160202ED

Page 43003

1 Mr. MacDonald will now continue his cross-examination.

2 Please proceed.

3 MR. MacDONALD: Thank you, Your Honours. There was one thing I

4 should address to the Bench. I do plan to ask Mr. Pavlovic some

5 questions about the new list, and in that regard, I would ask for some

6 extra time to be given for cross-examination, between half an hour and an

7 hour, Your Honours.

8 [Trial Chamber confers]

9 JUDGE ORIE: Well, you couldn't have prepared for this before you

10 had received it, so to the extent necessary, Mr. Lukic, I thought that

11 the list was just shorter, but -- but I leave at this moment in your

12 hands, but we'll follow closely the type of questions you will put to the

13 witness in this respect.

14 WITNESS: DUSAN PAVLOVIC [Resumed]

15 [Witness answered through interpreter]

16 Cross-examination by Mr. MacDonald: [Continued]

17 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, I'm going to begin by asking you some questions

18 about the two lists of individuals that we now have. Just to avoid any

19 confusion, the list that the Defence was asking you about, the list that

20 we were discussing yesterday, I'm going to call that the old list; and

21 the list that we received yesterday, I'm going to call that the new list.

22 We can agree to do that?

23 A. Of course.

24 Q. The old list, that list had a title, Mr. Pavlovic. Who gave it

25 that title?

Page 43004

1 A. I gave an overview of the cases, and I suppose that they were

2 sent for translation, and we probably gave the title together or I

3 probably said how it could be called, but I cannot remember the details

4 right now. I can just repeat that I worked under conditions that were

5 far from normal. We were doing many things simultaneously and it's

6 impossible for me to remember every detail.

7 Q. Well, it's a straightforward question, Mr. Pavlovic. Who gave it

8 the title? Did you give it the title? Did Mr. Lukic and the Defence

9 give it the title, who wrote the title?

10 MR. LUKIC: I think it's asked and answered.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Well, no. The question can be -- Mr. MacDonald can

12 insist on a clear answer on his question.

13 Could you tell us who gave the title? You? The Defence?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can just repeat that I do not

15 remember due to the circumstances under which we had to work.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's a clear answer.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: But it's in your report. Is that not so, sir?

18 It's part of your report, this list.

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, the list was included in my

20 report.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: And you are the author of the report and the

22 list -- and the list as well.

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am the author of the report and

24 the list.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. Thank you.

Page 43005

1 MR. MacDONALD:

2 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, just to make sure we're speaking about the same

3 thing when you answered His Honour Judge Moloto's question, are you

4 saying that this list, the list of individuals, the overview, was a part

5 of the report you submitted in June 2013?

6 A. It's a difficult question because I didn't know whether I would

7 be testifying or not up until one and a half days before I was supposed

8 to leave in order to travel here. I sent the materials in June, if you

9 say that it was at that point in time, probably it was. And when I was

10 told that I would be testifying, that I would be a witness, I then

11 brought with me a group of statements and the list that was to be

12 completed, the one that we talked about yesterday, the one that you're

13 talking about now. Because I didn't know whether I would be testifying

14 in the first place or not. The Defence didn't know that, and I could not

15 consult them about the direction we would be moving in. That's why I'm

16 talking about the conditions under which I had to work as a Defence

17 expert witness from the very beginning and which were not normal.

18 Q. Well, Mr. Pavlovic, in response to His Honour Judge Moloto's

19 question you said:

20 "Yes, the list was included in my report."

21 That list does not appear and is not referenced anywhere in the

22 report you submitted in June 2013, does it?

23 A. What is mentioned are the arguments or, rather, the cases of

24 possible - how would I call that? - omissions in the lists of missing

25 persons. I only enclosed those specific cases.

Page 43006

1 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, let me ask you this again and I'll clarify further.

2 Firstly, the list that we spoke about yesterday, that does not appear in

3 the report, it's not referenced in the report, and there are no names of

4 individuals who had died in the report from that list. That's right,

5 isn't it?

6 A. In the analysis itself, or the report, as you call it, if that's

7 it, I'm talking about the analysis that I prepared, it's a material of 50

8 to 60 pages, does not contain names. It only mentions possibilities,

9 things that may have happened, and then the list is an attachment to

10 that.

11 Q. Well, yes, the report does not contain any names. And this list

12 is a list of names, and you say it's an attachment but it wasn't attached

13 to it in June 2013, was it? In fact, the first time anybody was aware of

14 this list was when you came here in The Hague in December?

15 A. Is that a question?

16 Q. Yes. The first time the Defence, the Chamber, the Prosecution

17 was aware of this list is when you arrived December. That's right, isn't

18 it?

19 A. I'm telling you, I do not dispute that I brought that with me

20 when I came here in December, but the reasons why that was so are that I

21 didn't know whether I would testify or not.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was no information whether I

24 would be a witness here.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Pavlovic, no one blames you for anything. If

Page 43007

1 you just answer the questions, that's good enough. We're not saying it's

2 right or wrong. We're just asking - at least Mr. MacDonald is - what

3 happened. And Mr. MacDonald asked you whether, when you presented the

4 report in June, whether the list was attached or known to the Defence,

5 yes or no. Now you say, Well, it's not wrong -- no one says it's wrong.

6 We just want to know. That's all.

7 So, therefore, could you now please focus on the questions and

8 answer them.

9 MR. MacDONALD:

10 Q. I just want to clear this up, Mr. Pavlovic. When His Honour

11 Judge Moloto asked you if it was part of your report and you said you

12 included it, what I'm saying to you is that your report in June 2013

13 contains no names of people who died, contains no reference to this list,

14 and does not incorporate this list that you brought with you in December.

15 That's right, isn't it?

16 A. Yes, yes, that's correct.

17 Q. Mr. Pavlovic --

18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: May I put one question in the meantime,

19 Mr. MacDonald. I'm sorry for that.

20 Mr. Pavlovic, at the beginning of this discussion or question and

21 answers, you said:

22 "I gave an overview of the cases and I suppose that they were

23 sent for translation and we probably gave the title together, or I

24 probably said how it could be called ..."

25 When you say "we probably gave the title together," who is "we"?

Page 43008

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When I say "we," I suppose that I

2 told Mr. Branko Lukic what to write when he was supposed to sent it for

3 translation. I suppose so because we worked under conditions that were

4 not normal so I cannot claim with much certainty what exactly happened.

5 As I told you, I was invited --

6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Pavlovic --

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- just a few days before my

8 testimony. Please allow me to explain.

9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: No. I asked you who is "we"? Just give the

10 name. Who is "we"? Don't explain the whole procedure. I'm not

11 interested in that. Who is "we"?

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that I've just explained.

13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: No. Please repeat. It was very unclear.

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When I said that I suppose, it

15 means that I cannot claim, I cannot assert, because we worked under

16 conditions that were not normal, whether I told Mr. Lukic before he sent

17 it for translation how to formulate the title. That's why I said "we."

18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Pavlovic, no. You are not answering my

19 question. I would invite you to clearly state to whom you are referring

20 when you are saying "we." Which persons?

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What I tried to tell you when I

22 said "we," I had in mind the situation in which before the document was

23 sent to be translated, I told Mr. Lukic what to write there. That's why

24 I said "we." I'm repeating for the third time.

25 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And you shouldn't repeat what I didn't want to

Page 43009

1 hear. That means you are referring to Mr. Lukic and you. This is "we."

2 Correct?

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, as I said.

4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: No, you didn't say that. Thank you.

5 MR. MacDONALD:

6 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, I'd like it turn to the substance of the new list.

7 MR. MacDONALD: And we uploaded that under 65 ter 33644, and

8 that's not to be broadcast. If we could have that on the screen, please.

9 We only have it in the B/C/S.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Would it make any sense to have the old list and the

11 new list together on the screen? I don't know whether you want to do any

12 comparative thing. But if we only have the B/C/S, then at least we can

13 compare.

14 MR. MacDONALD: And, Your Honours, I do plan to refer back to the

15 old list, but I think I can guide the Court to it without requiring it on

16 the screen.

17 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, as this comes up, if I can just ask you another

18 question. At transcript page T42991 yesterday, I pointed out a duplicate

19 in the old list to you, and you told the Court:

20 "It is one more proof that this is a working version of the

21 material."

22 Do you remember saying that yesterday?

23 A. Yes, I said so.

24 Q. If we look at page 1 in the list and it's the second name from

25 the bottom, you see the name Salko Hrnjic, Mehmed, 1961. And if we can

Page 43010

1 now turn to page 3 in the list, please, and we're looking about midway

2 down, and there - yeah, that's fine - there we again see the name

3 Salko Hrnjic, Mehmed, 1961.

4 So this duplication, it's still on your new list?

5 A. I'm not disputing that. There's nothing I can say except that

6 it's a mistake.

7 Q. I just want to double-check, Mr. Pavlovic. There's not any other

8 list, is there?

9 A. This is the new list; right?

10 Q. Yes, Mr. Pavlovic, this is the new list. There isn't a newer

11 list, a more final list, is there?

12 A. No, I think not.

13 Q. Okay. Now, before we get into concrete examples, yesterday I

14 read you a portion of your testimony where you said in response to

15 question from His Honour Judge Orie that you exclusively chose examples

16 where the eye-witness saw them die. And I read that out to you when we

17 were talking about Azem Pasalic, and at transcript page 42956 going to

18 42960, you said:

19 "Yes, I said that then, but after seeing this list, including

20 cases that shouldn't be there, I cannot rule out the possibility that a

21 working version of the list did not exclude the cases where there are

22 witness reports saying that they had seen somebody die. Such cases

23 should be excluded, and I see that the list is not the one I was thinking

24 I was commenting on."

25 So I'm right in saying that this final list that we have on the

Page 43011

1 screen in front of us shouldn't have any examples where a person did not

2 see someone die. Have I understood that correctly?

3 A. Yes, as I understood the context of the statement, it shouldn't

4 be so.

5 Q. Okay.

6 MR. MacDONALD: If we can go back to page -- no, sorry, we're on

7 page 3 in the list.

8 Q. You see the name Salko Hrnjic. The name above it is Muhamed

9 Mehmedovic. We dealt with these two people yesterday, but in the

10 interests of time I didn't show you the statement, the statement of

11 Zijad Cikaric, but I'd like to show it to you now.

12 MR. MacDONALD: Can we have 65 ter 1D06273 on the screen, please.

13 Your Honours, this is the statement the Defence uploaded, but in

14 discussion with my colleague Ms. Stewart, we couldn't -- there was no

15 English translation uploaded, but we found then an English translation so

16 we uploaded the same statement with English translation, and that is

17 65 ter 33629. So my apologies. If we could turn to that one instead.

18 And if we can have page 2 in both languages, please.

19 Now, this is a long piece of text, but it's about halfway down in

20 both languages. And we're looking for the two names, Salko Hrnjic,

21 Muhamed Mehmedovic. In the English, it towards the bottom, just where

22 the pointer was actually. In the B/C/S, it's more in the middle.

23 Q. Now, Mr. Pavlovic, what this witness says is that he saw four

24 decomposing bodies at Snagovo and that he knew two of them, and he names

25 Salko Hrnjic and Muhamed Mehmedovic. And that is the first reference to

Page 43012

1 these people's names in that statement, so far as I could see.

2 So this is an example of somebody who clearly didn't see them die

3 because he came across their decomposing bodies; correct?

4 A. The witness says here the four who died at Snagovo, that is to

5 say, Salko Hrnjic and Muhamed Mehmedovic, both from Kamenica.

6 JUDGE ORIE: But, Witness, could I ask you, even that's not what

7 the statement says. The statement doesn't say that they died there, but

8 the witness says that he saw four decomposed bodies and he talks about

9 the dead he saw in Snagovo. That's not the same as seeing someone dying.

10 It's -- it's different and, therefore, you're evading the question.

11 Does this witness say, according to you, that he saw these

12 persons dying; or did he say that he saw four decomposed bodies? Which

13 of the two?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Just a second, please.

15 Please allow me to explain. I will rather read directly what --

16 JUDGE ORIE: No. I first want an answer to my question.

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's just what I am offering, an

18 answer, if you will allow.

19 JUDGE ORIE: "Which of the two" was my question.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "The second time when I was moving,

21 two young men were killed in an ambush at Krizevacke Njive. The four who

22 died at Krizevacke Njive I didn't know personally, but I knew two of the

23 dead at Snagovo."

24 Yes, yes, yes.

25 Yes, this is actually another group of the four he saw at Snagovo

Page 43013

1 who were decomposing and he recognised two, and he says there, as I

2 already said: "I do not know the four who died at Krizevacke Njive, but

3 I knew two of the dead at Snagovo. Those were Salko Hrnjic and

4 Muhamed Mehmedovic."

5 Yes, he saw them dead here. He didn't see them die. But it was

6 the combat zone, the zone of combat operations, so therefore --

7 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, I'm not asking you to interpret. And would

8 you next time before you answer a question, if it takes you so much time

9 what it really says, do it preferably before you give your first answer

10 so that we can save the time in getting this second answer now after you

11 have read carefully the statement.

12 Please proceed.

13 MR. MacDONALD:

14 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, you were just saying that this person only saw them

15 dead there, and then you were talking about the zone of combat operations

16 and you say "so" -- what were you going to say there?

17 A. I said the zone of combat operations but, in fact, I meant the

18 line of breakthrough of this column, surrounded by the zone of combat

19 operations. The fact that he saw these people dead entails an assumption

20 that they died in combat. It cannot be proven unless by forensic

21 investigation, but he saw them dead there, and I think the assumption is

22 they died in combat.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Could I just check again whether there's any wrong

24 translation.

25 Did he see them die there or did he see them dead there?

Page 43014

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He saw them dead in an area where

2 there was combat, where other people died in combat.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Did you say so a second ago? Did you say "he saw

4 them dead there," or did you say "he saw them die there"? Because then

5 there may be a translation issue, and we always are very cautious in

6 avoiding them, and we could have a correction to your words if you did

7 not say "he saw them die there."

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said others died in combat there,

9 and he saw them dead. Not die.

10 JUDGE ORIE: That will be verified.

11 Please proceed.

12 MR. MacDONALD:

13 Q. So, Mr. Pavlovic, when you come across a witness statement where

14 somebody sees someone dead and the line of the breakthrough surrounded by

15 a combat zone, you said the assumption is that they died in combat. Have

16 I understood that correctly?

17 A. Well, in this specific case, yes. The assumption is they could

18 have died during the breakthrough.

19 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, I don't know if you have forgotten this, but

20 yesterday when we spoke about these two victims, we went into private

21 session and I read you the testimony of a witness. And it was very clear

22 from that witness's testimony that these two people had been captured by

23 the VRS and were the victims of summary execution. Do you remember that?

24 A. Yes, I remember. I'm telling you that I made certain inferences

25 based on this statement, an assumption.

Page 43015

1 Q. And in this case, in this specific case, your assumption or

2 inference that these people died in combat, that was wrong, wasn't it?

3 A. The assumption that there is a possibility they could have died

4 in combat, is it wrong? If I understood well, the statement that we

5 looked at yesterday, if I remember well, that's also evidence that -- I

6 can't remember the details. I can't say it's 100 per cent wrong, whether

7 the investigation concerning specific persons has been finalized, I don't

8 know. If -- if it has been finalized, I'm not disputing it. We have one

9 witness on one side, and another witness on the other side. If the

10 forensic investigation and the pathological investigation and everything

11 has been finalized, then I'm not disputing it.

12 Q. I --

13 JUDGE ORIE: Let's move on, Mr. MacDonald.

14 MR. MacDONALD: Yes, there's one more question, Your Honours,

15 but --

16 JUDGE ORIE: Please.

17 MR. MacDONALD: -- it's not to do with the substance.

18 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, yesterday after I read that you information that

19 was in transcript form, and you told the Court you'd only looked at

20 statements, not transcripts, are you aware that that person also gave a

21 statement in which he gave the same information and mentioned the same

22 two names that are here on your list and that was disclosed to the

23 Defence, it would have been among the material you would have reviewed.

24 So you simply missed that statement of this person saying broadly the

25 same thing?

Page 43016

1 A. I think I told you yesterday that in searching the database, I

2 focused on witness statements because transcripts are very long, 150 to

3 200 pages, and in such a short time I was not able to deal with that

4 volume of material. I focused on statements given to security organs.

5 Did I look at some transcripts? At some, probably, yes. But I

6 concentrated on the breakthrough and the circumstances surrounding it.

7 Q. Sorry, Mr. Pavlovic. I just want to make sure that you've

8 understood my question. What I'm saying to you is, the information in

9 that transcript that I read to you yesterday is also contained in a

10 witness statement. I'm asking you if you simply missed that information

11 in your review of witness statements.

12 A. Looking through the statements, if I had noticed that that same

13 person had been captured, I would probably have excluded that person from

14 the list, but I didn't register it. I didn't notice it. There were many

15 names of both witnesses and victims.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Witness -- Witness --

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] For me alone, it's difficult to

18 cover such a range.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Again, the simple question was whether you missed

20 it, yes or no, not whether you are to be blamed for missing it, but just

21 Mr. MacDonald wants to know whether you missed it. And after a long

22 answer you say: Well, more or less, if I would not have missed it then I

23 would have seen, but there were a lot of names. That's all -- you missed

24 it apparently. Otherwise you would have found it. You would have used

25 it. Okay. So the simple answer to the question is: I must have missed

Page 43018

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 [Open session]

4 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. The Chamber is satisfied that you were

6 right, Mr. MacDonald.

7 Please proceed.

8 MR. MacDONALD: Yes, if we could have the witness statement of

9 Seval Ademovic on the screen, page 3 in both languages. It's 1D06277.

10 Q. The second-last paragraph, I read this out to you yesterday,

11 Mr. Pavlovic. All Seval Ademovic says is that:

12 "I would like to point out that the following died in the

13 breakthrough towards Tuzla," and the second name on the list,

14 Ragib Mehmedovic.

15 So this is another statement on your new list where the person

16 making an identification doesn't explicitly say that he saw the victim

17 die, isn't it?

18 A. He doesn't say explicitly. It's not written here that he saw it,

19 but if you know how witness statements are taken, and you know it, the

20 questions are usually posed in the form of which of the persons do you

21 know. And he says:

22 "I stress that in the breakthrough to Tuzla, the following

23 died ..."

24 And he is speaking to an official security organ, be it military

25 or public. So he knows it, the assumption is that he had seen it.

Page 43019

1 That's how I understood it.

2 Q. So when you see this phrase "died in the breakthrough," you

3 assume that the person had seen the person die. I find that interesting,

4 Mr. Pavlovic, because another person, another victim, on the old list

5 that you cited to was Mujo Turkovic and for Mujo Turkovic, you also cited

6 the witness statement of Seval Ademovic. So clearly you've read through

7 the witness statement of Seval Ademovic, and you decided that

8 Mujo Turkovic should come off of the new list and he is not there, but

9 you decided that Ragib Mehmedovic should remain on the new list even

10 although the same witness says exactly the same thing about both of them.

11 Is that what you decided when you read the witness statement of

12 Seval Ademovic?

13 A. Look, what you need to know about the way I proceeded in

14 gathering this information and why I included someone, whether I was able

15 to find them in the database of the missing or the dead, I need to know

16 who that person is. Because the name itself doesn't mean anything to me

17 if I'm not able to find that person on the list of the missing and

18 identify it. It's possible that I was not able to find the second person

19 and that's why I didn't include him. I can't remember the specific

20 reasons. I found certain persons in certain witness statements, but I

21 couldn't find out who they were.

22 Q. That's a long answer about how you proceeded in gathering

23 information. What I'm asking you is that on Sunday, 13th of December,

24 the day before you were due to testify, you had saved a version of this

25 list which had Mujo Turkovic and Ragib Mehmedovic on it. For both of

Page 43020

1 them, you cited to the witness statement of Seval Ademovic. And in this

2 new list that you say is your final list, one of them is still there, one

3 of them has been removed, even although Seval Ademovic says exactly the

4 same thing about both of them.

5 This is another mistake you've made, Mr. Pavlovic, isn't it?

6 A. Why would it be a mistake? I included one person. I didn't

7 include the other. What the reasons are for not including someone, I

8 would have to look at it again to tell you the reasons. And I stress to

9 you once again in what conditions I was working.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yesterday during your testimony we dealt extensively

11 with Mr. Turkovic. You explained to us that now having had a look at

12 this statement of Seval Ademovic, that it was wrong to have him on that

13 list. On today's list, we do not find Mr. Turkovic any further.

14 Now, what Mr. MacDonald is asking you, whereas Mr. Mehmedovic was

15 on the old list and is on the new list, why didn't you remove him?

16 Because the basis for your doubts are found in the same statement in

17 exactly the same wording. So why do you take out one from your old list

18 and do not adopt him in your new list, and why the other one - for which

19 the information is exactly the same - why does he remain on your list?

20 And all your previous answers just are beyond what the gist of the

21 question and the problem is.

22 So when I earlier said whether you would please read before you

23 give an impulsive answer, I now invite you also to think about the

24 question and the gist of it and the problem which is addressed by

25 Mr. MacDonald before you start giving long answers which are totally

Page 43021

1 beyond the point.

2 So, now, again, why, on the basis of exactly the same

3 information, you took Mr. Turkovic off your list, he doesn't appear

4 anymore; and why did Mr. Mehmedovic remain on the list although exactly

5 the same information is, to your knowledge -- I see that you now start

6 reading. Take your time, think about it, and then please answer the

7 question.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot remember why I did it at

9 that moment. I don't remember.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

11 MR. MacDONALD: Thank you, Your Honour.

12 Q. One last question on Ragib Mehmedovic. You may not remember this

13 from yesterday, but we looked at another witness statement about

14 Ragib Mehmedovic in private session. And Ragib Mehmedovic was last seen

15 on a meadow with his hands on his head having surrendered. You remember

16 that?

17 A. Yeah. Yes, I remember.

18 Q. So that I'm just going to summarise here what we've discussed.

19 This new list, this final list which you produced, it still

20 contains duplication. It still contains statements where the person

21 didn't see the victim die. It still contains somebody last seen alive in

22 the custody of the VRS on a meadow, and it still contains the names of

23 people who were killed in summary executions. That's right, isn't it?

24 A. According to the statements that you've shown me, there are

25 indications of that kind, yes, and I'm not disputing it. If you talk

Page 43022

1 about people who ended up differently.

2 JUDGE ORIE: I think you've -- you have answered the question.

3 MR. MacDONALD: Unless Your Honours have any further questions on

4 the list, I would propose to move on to the report and it's here I

5 thought I had about half an hour of cross-examination left, Your Honours.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please start.

7 MR. MacDONALD:

8 Q. Now, Mr. Pavlovic, we're not going to discuss either list

9 anymore. We're going to move to your report -- or I think you referred

10 it to it as your analysis but we'll call it your report just to keep the

11 terminology the same.

12 MR. MacDONALD: So if we can have MFI D01373 on the screen,

13 please. And this can be broadcast, this is not under seal.

14 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, the first 20 pages have been removed from your

15 original report and I'm not going to look at the parts of the report

16 where you talk about witness statements who see numbers of people dead.

17 I'm just looking straight at the part where you talk about -- or things

18 you cite to claim that there was some kind of clean-up of the

19 battlefield.

20 So if we can turn to page 31 in the English and page 28 in the

21 B/C/S of your report.

22 And what you do in this section, Mr. Pavlovic, is you cite one

23 order of Ratko Mladic from the 20th of July, one order of the Drina Corps

24 with regard to clearing up the battlefield. You say you couldn't find

25 any reports that that took place. And then you go on to give two

Page 43023

1 examples of what you claim is the clearing up of the battlefield taking

2 place, and I'm just going to deal with those two examples.

3 The first one is quite straightforward. If we can look for

4 footnote 69 in the text. It's towards the bottom in the English, about

5 midway in the B/C/S. You can look on the screen, Mr. Pavlovic. It's

6 also there, or you can look in hard copy.

7 Now, the text that this footnote purports to support is a claim

8 by you that the roads in Zvornik municipality were being cleared up. And

9 to support that, if we look down at footnote 69, it reads as follows:

10 "While we were in Pobudje, we watched from a hill as the Chetniks

11 were walking on the asphalt road in Pervani and collecting the dead

12 bodies with a loader, which was then loading them into an," and if we

13 turn the page in the English, "FAP truck. They were taking the bodies in

14 the direction of the village of Kravica, Bratunac municipality."

15 Mr. Pavlovic, where is Pervani village?

16 A. The village of Pervani is between Kravica and Konjevic Polje.

17 Q. Yes, I agree with that, and we have maps to show that.

18 The road going from Bratunac to Konjevic Polje, that's in the

19 Bratunac municipality, isn't it?

20 A. Yes, yes.

21 Q. So the only reference you cite for roads in the Zvornik

22 municipality being cleared is actually referring to something happening

23 in the Bratunac municipality; is that correct?

24 A. I'm trying to explain what was happening, and I cite an example

25 what they were doing as far as roads are concerned. The roads had to be

Page 43024

1 cleaned up.

2 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, all I'm asking is: In the main body of the text

3 you specify the roads in the Zvornik municipality and the only thing you

4 cite in the footnote is talking about something happening in the Bratunac

5 municipality; that's correct, isn't it? That's all I'm asking just now.

6 A. I cite in the text that the roads, just after combat operations,

7 had to be sanitized in order to become useable again. That's logical.

8 And I cite one of the examples.

9 Q. Mr. Pavlovic --

10 A. I am not claiming that this example applies to the Zvornik

11 municipality.

12 MR. MacDONALD: Can we go back one page in the English, please,

13 just to show the text again.

14 Q. Now, the line that you are purporting to support with this

15 reference begins:

16 "Similarly, the roads in Zvornik municipality where some of the

17 fighting had taken place," and then you say, "also had to be cleared up

18 soon after the cessation of combat operations."

19 You are talking about the roads in the Zvornik municipality here.

20 That's what this reference is for?

21 A. I am talking in these two sentences about the roads in Bratunac

22 municipality, citing a specific place, not about the Zvornik

23 municipality. I'm talking about the roads that were used by the columns.

24 Q. Okay, Mr. Pavlovic. So I'm right in saying you have no reference

25 here, no support for the idea that the roads anywhere other than the

Page 43025

1 Bratunac municipality were cleared up? Just a yes or no to that one,

2 sir. I think that's fairly clear, but can you confirm it for me?

3 A. I did not cite here any specific examples of sanitization of a

4 road in the Zvornik municipality.

5 Q. Okay. Thank you. And, Mr. Pavlovic, are you aware that

6 there's --

7 MR. MacDONALD: I'm almost finished with this topic,

8 Your Honours.

9 Q. There is already evidence related to the clearing up of bodies on

10 the Bratunac-Konjevic Polje road, and that, in fact, that evidence comes

11 from one Prosecution fact witness - and that is RM306, Your Honours - and

12 also pointed out in the report of the Prosecution investigator Dusan Janc

13 in P01987. Are you aware that the Trial Chamber has already heard

14 evidence about bodies being cleared up on the Bratunac-Konjevic Polje

15 road?

16 A. I mentioned here what I was aware of.

17 Q. So all you're aware of, then, in terms of evidence, is that there

18 was some clearing up of the Bratunac-Konjevic Polje road. That's all

19 that's in your report. That's correct, isn't it?

20 A. If that's all I mentioned, then that's it.

21 MR. MacDONALD: Your Honours, I am aware it's time for the break.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it's time for a break.

23 We'll take a break of 20 minutes, Witness. You may follow the

24 usher.

25 [The witness stands down]

Page 43026

1 JUDGE ORIE: We resume at five minutes to 11.00.

2 --- Recess taken at 10.32 a.m.

3 --- On resuming at 10.58 a.m.

4 JUDGE ORIE: We are waiting for the witness to be escorted in the

5 courtroom.

6 Mr. MacDonald, you're on your feet.

7 MR. MacDONALD: It was just to save time, Your Honours. If we

8 could call up the exhibit I plan to ask the witness about. That is his

9 report, D01373. Oh, it's still on the screen.

10 JUDGE ORIE: I think it's still on our screen, yes.

11 [The witness takes the stand]

12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. MacDonald.

13 MR. MacDONALD:

14 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, I have one more item I'd like to discuss with you.

15 You see on the screen there your report. Now, we dealt with the sentence

16 before footnote 69. After footnote 69 -- it's on the screen, if you wish

17 to look at that, Mr. Pavlovic.

18 After footnote 69, you go on to cite a regular report dated

19 14th of July, 1995, from the engineering battalion based at

20 Konjevic Polje. Now my first question here is: This report, that wasn't

21 issued pursuant to the orders you cited just before it, was it?

22 Do you need me to repeat the question, Mr. Pavlovic?

23 A. [In English] No, no.

24 Q. Okay.

25 A. [Interpretation] No, this sentence only mentions that

Page 43027

1 sanitization of the terrain was carried out, not that it was done in

2 accordance with the above orders.

3 Q. Okay. Now, this report is dated 14th July 1995. I'm going to

4 ask you if you're aware of some evidence in this case, Mr. Pavlovic, and

5 perhaps you could just respond by saying either you are aware or you're

6 not aware.

7 Now, the evidence I would like to lay out for you is that on the

8 13th of July, 1995, a large number of the members of the column

9 surrendered. They were held at Sandici meadow. And then just over a

10 thousand of those people walked or were transported in buses to nearby

11 Kravica warehouse, and then they were executed in Kravica warehouse on

12 13th July 1995 with guns and hand-grenades.

13 Were you aware of that evidence, Mr. Pavlovic? And you can just

14 say: I was aware or I was not aware.

15 A. I did not deal with this evidence and therefore I'm not aware of

16 it.

17 Q. Are you aware that Kravica warehouse is between 6 and

18 8 kilometres away from where the engineering unit who issued this report

19 was based?

20 A. I suppose that the distance from Konjevic Polje to Kravica is

21 what you've just mentioned.

22 Q. Now, Mr. Pavlovic, I'd like to look at some other testimony about

23 this document. Did you read any other person's testimony about what this

24 document means?

25 A. Well, what I could see while working on this analysis from the

Page 43028

1 materials --

2 Q. No, Mr. Pavlovic --

3 A. I'm telling you that.

4 Q. I would just like to ask: Did you read any witness testimony

5 about this document, about the report of the engineering battalion?

6 A. Not about that specific document. I only know through Subotic's

7 statement that some were taken prisoner and that some lost their lives

8 during the breakthrough.

9 Q. Well, I'd like to look at some -- what other people have said

10 about this document.

11 MR. MacDONALD: If we can have 65 ter number 1D01273.

12 Q. And this is the testimony of General Milovanovic, whom I'm sure

13 you were aware was the then-Chief of Staff of the VRS. We only have this

14 in English so I'm going to read it out to you.

15 MR. MacDONALD: I'd like page 72 in e-court, please.

16 Q. Starting at line 14. This is his testimony in the Popovic case.

17 In line 14:

18 "Q. Okay. Let me read this to you. It says:

19 "'A large enemy group was infiltrated in the region of Pobrdje

20 Brdo and the region of Konjevic Polje. Units of the 5th Engineering

21 Battalion and the MUP successfully resisted the enemy. About 1.000 to

22 1500 enemy civilians and soldiers were arrested and killed.'

23 "Now, we talked about this before. Is there any justification to

24 kill people after you arrest them?"

25 MR. MacDONALD: I wonder if we can scroll down on the screen,

Page 43029

1 please.

2 Q. "A. No, there isn't. It's a war crime."

3 So the VRS Chief of Staff considers that this report is talking

4 about a crime - in fact, a war crime.

5 Now, my question for you, Mr. Pavlovic, General Milovanovic, the

6 VRS Chief of Staff, he's going to have more experience than you in

7 writing and reading military reports, isn't he?

8 A. Yes, he has more experience in what you mentioned.

9 Q. And I'd like to move to the second person who talks about this

10 document.

11 MR. MacDONALD: Can we have P03517. That is a public document.

12 Q. As this comes up, Mr. Pavlovic, this is the testimony from a

13 previous case, although it's evidence in this case, of Major Mile Simanic

14 and he was the man who signed this document.

15 MR. MacDONALD: So in P03517, if we can have page 24 in the

16 English. Again, this is only in English. And I'm looking to start at

17 line 19.

18 Q. "Q. Do you remember when I showed you this document in Bosnia,

19 do you remember what you first said when you read that?

20 "A. I said, 'God forbid,' or 'God Almighty,' or something like

21 that.

22 "Q. And why did you say that after reading this sentence?

23 "A. Because at first I thought it was written meaning that the

24 MUP and the Engineering unit did that."

25 MR. MacDONALD: Now if we can turn over the page, please.

Page 43032

1 MR. MacDONALD:

2 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, we've seen one VRS officer, the one who wrote this

3 report, say he thinks it's a crime. We've seen the VRS Chief of Staff,

4 General Milovanovic, say he thinks it constitutes a war crime. And we

5 have seen another person connected to these events say he is unaware of

6 any other event it could be on that day.

7 Mr. Pavlovic, this report, on the 14th of July, this report

8 refers to the mass execution at Kravica warehouse on the 13th of July,

9 doesn't it?

10 A. I do not think so.

11 MR. MacDONALD: If Your Honours would bear with me for one

12 moment.

13 [Prosecution counsel confer]

14 MR. MacDONALD: That concludes the cross-examination,

15 Your Honours.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. MacDonald.

17 Mr. Lukic, any questions in re-examination?

18 MR. LUKIC: Yes, we do, Your Honour. Thank you.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

20 Re-examination by Mr. Lukic:

21 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Pavlovic, good morning.

22 A. Good morning.

23 Q. I will start from the end because, as we've gone through these

24 documents now, while they're still fresh in our minds, let's see. There

25 was some talk about this document but only testimonies of several persons

Page 43033

1 about this were shown to you, what they said about the document, and I

2 will show you P03518. You have dealt with this document in your report.

3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We'll just wait for the English

4 translation to be uploaded.

5 Q. So Mile Simanic, a major, signed this document drawn up on the

6 14th of July, 1995. Let us read the sentence that other witnesses were

7 questioned about in the given context. You were told that this could

8 only refer to the killings at Kravica.

9 Paragraph 1, enemy, reads as follows:

10 "A large enemy group infiltrated in the Pobrdje Brdo region and

11 the region of Konjevic Polje. Units of the 5th Engineering Battalion and

12 the MUP successfully resisted the enemy."

13 Let me ask you about this first part. On the 13th and the 14th

14 of July, did you come across any information that combat was ongoing in

15 the Pobrdje Brdo and Konjevic Polje areas?

16 A. Yes. Especially on the 13th. The 28th Division and the column

17 were fighting while crossing the road between Konjevic Polje and

18 Nova Kasaba. There were many casualties, and the sanitization of the

19 terrain was under way. I believe that we already commented on this in

20 the first part.

21 Q. Now we shall comment on the last sentence that the -- that was

22 presented to the witnesses. We are not experts in semantics either of

23 us, however, this sentence, is it properly written? Do you understand

24 what it refers to: Arrested and killed?

25 A. Well, I viewed it in the context of the witness statements about

Page 43034

1 events in this period, the 13th, because it refers to the 13th and

2 possibly the 14th. What was going on in the area where the person who

3 signed this document was at the time and also all the other statements

4 that I had at my disposal. So in -- arrested and killed --

5 Q. Is there a conjunction because it says "arrested, killed"?

6 A. Yes. According to what I learned from the statements about what

7 was going on on the ground, I understood that this is just a confirmation

8 of the information that many people were taken prisoner, as Mr. Subotic

9 said, in Nova Kasaba at the stadium, and that the total number of people

10 who were killed was between 1.000 and 1500. Once again, I repeat,

11 because that was what the statements contained. That it refers to both

12 categories, the arrested and the killed persons, that in total the number

13 was between 1.000 and 1500, of both of these categories. Because he

14 doesn't say that they were killed by firing squad but he says: Arrested,

15 killed.

16 JUDGE ORIE: I have one short question. In the English

17 translation of the document, we see "arrested and killed." And now --

18 MR. LUKIC: The translation is perfect in the sense the

19 Prosecution asked, but it's not what the B/C/S version says.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. If there's any need to have "arrested and

21 killed" being reviewed for the accuracy of the translation --

22 MR. MacDONALD: Your Honours, this issue was litigated at great

23 length in the Popovic case, in particular, and --

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I was not a Judge in the Popovic case and so,

25 therefore, it's fine that you tell us. But apparently now "arrested,

Page 43035

1 killed" comes up a few times now in the oral testimony, whereas the

2 document says "were arrested and killed" --

3 MR. MacDONALD: Yes. Yes, Your Honour --

4 JUDGE ORIE: And if there's anything you would like to -- I'm

5 just raising the matter whether there's a -- and if you say it has been

6 dealt with extensively in another case, then I think it's appropriate

7 that the parties provide the Chamber with any information about what was

8 at that time presented to the Popovic Chamber so that we are not making

9 any mistakes.

10 MR. MacDONALD: Yes, Your Honours. The only point I was going to

11 make was that in the B/C/S the Prosecution absolutely agrees it says

12 "arrested, killed," but the translation has been vetted numerous times

13 and that has been the translation put forward by CLSS. That was the only

14 point I was going to --

15 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. So verification, Mr. Lukic, apart from

16 whether it's right or wrong, but has the translation as it appears before

17 us at this moment has been verified, if I understand Mr. MacDonald, again

18 and again by CLSS and --

19 MR. LUKIC: It's my mother tongue. I would never agree that's --

20 that means "arrested and killed" --

21 JUDGE ORIE: No, no, you don't have to --

22 MR. LUKIC: It does not say that. Whoever claims it, it's not

23 true --

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, the only thing I wanted to establish

25 whether this, right or wrong, that's for the Chamber later to consider,

Page 43036

1 whether the translation as it appears before us on the screen, whether

2 that has been verified thoroughly by CLSS although you do not agree with

3 the outcome.

4 MR. LUKIC: We'll check that. But we can ask Mr. Pavlovic --

5 JUDGE ORIE: No. Mr. Pavlovic is not someone who --

6 MR. LUKIC: Is it -- in B/C/S does it say --

7 JUDGE ORIE: No. No, because --

8 MR. LUKIC: -- "arrested and killed."

9 JUDGE ORIE: I think Mr. MacDonald said it says "arrested,

10 killed" and it is translated as it is now before us that has been

11 verified. We don't need Mr. Pavlovic to verify any translation as made

12 by CLSS. But I do understand that while observing "arrested, killed" and

13 looking at the text, that it's -- it's an issue which apparently was

14 dealt with extensively in the Popovic case, and I just want to avoid that

15 there's any mistake.

16 Please proceed.

17 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Lukic, you yourself said that you and the

19 witness are not experts in linguistics.

20 MR. LUKIC: That's true. But this much I can understand. I

21 think. And I hope.

22 JUDGE ORIE: I -- I ... we remain confident, Mr. Lukic --

23 MR. LUKIC: It is not only semantics. It is whether there is

24 "and" in the sentence or not. A simple question. There is no "and" in

25 the sentence. There is no --

Page 43037

1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, we have understood that you disagree with

2 the CLSS-verified translation.

3 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

5 MR. LUKIC: I'll move on. Thank you.

6 Q. [Interpretation] Today there has been much discussion of the

7 criteria you applied for including something in your overview; that is to

8 say, the table. It was stated that one ought to have seen somebody die

9 in order to be able to testify whether somebody was indeed killed or not.

10 Do you think and whether it was believed sufficient if someone

11 saw a man dead and recognised him at a certain location but did not see

12 the moment when the person died, was it considered sufficient in your

13 work at the institute for missing persons?

14 A. When we collected information, information was very important for

15 us so that we could establish the site where we might find the missing

16 person, and, of course, we wanted to know something about the

17 circumstances under which the person lost his or her life, if we were in

18 a position to obtain such information at all.

19 Q. Then let us look again at a statement that had been put to you

20 before.

21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We have one number and the

22 Prosecution called it under another number. 65 ter 33629 is the one that

23 I would like to call up because we have an English translation.

24 That is the record of the statement of Zijad Cikaric. The date

25 is 16 September 1995.

Page 43038

1 Q. A passage from the second page was put to you, so I'd like to see

2 the second page in both versions. The last quarter of the page in

3 English. And it's in the end of the second half, Salko Hrnjic and

4 Mehmedovic Mehmed [as interpreted] are the names mentioned. In fact,

5 Salka Hrnjic in English.

6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And it is Muhamed Mehmedovic.

7 MR. LUKIC: Mehmedovic Muhamed, yes, Your Honour.

8 Q. [Interpretation] About the four men that he didn't see die. He

9 says:

10 "At Snagovo, I saw four corpses also in the stage of

11 decomposition, unrecognizable. These four who died at Krizevacke Njive I

12 don't know personally, but I knew the two dead at Snagovo."

13 And he says it is Salko Hrnjic and Muhamed Mehmedovic. He says

14 both of them were from Kamenica. He says he heard from another person

15 and discussed it with that other person. He says:

16 "Concerning these two, Almir, known as Dzin, told me they had

17 gotten killed in one of their earlier attempts to cross."

18 We see the two men, although it's told by only one of them, who

19 speak about the death of these two.

20 Now, in the work of the institute, would it be a sufficient

21 indication to proceed with investigation and establish that these two men

22 had gotten killed during the attempt to break through? Were there

23 fighting operations in Snagovo?

24 A. Yes, that would be an important indication for us for further

25 search. And as we said earlier, there was fighting at Snagovo and there

Page 43039

1 were losses in that fighting.

2 Q. You were asked about Kamenica at some point. Was there fighting

3 at Kamenica?

4 A. Heavy fighting, yes. If I can just add one more thing. It says

5 here both of them were from Kamenica. We don't know exactly which

6 Kamenica he means, because we have Kamenica in the Bratunac municipality

7 and one in the Zvornik municipality. Although for this purpose, it

8 doesn't really matter. In both of them, there was fighting; but in

9 Bratunac municipality in Kamenica, there were many more fatalities.

10 MR. LUKIC: We would offer is this document into evidence,

11 Your Honour. The Prosecution's number since it has English translation.

12 JUDGE ORIE: That it should be -- I think the English translation

13 is not at this moment attached to the -- to 65 ter number -- oh, in this

14 version.

15 MR. LUKIC: To this one it is.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Okay.

17 Madam Registrar, the number would be?

18 THE REGISTRAR: The number would be, Your Honour, D01400.

19 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.

20 Any need to have it -- it is a public document.

21 MR. LUKIC: It is public document, I think.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.

23 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

24 JUDGE ORIE: In the remainder of your re-examination, Mr. Lukic,

25 the Chamber has some concerns on whether you really missed the point

Page 43040

1 which was raised in chief. The point raised in chief was --

2 MR. LUKIC: I led chief.

3 JUDGE ORIE: In cross-examination, yes. In cross-examination.

4 The issue was that there was a claim by this expert that he relied for

5 his list on statements of persons who eye-witnessed someone to die, not

6 whether finally where they died, how they died, et cetera, but it's the

7 claim of that witness. You have not addressed that issue and that was,

8 as far as -- and I checked with my colleagues - was the main and core

9 issue dealt with in cross-examination. So, therefore, that is apparently

10 then unaffected. But I leave it to you because you introduced the matter

11 in a way where the Chamber had difficulties in understanding exactly

12 whether you had got the core of what was the -- were the questions in

13 cross-examination on this specific issue.

14 Please proceed.

15 MR. LUKIC: Our position is that that test is too high and

16 that -- not the test that the Prosecution followed so --

17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, it's not a matter of -- and again you

18 show that you may have missed the real point.

19 MR. LUKIC: No, I understand your point.

20 JUDGE ORIE: The real point is that this witness claims that he

21 relies on something, right or wrong, in whatever conclusions you want to

22 draw, and that in cross-examination it was tested whether his sources

23 really were about eye-witnesses, and whether he had good other reasons to

24 draw some conclusions is a totally different matter.

25 I leave it to this at this moment. Please proceed.

Page 43041

1 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.

2 Q. [Interpretation] Then you were asked about the statements of

3 Seval Ademovic which in this case is 1D06227.

4 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we see it on the screen,

5 please.

6 MR. MacDONALD: I think the reference my friend is looking for is

7 1D06277.

8 MR. LUKIC: It's 1D06277.

9 Q. [Interpretation] Only a small passage from the end of this

10 statement was put to you, but this is a longish statement. And we see on

11 page 1 that this gentleman talks about the breakthrough towards Tuzla,

12 and he obviously participated in it.

13 I'd like to show you the second paragraph. It says:

14 "I stress that from the very start of our breakthrough towards

15 Tuzla, I didn't see my Jusuf again, but then during the exchange I found

16 out that he had been killed in the area of Vlasenica."

17 Then he talks about how they wandered about in the direction of

18 Kuslat and Snagovo, how they tried to cross over the asphalt road towards

19 Snagovo. After two or three days of wandering about, they are trying to

20 reach Snagovo and then Memici --

21 MR. MacDONALD: I think we need the next page in English, just to

22 let my friend know.

23 MR. LUKIC: Oh, it's not there. I'm sorry. Can we move to

24 another page in English, please. It's on the top of the page.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, now I can follow it. Please proceed.

Page 43042

1 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

2 Q. [Interpretation] He says they came across the bodies of their own

3 fighters who had got killed in trying to break out earlier and there were

4 many wounded as well. And then he goes on to describe how they proceeded

5 for the next five or six days, trying to reach Memici.

6 And then comes the passage on the last page at the end, and you

7 stressed in which way these statements are given, he mentions that:

8 "In the breakout towards Tuzla, the following people got killed,"

9 and he gives the names.

10 Did you understand then that he had direct knowledge about the

11 death of the men mentioned in the last passage of this statement?

12 A. First of all, I think his son got killed at Ruzina Voda as he was

13 told, and I believe that he was from that locality.

14 And, second, in the Serbian language when you say that somebody

15 got killed in the context of the breakthrough, it means they got killed

16 during fighting. If somebody was executed, the word "executed" would be

17 used. But in the context in which he gives this statement to a security

18 organ, he is talking about the knowledge that he has. If it was hearsay,

19 he would have said: I was told that these people had got killed. So

20 this leads to the conclusion that he was an eye-witness, although he

21 doesn't explicitly say that. So it's an inference on my part. But in

22 the context of everything he said and considering that he was giving this

23 statement to a security organ, one can understand that he had seen them

24 die.

25 Q. Thank you.

Page 43043

1 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we look briefly again at the

2 table that we uploaded in the system, D01399, or the old table, as my

3 colleague referred to it earlier today.

4 MR. MacDONALD: Sorry for interrupting. That's not to be

5 broadcast, Your Honours.

6 MR. LUKIC: That's not to be broadcast. Yes. Thank you.

7 Q. [Interpretation] I'm not going to mention the name of the person.

8 I'll just tell you in which line it is.

9 JUDGE ORIE: While we are waiting for it, may I remind the

10 parties that the new list is -- is neither tendered nor marked for

11 identification. I don't know whether for a better understanding of the

12 testimony of the witness that it would be good to have it in evidence,

13 and I take it a translation might take less time than usual because most

14 of the text is identical. I just remind you of that.

15 Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.

16 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

17 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Pavlovic, about this title, did you give us

18 a version of the text with or without a title? Can you remember that

19 detail? Did I put in a title or was it you? If you can recall?

20 A. I didn't hear the question from the beginning.

21 Q. This document has a title: "Overview of known individuals killed

22 during breakthrough and other disputed cases." Who put in this title,

23 you or I? If you can remember.

24 A. I can only repeat that I assume I told you what to type in.

25 Because the document was about to be sent for translation. Whether I

Page 43044

1 perhaps put it in myself, I can't remember.

2 Q. All right. You mentioned chaos. What was the situation with

3 electronics in the Defence room?

4 A. I mentioned it this morning. I believe it was --

5 Q. I think it was missed.

6 A. First of all, that whole situation, I was given one day's

7 notice --

8 Q. I'm only asking you about the electronics in the Defence room.

9 A. I came here for these two days on the 4th and 5th for preparation

10 everything was blocked. There was a virus in your computers. So I had

11 to work over the weekend in complete chaos. I tried to draw everyone's

12 attention to this because I think it's very important. From the very

13 start, we had to put in a lot of effort to get to the documents. Some

14 translations were missing. There were a lot of omissions and errors.

15 Q. Were representatives of the Tribunal involved in trying to solve

16 the problem with the virus?

17 A. I don't know how it goes. Probably somebody from the service

18 came to deal with it. I don't know whether it was from the Defence or

19 the Prosecution.

20 Q. I just wanted to clear this up because I don't think it received

21 proper attention.

22 In this document, on page 2 - we can't broadcast it - in English,

23 it's the last name that was discussed, and in B/C/S, it's fifth from the

24 top. I'm interested in these numbers. You see CR12-161. Where did you

25 find these numbers?

Page 43045

1 A. In the ICMP table from 2013. And it's possible I compared it

2 with some other data, including maybe Mr. Sekic's [phoen] book about mass

3 graves in Srebrenica that in its turn was based on information from the

4 institute for missing persons, and information from Mr. Masovic whom I

5 mentioned when I was last here in December.

6 Q. In practice, because we have two numbers here, do you know who

7 provided one and who provided the other? Was it the investigating

8 authorities or the ICMP?

9 A. It's from the authorities in the localities where exhumations are

10 done, the pathologist has to do that and the laboratory.

11 Q. So somebody outside of the ICMP provided these numbers. Are they

12 then able to know how these numbers are assigned to different parts?

13 A. They shouldn't be able to know, and they know because when DNA

14 analysis is done, it's a blind system in order to be objective.

15 Q. We'll come later to these documents.

16 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] But it's now time for the break.

17 JUDGE ORIE: It is.

18 Witness, we'd like to see you back in 20 minutes from now. You

19 may now follow the usher.

20 [The witness stands down]

21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, could you give us an indication as to how

22 much time you would need for re-examination.

23 MR. LUKIC: Today's examination prolonged a bit, but I will

24 finish in the next session.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And would you please -- the Chamber understood

Page 43046

1 the main aspect of cross-examination to be methodological things, I rely

2 on this, is it there, is it not there. That's rather more than -- at

3 least I didn't hear much that individual conclusions, apart from the ones

4 we dealt with, that that may be right, that may be wrong, but it's rather

5 a -- it's rather a methodological criticism to the work done by the

6 expert, including that he could overview only very -- a limited part of

7 the available evidence and drew his conclusions on that.

8 So if you would focus on what was the gist of the

9 cross-examination, then we might move on most expeditiously.

10 We take a break, and we resume at quarter past 12.00.

11 --- Recess taken at 11.53 a.m.

12 --- On resuming at 12.15 p.m.

13 JUDGE ORIE: We wait for the witness to enter the courtroom.

14 It seems that Mr. Mladic is trying to draw the attention of

15 counsel.

16 [The witness takes the stand]

17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.

18 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

19 Q. [Interpretation] May we continue, Mr. Pavlovic?

20 A. Yes.

21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please see P07789 on our

22 screens.

23 Q. You were asked something about this document. This is a report

24 on reassociation following re-exhumation of mortal remains. It is one of

25 the persons that the Prosecutor asked you about. We've looked at the

Page 43047

1 person in your list. The same numbers are mentioned. Two numbers. One

2 is CR. That's the Cancari Road; right?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. The other one is TIS. What does that stand for?

5 A. Tisova Kosa.

6 Q. Even though this document was drawn up on the 4th of December,

7 2012, as it says here, it was disclosed to the Defence on the 21st of

8 January, 2016, so that you could not see it. I will ask you anyway.

9 Did the Defence ask you to deal with forensic evidence and check

10 their accuracy while preparing your report? And are you a forensic

11 expert?

12 A. No, no, that was not requested from me. And as you know, I'm not

13 a forensic expert.

14 Q. In your work at the institute for the missing persons of

15 Bosnia-Herzegovina, did you ask the ICMP to inform you about such

16 mistakes as this one which occurred in the work of ICMP, according to the

17 Prosecution?

18 A. As far as I know, no.

19 Q. And did they inform you about such mistakes, even if you didn't

20 ask them to do it?

21 A. As far as I know and to the best of my recollection, they didn't.

22 Q. Did you ever see a summary overview compiled by the ICMP that

23 would present such mistakes?

24 A. I never saw anything like that.

25 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Let us now move to 65 ter -- or,

Page 43048

1 rather, it has a new number now, P07791.

2 Q. It is a document from the ICMP in which they explain what, in

3 their view, happened.

4 A part of the mandible is discussed. It was given this other

5 label, the TIS label. The explanation does not include any precise

6 information as to how this happened. The penultimate paragraph only says

7 that it is possible that this bodily remain was wrongly stored, but it's

8 not explained how that could have happened.

9 The document was drawn up on the 27th of January, 2016.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. MacDonald.

11 MR. MacDONALD: Thank you, Your Honour.

12 Just my friend said that one of the paragraphs here only says

13 that it is possible that this bodily remain was wrongly stored, but -- oh

14 no. My apologies, Your Honour. I thought my friend was talking about

15 the reassociation itself. My apologies.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.

17 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.

18 [Interpretation] The document was written on last Wednesday. And

19 just for the record, it's obvious that the Prosecution did some

20 preparations and some verifications during the break in Mr. Pavlovic's

21 testimony, so we would ask to be shown what was requested from the

22 Bosnian authorities and who submitted information to them, and was this

23 all that the Prosecution requested from the Bosnian authorities. As

24 disclosure was really late, we would like to see what this was all about.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Are you examining the witness at this moment or are

Page 43049

1 you raising a matter --

2 MR. LUKIC: No, I'm just putting that on the record. Yes,

3 Your Honour.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, any problems in closing what has been asked

5 and -- Mr. McCloskey.

6 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, we can get together with them. They have

7 been disclosed quite a bit of this material so they could see where this

8 all came from. And there's nothing late about any of this given that, as

9 you know, this material came the Sunday before the Monday of the

10 testimony. But we've given them most everything we have, but we'll

11 continue to explore what else they think there may be.

12 JUDGE ORIE: It seems that Mr. Lukic touches upon a more general

13 issue; that is, is there any record of recognised mistakes or errors in

14 the ICMP conclusions? That's, Mr. Lukic, what I thought you were trying

15 to elucidate in your examination. I take it that there's not because if

16 there would be, that would be exculpatory evidence anyhow where there's

17 an obligation to disclose that.

18 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, Mr. President. That's a rather broad topic,

19 and as you know, there has been many updates of ICMP material correcting

20 mistakes. The Skorpions being the most obvious. We have made an effort

21 to keep up with that as much as we can, and again, we'll keep our eye out

22 and see if there's anything in particular.

23 JUDGE ORIE: And all that is disclosed to the Defence.

24 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes. As far as we know, it's all been disclosed.

25 MR. LUKIC: I would narrow down my request. It is something

Page 43050

1 asked after Mr. Pavlovic left in relation to his testimony.

2 JUDGE ORIE: I think that Mr. McCloskey had answered that

3 question already when I then broadened it a bit, and -- because he said

4 he is willing to sit together with you and give information about

5 whatever you've asked and what -- how it was prepared, Mr. McCloskey, if

6 that's well understood.

7 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, that's no problem. He has quite a bit of

8 material right now, and if there's something in there that leads him to

9 something else we'll absolutely get together.

10 JUDGE ORIE: So there will be full transparency by Mr. McCloskey

11 if you sit together on what communications have taken place and what the

12 results of all that has been.

13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: May I narrow it down to one matter. At the

14 beginning of this letter from Mr. Parsons, ICMP, he refers to a letter or

15 a recent inquiry concerning DNA-based reassociations. Was that a letter

16 sent to ICMP, or was it another way of communication?

17 MR. McCLOSKEY: My memory was - and Mr. Lukic has this - it

18 started off with an e-mail saying something to the effect of "can you

19 check this out," and they wrote us back, and then we wrote a letter

20 asking for a request. He has got all that material, and if he'd like

21 to -- or if the Court would like it, we have it as well.

22 JUDGE ORIE: No.

23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I just wanted to know the background of this

24 specific letter, but I think Mr. Lukic will be able to check if it is in

25 his possession.

Page 43051

1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic raised his eyebrows when Mr. McCloskey

2 said that he had received all of that. So, therefore, perhaps sitting

3 together, coffee or tea, would assist in establishing that there indeed

4 is full transparency and that's the only concern the Chamber would have.

5 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

7 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.

8 And now I would call the next document. It's 65 ter number

9 33617, please.

10 Q. [Interpretation] This is a death certificate --

11 MR. LUKIC: Can this be broadcasted? I'm not sure, can you see

12 the name.

13 MR. MacDONALD: This name has been checked with ICMP and it's

14 fine to be broadcast, yes.

15 MR. LUKIC: Okay.

16 Q. [Interpretation] We can see the name. It's Husein Alic, and you

17 discuss this, the fact that it's a gun-shot/blast injury to the head.

18 And on transcript page 42947, you said that you understood this as both

19 injuries at once, a gun-shot and a blast injury. You also explained

20 later on that a gun-shot wound doesn't exclude the possibility that

21 someone may have perished during the breakthrough.

22 MR. LUKIC: Before I continue, I would just offer this document

23 into evidence since my learned friend did not do it.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But then we need an English translation, so

25 you would like to have it marked for identification --

Page 43052

1 MR. LUKIC: Then it could be MFI'd, yes --

2 JUDGE ORIE: -- because I don't know, because I think we -- could

3 we have a look at it again.

4 MR. LUKIC: It's on the second page what was discussed.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And could I have a look at that second page.

6 MR. LUKIC: Yes.

7 MR. MacDONALD: Your Honours.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

9 MR. MacDONALD: If I may just -- thanks to my colleague

10 Ms. Stewart, I can tell the Court we have requested an English

11 translation for this and we should have it in a day or two. Just

12 to clear up that matter [overlapping speakers] --

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, okay. So it can be marked for identification.

14 Let's start with that.

15 Madam Registrar, the number under which it would be marked for

16 identification -- oh, you want to tender it, Mr. -- or would you --

17 MR. MacDONALD: I have no objection to my friend tendering. It's

18 just to let Mr. Lukic know he doesn't --

19 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Mr. Lukic tendered it --

20 MR. MacDONALD: -- have to ask for an English translation.

21 JUDGE ORIE: And the number -- the D number to be assigned would

22 be?

23 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, D01401 MFI.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Is marked for identification pending translation.

25 Because one of the things that struck me is that the whole

Page 43053

1 emphasis was on whether it was a bullet wound or an explosive. But, of

2 course, first of all, we need a translation not from B/C/S but from

3 Latin. Because the medical expression starts with "destructio capitis."

4 Now, I'm not that fluent in Latin anymore - I never was, as a matter of

5 fact - but that sounds to me as that the head was destroyed, which, of

6 course, then is also a relevant issue. I draw the attention of the

7 parties to it, that they focused exclusively on part of what is written

8 there in Latin.

9 [Prosecution counsel confer]

10 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, I see that there is B/C/S translation. I don't

11 know whether -- that's a medical translation. But I don't know,

12 Mr. Lukic, if you could read that slowly, then we could ...

13 MR. LUKIC: I can --

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --

15 MR. LUKIC: I can do that much.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

17 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Gun-shot/blast destruction of the

18 head.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So that there's -- so my knowledge of the

20 Latin is still sufficient to resolve simple problems. But the

21 destruction of the head, of course, has not been paid a lot of attention

22 to.

23 And let's move on --

24 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

25 JUDGE ORIE: -- Mr. Lukic.

Page 43054

1 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

2 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, yesterday and earlier too, you talked about the

3 number of missing persons and those who were killed during the events

4 around Srebrenica. Do you know what is the total number of the

5 casualties in the events in and around Srebrenica and the breakthrough of

6 the column?

7 A. I cannot precisely tell you.

8 JUDGE ORIE: One second.

9 MR. MacDONALD: Yes. Your Honours, I understand that Mr. Lukic

10 is trying to reference a part of Mr. Pavlovic's analysis which

11 Your Honours explicitly was said outside of his competence. That is his

12 conclusion on the number of people who died in the breakthrough in the

13 column. That's how I understood Mr. Lukic to be --

14 MR. LUKIC: No. My question was total number of killed, missing,

15 died in combat, total number in connection with Srebrenica from July 12th

16 until the end of July.

17 JUDGE ORIE: But that requires a knowledge, a thorough knowledge

18 of who died in combat and who did not die in combat.

19 MR. LUKIC: No, the total number of -- his institute worked with

20 which number as casualties in regard of Srebrenica in July 1995. That

21 was my question.

22 JUDGE ORIE: All, whether executed, died in combat --

23 MR. LUKIC: The whole -- the total number.

24 JUDGE ORIE: The total number of those who --

25 MR. LUKIC: Yes.

Page 43072

1 and nothing but the truth. Would you please make that declaration of

2 which the text is now handed out to you.

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

4 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

5 WITNESS: MILE MATIJEVIC

6 [Witness answered through interpreter]

7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please be seated.

8 THE WITNESS: Thank you.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Matijevic, you'll first be examined by

10 Mr. Stojanovic. You find Mr. Stojanovic to your left. Mr. Stojanovic is

11 counsel for Mr. Mladic.

12 Please proceed.

13 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

14 Examination by Mr. Stojanovic:

15 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, sir.

16 A. Good afternoon.

17 Q. I'm sorry that you waited so long because of our yesterday's

18 estimate.

19 Now, would you please tell us your full name for the record.

20 A. Mile Matijevic.

21 Q. Mr. Matijevic, have you given a written statement to the Defence

22 team of General Mladic answering the questions we put to you?

23 A. I have.

24 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like to

25 call up in e-court 65 ter 1D05452.

Page 43073

1 Q. Mr. Matijevic, you will shortly see on the screen before you a

2 text. If you can now see it on the right-hand side of the screen, is

3 this personal -- are these personal details yours? And whose is the

4 signature?

5 A. The details I see in front of me are my details, and the

6 signature is mine.

7 Q. Thank you.

8 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we look at the last page

9 of this document, please.

10 Q. Mr. Matijevic, the signature we see on this page, is it yours?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Thank you.

13 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I should like us

14 to focus on paragraph 3 of this statement in both versions.

15 Q. Mr. Matijevic, yesterday when we were making the last

16 preparations for your appearance in the courtroom, did you tell me that

17 just for the sake of full precision, in the first word of paragraph 3,

18 instead of "there," we should change to "at the centre of the security

19 services, I was first assigned," et cetera?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And now, Mr. Matijevic, having clarified this in paragraph 3 and

22 upon making a solemn declaration here in the courtroom and having

23 reviewed your statement once again yesterday, if we were to put to you

24 the same questions again, would you give the same answers as in the text

25 in front of you?

Page 43074

1 A. Yes, I would give identical answers.

2 Q. Would it be to the best of your recollection on the circumstances

3 you described?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Thank you.

6 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like to

7 tender this witness's statement, 65 ter 1D05452, with the proviso that in

8 e-court, as I have discussed with my learned friend from the Prosecution,

9 a duplicate of this statement should be deleted from e-court. Because we

10 had uploaded another version intending to tender it under 92 bis.

11 I hereby tender this document.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

13 THE REGISTRAR: Defence Exhibit D01402, public.

14 MR. TRALDI: And just so I understand the technical side -- we

15 have no objections to the admission of one statement through the witness.

16 Just so I understand the technical side, will it be, once it's marked for

17 identification, possible for the Defence to correct the upload or is

18 Mr. Stojanovic asking that the Registry be requested to remove one of the

19 two versions?

20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stojanovic.

21 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] We discussed this before the

22 beginning. I'm not sure whether our case manager would technically be

23 able to do it. If she's able to do it, she will; but if that's not

24 possible, then we would ask assistance from the Registry to remove the

25 earlier version from the system.

Page 43075

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, well, whether it needs to be removed from the

2 system, yes or no, what we see at this moment on our screen is apparently

3 the document as uploaded by the Defence which the Defence seeks to be

4 admitted.

5 Any further comments? Because what else is in the system as long

6 as it's not tendered or if it is part of a withdrawn motion, that's a

7 different matter.

8 MR. TRALDI: And, Your Honour, the reason and I think what

9 Mr. Stojanovic was pointing to was both versions and there's only one --

10 there aren't significant differences but both versions are uploaded under

11 the same 65 ter number. So if 65 ter 1D05452 is admitted, then

12 everything under that number, as I understand it, gets admitted, both

13 versions, and so we're just talking about how to technically remove the

14 duplicate from that single number.

15 JUDGE ORIE: That -- Madam Registrar, does this cause any problem

16 if we would now decide to have the document as it is on our screen as

17 called up by Mr. Stojanovic, to have it admitted into evidence, or do we

18 get for free another copy?

19 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

20 JUDGE ORIE: We can admit it into evidence upon the confirmation

21 of Madam Registrar that it causes no problems.

22 Please proceed.

23 [Trial Chamber confers]

24 JUDGE ORIE: I think I said admitted into evidence but I may

25 have --

Page 43076

1 [Trial Chamber confers]

2 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, yes, there's no number -- it has a number --

3 [Trial Chamber confers]

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I must have been unclear when I said admitted

5 into evidence earlier. But let's now make it ... one second, please.

6 [Trial Chamber confers]

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it is D1402, which is hereby admitted into

8 evidence.

9 Please proceed.

10 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] I thank the Court. With your

11 leave, I should like to read the short summary of Mr. Matijevic's

12 statement.

13 Witness Mile Matijevic has a Ph.D. in law and works as a

14 professor in Banja Luka. He spent his professional career in a variety

15 of duties at the republic Secretariat for Internal Affairs of Serbia, of

16 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and finally Republika Srpska. From the establishment

17 of the MUP of Republika Srpska, he worked at the Security Services Centre

18 of Banja Luka. And beginning with mid-1994, he worked at the Ministry of

19 Interior of Republika Srpska in Bijeljina. And from 1995 onwards, he

20 dedicated himself to education and the training of MUP staff in

21 Republika Srpska.

22 In his statement, he describes his career in detail.

23 While he was living and working at the CSB Banja Luka, in the

24 course of his duties and by the nature of his job, he had direct

25 co-operation with military authorities, especially the security organs of

Page 43077

1 the 1st and the 2nd Krajina Corps. He also describes in detail the

2 system of control and command at the then-CSB Banja Luka. He also talks

3 about his impressions about the operation and work of the public security

4 centre Prijedor, as well as the work style of the then-chief of this SJB,

5 Simo Drljaca, who was wont to make decisions bypassing the prior and

6 necessary consultations with CSB Banja Luka. There were also situations

7 when he didn't even inform the CSB about certain events in the territory

8 of the SJB Prijedor.

9 In connection with references to his name in the diary entries of

10 General Mladic in the text of the 27th May 1993, he stresses that he is

11 personally unaware of any meeting comprised of the people listed in these

12 notes. He is unaware that such a meeting was ever held. He never

13 attended any meeting in the said composition of persons, nor does he know

14 what Colonel Bogojevic reported to General Mladic. He was very surprised

15 to find his name in the context of the said meeting. Otherwise, he

16 collaborated with Colonel Bogojevic on issues concerning the employment

17 of police units in combat operations and on other forms of co-operation

18 between military and police forces.

19 This is, Your Honours, the short summary of Mr. Matijevic's

20 statement. I have just a few questions for him.

21 Q. Mr. Matijevic, in your statement, you say that you had some form

22 of co-operation with Colonel Bogojevic. To the best of your knowledge,

23 what were the duties and responsibilities of Colonel Bogojevic in the

24 period when you were in contact with him?

25 A. Working in the Security Services Centre and earlier in the

Page 43078

1 police, my job was to liaise with the security organs of the 1st and

2 2nd Krajina Corps mainly concerning the use of police officers in combat

3 operations.

4 On this issue, we collaborated by agreeing on the number of

5 personnel from the police needed by the military in certain localities at

6 the request of the VRS. This colonel was doing his job and I did not

7 need to be informed about all aspects of his job. I only knew the aspect

8 concerning the resubordination of police members to the military.

9 Q. Did Colonel Bogojevic hold this position of the security organ in

10 the 1st Krajina Corps all the time of the war, or did you have to liaise

11 with any other officers of that corps?

12 A. Colonel Bogojevic took over as chief of security from late

13 Milan Stevilovic who got killed on the 5th of July, 1992, together with

14 the chief of police, Stevan Markovic. They were ambushed in the area of

15 Kotor Varos and both of them got killed. And after their death, I was

16 appointed chief of the security at the CSB, and he became chief of

17 security in the corps. So I knew Colonel Stevilovic before him, although

18 I didn't have much contact with him, but later on I continued to

19 collaborate with Colonel Bogojevic.

20 Q. For the record and for the Court, could you tell us if

21 Colonel Bogojevic is still alive?

22 A. I heard recently that he died a couple of months ago. After the

23 war I had no further contact with him. He was seriously ill, and as far

24 as I know, he died from a stroke.

25 Q. Thank you, Mr. Matijevic, for these answers.

Page 43079

1 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, these were all the

2 questions we had for Mr. Matijevic for now.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Stojanovic.

4 Mr. Matijevic, you'll now be cross-examined by Mr. Traldi. You

5 find Mr. Traldi to your right, standing. Mr. Traldi is counsel for the

6 Prosecution.

7 You may proceed, Mr. Traldi.

8 MR. TRALDI: Thank you, Mr. President.

9 Cross-examination by Mr. Traldi:

10 Q. Good afternoon, sir.

11 A. Good afternoon.

12 Q. I want to talk briefly about the mechanics of your co-operation

13 with the VRS. Now, did I understand correctly from your answers on

14 direct examination that you would liaise directly personally with

15 Colonel Bogojevic?

16 A. Yes. I contacted him directly in certain situations when it was

17 determined by my superiors that we should agree about certain operational

18 engagement of members of police and army on the ground. And, likewise, I

19 met him at the front because I spent quite some time with police members

20 in the field and on the fronts.

21 Q. Would you just meet him at the front or also in Banja Luka?

22 A. In Banja Luka, we would sit together occasionally as the need

23 arose, whether in his office in the corps or on our premises in the

24 police. It was not necessary very often. More often, we had telephone

25 contacts or we sent dispatches, but sometimes we did meet and sit

Page 43080

1 together, yes.

2 Q. When you met, would you meet alone or would others attend?

3 A. Well, I really don't remember details of specific meetings now.

4 I think these were more often meetings where there were many of us, where

5 we agreed about the engagement of members of the police at the request of

6 the army or perhaps some other issues that had to do with our joint

7 activities. But probably we sometimes sat alone, just the two of us, but

8 I really cannot remember the details or specific instances right now.

9 Q. When you say "other issues that had to do with our joint

10 activities," what do you mean?

11 A. Well, as part of our duties, the members of the police and

12 military security, one question that was very topical were our measures

13 taken against soldiers in case they violated regulations in public or if

14 they deserted from their units and similar issues, where members of the

15 police intervened and then we handed them over to the relevant military

16 organs for further processing. So these were some of the issues that

17 required us to have contacts.

18 Q. And you say you handed them over to military organs. That's

19 because the military had exclusive jurisdiction over any violations by

20 soldiers; right?

21 A. Yes, precisely. We were authorised to react in the first

22 instance, but our duty was then to transfer this to the jurisdiction of

23 the military organs.

24 Q. And would you say you had a good working relationship with

25 Colonel Bogojevic?

Page 43081

1 A. During the time when we co-operated, and that was less than two

2 years, there were no special problems. No problems with regard to our

3 co-operation and our official duties. We carried out all our duties

4 properly in accordance with the tasks that we had.

5 Q. And in the 2nd Krajina Corps -- Bogojevic was who you had contact

6 with in the 1st Krajina Corps. Who was it in the 2nd Krajina Corps?

7 A. In the 2nd Krajina Corps, the chief of security was

8 Lieutenant-Colonel - later colonel - Mikajlo Mitrovic.

9 Q. You would also communicate with him about common tasks?

10 A. Yes, about the same issues that we discussed with our colleagues

11 from the 1st Krajina Corps. Because the Security Services Centre was in

12 charge of the zone of the 2nd Krajina Corps and one part of the zone of

13 responsibility of the 1st Krajina Corps.

14 Q. And did you have a good working relationship with Colonel

15 Mitrovic?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And also with Colonel Bogojevic; right?

18 A. Yes, also with Bogojevic.

19 MR. TRALDI: Can we have 65 ter 33599.

20 Q. And, sir, I'm just going to look quickly at one example of a

21 joint operation.

22 This is a commendation sent to the MUP special unit and the MUP

23 information minister and all SJBs in the region from Mr. Zupljanin, dated

24 the 2nd of November, 1992. We see a reference to members of several

25 police stations and those enrolled in a policemen's course in Banja Luka

Page 43082

1 who had been among the first to enter Jajce, clearing it of the remnants

2 of Ustasha-Muslim forces. And it refers to, a couple of lines lower, a

3 "synchronized action with the army."

4 And turning to page 2 in the English and page 1 at the bottom in

5 the B/C/S, we see several people are commended by name, including you.

6 Do you see your name there?

7 A. I can see it.

8 Q. And what was your role in the Jajce operation?

9 A. In the Jajce zone - I think that this was in late 1992 - a

10 military action was carried out in the Jajce area. It was the liberation

11 of Jajce. In co-ordinated action with military units were -- was a

12 number of policemen.

13 Q. And --

14 A. As members of the police were in the composition of those units,

15 somebody from the police had also to be in the staff of the units. Even

16 though it was a military command, it was our obligation to be present

17 there because our members were engaged. And, I'm sorry, I also see here,

18 and it's true, that the special unit of the Republika Srpska MUP also

19 participated in this action.

20 Q. Who had overall command of the Jajce operation?

21 A. No, no. No. No, not at all.

22 Q. Sorry. I think there may have been a translation issue. What I

23 asked you was who, what person, had overall command of the Jajce

24 operation?

25 A. Yes, yes, I'm sorry, I heard the question whether I was the

Page 43083

1 commander. Even if I had wanted to, I couldn't have been the commander

2 because it was the army that commanded. And to be frank, I don't

3 remember for sure who it was. It was a big operation where one part of

4 the corps participated. It must have been a high-ranking army officer at

5 the level of the division or so. I was simply present there in the staff

6 as the co-ordinator of liaison with the police, so I was in charge of

7 logistics. Because the command was absolutely in the hands of the army,

8 and the army was leading this operation.

9 Q. And that was standard during these joint operations, the top

10 command would be the army; right?

11 A. Yes. According to regulations, the army carried out combat

12 operations and policemen participated in certain activities because they

13 were not by themselves entitled to carry out combat operations.

14 MR. TRALDI: Can we have 65 ter 16975.

15 Q. Now, this is an order from Mr. Zupljanin dated the 27th of

16 October, 1992, a few days earlier. If we zoom in at the very top, he

17 begins that:

18 "Pursuant to a request from the command of the 1st Krajina Corps

19 of the VRS to engage 158 members of the police from the Banja Luka CSB

20 region, who will be resubordinated to the 1st KK command to execute

21 designated tasks in Jajce."

22 And then he orders which stations will send which personnel.

23 Now, the term used in the regulations for when the army has the

24 top command, as you just described was standard, is resubordination;

25 right?

Page 43084

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And you mentioned the last one referred to the special unit. If

3 we look below the list of what personnel will come from what SJB, we see

4 a reference to Brane Pecanac commanding the unit of these 158 members of

5 the police. That's the special unit that you saw referred to in the last

6 document; right?

7 A. Yes, that's right.

8 Q. And we saw the previous document was dated the 2nd of November,

9 1992, the commendation. What you refer to as the liberation of Jajce

10 happened at the beginning of November 1992; right?

11 A. Yes, late October and early November. I think it was roughly

12 that period. I don't know exactly, I don't remember, but one can see

13 from these dates that that's when it was.

14 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, I tender 65 ter 33599 and 16975.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

16 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, those will be Exhibits P07793 and

17 P07794, public.

18 JUDGE ORIE: P7793 and P7794 are admitted.

19 MR. TRALDI:

20 Q. Now, I'm not going to go into more detail about the Jajce

21 operation, but the Chamber has received evidence coming from CSB

22 Banja Luka - and I'm referring to P3216 and P3853 - that there were about

23 33.000 Muslims and Croats in Jajce before the war, 31.000 had moved out

24 by 1993, and by 1995 there were barely 100.

25 Now, you were aware that during and after what you call the

Page 43085

1 liberation of Jajce, tens of thousands of Muslims and Croats had fled to

2 Central Bosnia; right?

3 A. This specific situation in the Jajce area and further afield is

4 something that I'm only generally aware of. I'm not a military

5 strategist or a commander. But knowing the situation to a degree, it was

6 such that in view of the multi-ethnic composition of the population of

7 Jajce and the surrounding area, as early as -- at the beginning of the

8 war, the conflict between armed forces, both Serb, Muslim and Croat ones,

9 was very fierce, and it so happened that in certain areas, the Muslims

10 left their territory; in other areas, it was the Serbs; and in the third,

11 the Croats. And so on and so forth. So it was a situation that was

12 typical of the municipalities in the Jajce zone and the surrounding

13 areas.

14 Q. Now, you were aware, because you worked at the CSB when it

15 collected this information, that Jajce was one of the areas that because

16 of the destruction of their neighbourhoods, because of the crimes

17 committed against them, the Muslims and Croats left; right?

18 A. I'm not aware of that, really.

19 Q. Sir, I see we're close to the end of the day. I just have one

20 more question for today.

21 MR. TRALDI: Can we have 65 ter 33604.

22 Q. Now, this is a portion of your testimony in Bosnia in the Mejakic

23 case.

24 MR. TRALDI: If we could have page 11 in the English and 12 in

25 the B/C/S.

Page 43086

1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, I'm a bit confused. You said it's "a

2 portion of your testimony." It seems to be a statement given, if I look

3 at the format.

4 MR. TRALDI: It's a transcript of the Court of BiH testimony.

5 The format that we get those in looks like the format that we see OTP

6 interviews in on the screen. But -- yes.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, now I understand better that -- please proceed.

8 MR. TRALDI:

9 Q. I'm just going to read you one of the answers you gave there,

10 beginning at line 12 in the B/C/S, and ask you if you stand by it as

11 truthful and accurate. It's about the structure of the RS MUP.

12 You testified:

13 "MUP of the Serb Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, later on -

14 Serb Republic, is, in essence, one centralised and organised in

15 hierarchy, in hierarchy order, that is the ... it is the body. So in a

16 vertical structure, the MUP is organised in a way that it was dealt ...

17 it was led by the minister of the MUP who is authorised towards all the

18 lower bodies, directly or through his subordinates, through the

19 organisational unit in the seat of the Ministry, and through

20 organisational units that are situated in the field."

21 Do you stand by that testimony today as truthful and accurate?

22 A. Yes. Yes.

23 MR. TRALDI: And I see we're at the time to break for the

24 afternoon, Your Honours.

25 JUDGE ORIE: We are already beyond the time to break.