Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 11789

1 Tuesday, 12 September 2006

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The accused Sljivancanin not present in court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.

6 [The witness entered court]

7 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning, sir. Would you please read aloud the

8 affirmation on the card.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak

10 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

11 JUDGE PARKER: Please sit down.

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.


14 [Witness answered through interpreter]

15 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Vasic.

16 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Good morning, Your

17 Honours. Good morning to all present in the courtroom.

18 Examination by Mr. Vasic:

19 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning to you, sir. Would you please be so

20 kind as to tell us your full name?

21 A. Milan Babic.

22 Q. Sir, would you please tell us what your profession is. Tell us

23 about your educational background and your career.

24 A. I was a pilot in the air force of the JNA, later on the army of

25 Yugoslavia. I graduated from the air force academy in Zadar and served in

Page 11790

1 Split and Batajnica in Belgrade.

2 Q. Thank you, sir. Please tell us the makes of aircraft you flew

3 during your career, and do you still fly or are you retired?

4 A. I flew helicopters of different makes, but most often on the MI8

5 or HT40 helicopter. I'm currently retire.

6 Q. Did you also fly the Gazelle helicopter?

7 A. Yes, I did.

8 Q. We're interested in the year 1991. Can you tell us where you

9 served in 1991 or, rather, in which unit did you fly helicopters?

10 A. In 1991, I served at the Batajnica airport in the 890th Mixed

11 Helicopter Squadron, and I flew a HT40.

12 Q. Thank you. Let me just intervene in the transcript -- oh, now

13 it's fine. It's the 890th Mixed Helicopter Squadron.

14 Was your unit assigned a mission relative to the transport from

15 the Vukovar battlefield?

16 A. Among other missions, the unit also had the mission to transport

17 medical corps or, rather, the -- for the purposes of the medical corps of

18 the Motorised Brigade. Our mission specifically was to transport the

19 wounded from the Vukovar battlefield or, more precisely, from Negoslavci

20 where the hospital was located.

21 Q. Thank you. Now that you've mentioned the transport of the

22 wounded, you can you tell us what the capacity of the HT40 helicopter you

23 flew was, specifically when it comes to the transporting of the wounded.

24 A. The HT40 helicopter could hold approximately 15 to 16 slightly

25 wounded, that is to say those who are able to stay seated, or 12 wounded

Page 11791

1 on stretchers. Those were the maximum capacities of the helicopter.

2 Q. Were the services of your helicopter squadron requested in

3 advance?

4 A. Depending on the situation, one HT40 helicopter that was set aside

5 for the transporting of the wounded was located in the village of

6 Negoslavci. In the event of greater needs, our other helicopters that

7 were stationed at Batajnica were requested to fly in.

8 Q. In addition to your helicopter at the Negoslavci heliodrom --

9 heliport, were there any other helicopters to be found there on a daily

10 basis?

11 A. Yes. There was one Gazelle helicopter for the purposes of the

12 command and for the purposes of transporting wounded from the temporary

13 hospital at Negoslavci to the VMA, that is to say the Military Medical

14 Academy. If one single wounded had to be transported.

15 Q. Can you tell us who made up the crew of the HT40 helicopter?

16 A. The crew of the HT40 helicopter was made up of two pilots and one

17 mechanic. Thus three members of the crew in total.

18 Q. When you were assigned missions to transport a group of wounded,

19 who assigned such missions to you? Do you recall?

20 A. We received direct orders from the superior commander. The crew

21 at Negoslavci received their orders from the air force commander attached

22 to the Guards Brigade.

23 Q. You mentioned the crew stationed at Negoslavci. Were there shifts

24 of crews or was there just this one single crew?

25 A. There were shifts of crews that rotated every three to four days.

Page 11792

1 The crews would change depending on the availability of manpower and the

2 circumstances dictated by the situation.

3 Q. Did you ever transport the commander of the Guards Brigade,

4 Colonel Mrksic, in a HT40 helicopter?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Do you know if he, during his stay at Negoslavci, ever used that

7 make of helicopter for his purposes?

8 A. As far as I know, he did not.

9 Q. Could we please be shown Exhibit 765, which is the flight log of

10 the 890th Transport Helicopter Squadron for HT40 helicopters. Yesterday,

11 we provided copies of the document?

12 Q. Sir, do you have this flight log before you? Can you tell me is

13 this the log of your squadron for the make of the helicopter you flew in

14 1991 in Negoslavci?

15 A. Yes, it is.

16 Q. Can you tell us whether important data about the crews and sorties

17 of the helicopters in the relevant period were entered into this log.

18 A. The main data contained in flight schedules were entered into the

19 log; that is to say, the time of flight that was carried out, names of the

20 passengers, the crew, the number of the helicopter which flew, and the

21 numerical code of the exercise in order to avoid writing details about it.

22 Let us say that it was a sort of a code used for that purpose.

23 Q. This document which is kept for a long time and is in effect the

24 document on the basis of which the number of hours flown is determined for

25 a particular aircraft, as well as the persons who flew the aircraft?

Page 11793

1 A. Yes, precisely, both for the aircraft itself and the crew. After

2 the data is entered into the flight log, the members of the crew enter the

3 same data into their own respective records about the details of the

4 flight. The data are subsequently confirmed by the superior officer.

5 Q. In the relevant period, what was your position in the squadron?

6 Were you just a helicopter pilot or did you have a post?

7 A. I was the commander of the helicopter squad.

8 Q. Please look at the entry for the 21st of November, 1991, in this

9 flight log, which is page 1D040047 in the B/C/S. And in the English

10 version that's page 1D040063.

11 Do you see the entry for the sortie which was carried out

12 between 8.00 and 9.35? Did your view fly this sortie?

13 A. Yes, and I was the head of the crew.

14 Q. What was the route of this flight; do you know?

15 A. Yes, I do. We took off from the Batajnica airport to the football

16 pitch in the village of Negoslavci, whereupon we flew over to the VMA

17 heliport, that is to say the heliport of the Military Medical Academy, and

18 returned to the Batajnica airport.

19 Q. You've told us already but I will ask you again. On this flight

20 and on that day, did you transport Colonel Mrksic in the helicopter that

21 you yourself flew?

22 A. As I've already answered you, no, I have not.

23 Q. Did you know Colonel Mrksic from before?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Can you tell us how you came to know him or how far you knew him?

Page 11794

1 A. We met in the village of Negoslavci, and I knew him as the

2 commander of the Guards Brigade since, for a period of time, I was

3 stationed in the village of Negoslavci as the reserve crew.

4 Q. Do you remember if at the time you took off from Negoslavci on

5 that day, when you took off from Negoslavci to Belgrade, was there another

6 helicopter that took off from the heliport at the football pitch you

7 mentioned at that time?

8 A. At the time I was there, no, it did not. There was none.

9 Q. Thank you very much, sir.

10 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have no further

11 questions for this witness.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Vasic.

13 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. No

14 questions from us.

15 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. Likewise.

16 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Lukic.

17 Mr. Moore.

18 Cross-examination by Mr. Moore:

19 Q. Have you given evidence before in a court?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. When was that, please?

22 A. A long, long time ago. It must have been ten years ago, possibly

23 more.

24 Q. In this court, we are given a document. Can you just look at me

25 for a moment, please? Thank you.

Page 11795

1 We're given a document with your name, your date of birth, and the

2 evidence, we're told the evidence that you're going to give. Now, when

3 did you first speak to the lawyers of Colonel Mrksic?

4 A. The first time, I don't know. It was last year, up to a year. I

5 can't remember specifically.

6 Q. And when did you arrive here in The Hague for this trial?

7 A. On the 9th of September this year.

8 Q. Can I just read out what your summary says. It gives your date of

9 birth. It indicates that you're an ML -- or a MI8 helicopter. "On the

10 21st of November, 1991, in the morning hours, around 8.00, the witness,

11 together with his co-pilot, transported Major Tesic, Vujovic, and two

12 wounded persons from Negoslavci to Belgrade. He will testify that Colonel

13 Mrksic never used the MI8 helicopters but exclusively Gazelles."

14 Do you remember taking a man named Miroljub Vujovic on the 21st of

15 November?

16 A. I really can't remember. I don't know.

17 Q. Well, you see, he's given evidence at the military court in

18 Belgrade in 2001 that he actually went by helicopter on the morning of

19 the 21st from Negoslavci to Belgrade, and clearly it had to be your

20 helicopter.

21 A. That is possible. I'm not saying that it wasn't the case.

22 However, I don't know the man, and I simply can't confirm that he was in

23 that helicopter.

24 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, just one objection to

25 raise, which stems from what has so far been the established practice used

Page 11796

1 by Mr. Moore. We can't confront a witness with his own statement and then

2 ask him what he thinks about it.

3 JUDGE PARKER: I'm sorry, Mr. Vasic, I don't know the real point

4 of that objection. This is cross-examination, not examination-in-chief,

5 and in cross-examination, if there was a difficulty or a difference

6 between a statement in the evidence, it would properly be put to the

7 witness. But what is being done here is not putting a statement but a

8 summary provided to the Prosecution, which is -- may or may not be

9 something the witness has seen, and he's being asked about the reliability

10 of that statement or whether he himself here remembers certain things in

11 it, and it doesn't seem to me that that's objectionable.

12 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I do agree.

13 JUDGE PARKER: You're very generous, Mr. Vasic, this morning. Let

14 us both continue in that spirit.


16 Q. That gentleman, when he gave evidence, said that he travelled with

17 Colonel Mrksic and Major Tesic. Now, can you explain how that might be?

18 And before you answer, in fairness to you, Colonel Mrksic, on two

19 occasions, indicated that he had travelled in the morning, and that on one

20 of those occasions -- and I say one of those occasions, he said he also

21 travelled by helicopter when he was on his way to Belgrade for the special

22 meeting.

23 Now, can you explain that, how it is you say that Mrksic didn't

24 travel and Mrksic himself said he did travel and also another passenger

25 who you accept travelled, how he said that Mrksic was on that helicopter?

Page 11797

1 Is it a case you might have forgotten?

2 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Moore, I think in fairness to the position, it

3 should be added to your preliminary comments that evidence about how

4 Colonel Mrksic travelled has varied, but as you have said, he himself has

5 given evidence. Yes.

6 MR. MOORE: Thank you very much.

7 Q. Might it be that with the passage of time you have simply

8 forgotten? Would that be fair?

9 A. No. If I may just explain. My evidence was that Colonel Mrksic

10 did not fly in my helicopter at all, the one that I flew, the HT40.

11 Whether he ever flew with a different crew in that same helicopter, or

12 perhaps he used a Gazelle, is not something that I can say.

13 One thing I do know for certain is Colonel Mrksic never flew in

14 any of my helicopters, not then, not later.

15 Q. Well, let's just look at some of the documents that we have. You

16 will have a bundle. It's Exhibit, I think, 764. I hope I've got my

17 numbers right. It relates, I hope, to the Gazelle helicopter. Now, have

18 you got that in front of you?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Can I just see if my English translation corresponds with your --

21 your B/C/S original document. Can we just have a small exercise. Can we

22 look at the 19th of November. The pilots should be Minic and Nikolic.

23 Have you got that? Have you got it in front of you? You have documents

24 there.

25 A. No, not now. That's not what it says. I just have the title page

Page 11798

1 of the document.

2 Q. Well, with a bit of luck we'll soon get it.

3 MR. MOORE: Are there hard copies for the witness, or does it have

4 to be always e-court?

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I see it now.


7 Q. Thank you very much. Can we just check? 19th of November, H45,

8 892, Minic, Nikolic. Is that right? Then it's number 300, BT-Kovin, and

9 then 1535 takeoff, 1600 landing. Have you got that in front you?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Does this apply to the Gazelle helicopter that normally was based

12 at Negoslavci?

13 A. This applies to a Gazelle. However, based on what I see on my

14 monitor, the helicopter was stationed at Batajnica, because that's what BT

15 stands for, and it was on its way to Kovin airport.

16 In this other column you can see that it returned at 1700 hours

17 from Kovin to Batajnica.

18 Q. Let's just look at this -- this flight log, because this document

19 relates to one helicopter; is that correct?

20 A. No.

21 Q. Well, then you explain to me, please, what the 19th and the 21st,

22 how you can distinguish between the helicopters.

23 A. The first column contains the type of helicopter. H45 stands for

24 a Gazelle. 892, for example, is the helicopter's military number, its

25 proper name in the army, if I may put it that way. Another helicopter of

Page 11799

1 that same make bears a different number, and these numbers are used to

2 distinguish individual helicopters.

3 Q. So if we're looking at the 19th of November by way of example,

4 we've got the Gazelle, which is H45. We've got what I will call the

5 identification number of the helicopter, which is 892, and we've got this

6 helicopter travelling from Minic -- flown by Minic and Nikolic. It's

7 going from BT to Kovin, and then it's returning from Kovin to BT. So that

8 is one helicopter flight; is that right?

9 A. That's right. No. These are two flights; one to Kovin and one

10 back.

11 Q. Thank you very much. So let's look, then, at helicopter 892,

12 shall we? So 892, on the 19th of November, flies into BT. You agree with

13 that, I imagine.

14 A. The 19th, yes.

15 Q. The next time it makes a flight is on the 21st of November. We

16 can see that. And it goes BT, Top, and then Top to Negoslavci; is that

17 correct?

18 A. I assume it to be correct, yes.

19 Q. Now, can I just deal, then, with the larger helicopter, the one

20 that you were flying. Its capacity, clearly, could carry four passengers.

21 You said 15, 16, depending on who was wounded or not. And you have told

22 us about passengers. How many passengers were flying with that large

23 helicopter on the morning of the 21st of November?

24 A. I can't remember based on the log, but I assume that information

25 entered here is accurate. It would seem to indicate four passengers.

Page 11800

1 Q. So how do you get four passengers from this particular document?

2 Can you tell us? Explain.

3 A. I think I could explain. I could show you what I have here. This

4 is a flight log, and it looks like this in actual fact.

5 Q. Yes.

6 A. So what that means is -- there is the continuation on the other

7 page. It says "flight" and "flight time," and then the designation L in

8 column 19. That means flights, which means three flights. And then P,

9 these are passengers, four.

10 Q. And what does M stand for?

11 A. It means materiel, cargo, if you like.

12 Q. So when you tell us that you can't remember based on the log how

13 many passengers, you assume that the -- that you assume that the

14 information entered here is accurate. It's not a case of you actually

15 remembering. It's a case of you refreshing your memory from this

16 document; i.e., four passengers.

17 A. I look at this document and it tells me that there were four

18 passengers. I can't remember if that was actually the case or not, but

19 there is absolutely no reason for the information that was entered here to

20 be inaccurate. This was written on the very same day that the flight was

21 made.

22 MR. MOORE: Could Your Honour forgive me for a moment, please.

23 Q. So it's not a case of names of passengers. It's a case of numbers

24 of passengers. That's right, isn't it?

25 A. Yes.

Page 11801

1 Q. Thank you very much.

2 MR. MOORE: I have no further questions. Thank you very much.

3 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Vasic.

4 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. Just a

5 couple of questions in re-examination.

6 Re-examination by Mr. Vasic:

7 Q. [Interpretation] Can you first explain what these flights mean

8 that are recorded in the log? What does this concept imply, "flights"? I

9 see here that on the 21st of November you had three flights, or so you

10 say.

11 A. When one says "flights," that implies the time between the time a

12 helicopter first takes off and the time it touches ground again. So, for

13 example, if I made a flight from Batajnica to Negoslavci on this day, that

14 is one flight. Then from Negoslavci to the Military Medical Academy, that

15 was the other flight. And then from the hospital back to Batajnica was

16 the third flight.

17 Q. Thank you. You say you landed at the VMA, Military Medical

18 Academy airport. Did you only land there if you were ferrying the

19 wounded? Was that the only reason you ever landed there?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Can we say based on that that on the 21st of November you were

22 ferrying some wounded persons again, because you say you landed at the

23 VMA?

24 A. For the most part, HT40 was used for ferrying wounded, and all the

25 missions carried out at the time were for that purpose, which does not

Page 11802

1 mean in itself that no one else was ever ferried. In addition to wounded

2 people, there were officers being ferried, too, who used the occasional

3 flight to get to Belgrade, or back.

4 Q. Based on your experience as a pilot, can you tell us if brigade

5 commanders, army commanders, corps commanders used their own helicopter on

6 their missions, or would they normally fly together with wounded persons?

7 MR. MOORE: I object to that question. This is case specific. It

8 relates to a flight to Belgrade, and all this is speculation in relation

9 to conduct either before or after.

10 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Moore, we see that as going to weight, not

11 admissibility.

12 Carry on, Mr. Vasic.

13 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Would you please repeat the

15 question? I've been thrown slightly.

16 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation]

17 Q. In your experience as a pilot, and you did fly brigade commanders

18 as well as even those of a higher rank. When they went on a mission,

19 would they go in their own helicopter, the one that was assigned to them,

20 or were they use the helicopter, the same helicopters that were used for

21 ferrying wounded or equipment?

22 A. In principle, if there was just a single person escorting them,

23 they would take a Gazelle. If it was a larger group travelling, and only

24 in that case, they would use a larger helicopter. But if there was a

25 one-man escort only, then they would normally use a Gazelle, the smaller

Page 11803

1 helicopter.

2 Q. A Gazelle has what seating capacity exactly?

3 A. I flew that helicopter, too, so I'm somewhat familiar with it. It

4 can take up to two crew and three passengers, the pilot, the mechanic, and

5 a maximum of three passengers.

6 Q. Would it be possible for an aircraft like that to take only one

7 pilot and four other passengers? Would that be in line with the

8 regulations?

9 A. Yes, as long as the final destination is an airport, and as long

10 as there is a crew awaiting its landing.

11 Q. Thank you very much. When you took off on this mission on

12 the 21st of November, can you remember whether over at Negoslavci, at the

13 heliport in Negoslavci, there was a Gazelle that was in theory available

14 to be used?

15 A. I can't say with sure and certain knowledge that there was one

16 there, but as far as I remember, there was both a MI8 and a Gazelle, but I

17 can't be positive about this.

18 Q. Thank you very much, Mr. Babic. I have no further questions for

19 you.

20 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

21 Questioned by the Court:

22 JUDGE PARKER: I wonder whether you can help the Chamber with a

23 couple of matters, please.

24 Firstly, the H40, that was your medium, heavy transport

25 helicopter; is that correct?

Page 11804

1 A. That's right. HT40 is the medium transport helicopter. Depending

2 on the exact type, because sometimes you can remove certain parts inside

3 the helicopter, and then in that case it can take up to 24 passengers.

4 JUDGE PARKER: What was the maker of that aircraft; do you know?

5 A. Yes. It was of Russian make.

6 JUDGE PARKER: And the maker?

7 A. I don't know exactly.

8 JUDGE PARKER: Did it have a name that was typically used for it?

9 What did you call it, the HT40 or some other typical name?

10 A. The Russian name is MI8. We called it HT, which stands for

11 transport helicopter, and then the number assigned to it is 40.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Yes. The Gazelle is the H45; is that correct?

13 A. That's one type of Gazelle. There are several versions, as it

14 were. The air force at the time had another type of Gazelle which was

15 called H42. The appearance of the helicopter was identical to the other

16 one, but the engine was somewhat less powerful. That was the only

17 difference, and all the other features were the same. And the helicopter

18 was also -- this other type was also referred to as a Gazelle.

19 JUDGE PARKER: And who was -- or which company made the Gazelle?

20 A. It is a French helicopter. A Mostar-based company called Soko in

21 the former Yugoslavia also produced those. Most of the Gazelles used by

22 the air force, by the Yugoslav air force I expect were produced in the

23 Soko Mostar company that produced helicopters and aeroplanes.

24 JUDGE PARKER: The flight log that you've been looking at for the

25 Gazelle, Exhibit 764, shows both H42 and H45. So that's a flight log

Page 11805

1 covering both types of Gazelle; is that correct?

2 A. That's correct. Because to all practical intents, these were the

3 same helicopter with a different designation, and the difference in terms

4 of the engine power was very slight. But one of these was called H42, and

5 the other was referred to as H45.

6 JUDGE PARKER: And this flight log is the log of the 890 Squadron;

7 is that correct?

8 A. Yes. The reason being the 890 Squadron had a number of different

9 helicopter types.

10 JUDGE PARKER: If you could turn to the log for the Gazelle for

11 flights on the 21st of November. Do you have that?

12 A. Yes, I have it on the screen.

13 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Now, that shows flights by two H45s,

14 one number 893 and the other number 892, on the 21st of November. Is that

15 correct?

16 A. Yes.

17 JUDGE PARKER: Number H -- number 892 appears to have been flown

18 at 0800 for 40 minutes from Batajnica to Topcider and then to Negoslavci;

19 is that correct?

20 A. Yes.

21 JUDGE PARKER: And Topcider, as I understand it, is in Belgrade.

22 A. Yes.

23 JUDGE PARKER: And the Batajnica airport is in the Belgrade area?

24 A. The Batajnica airport is roughly 20 kilometres away from Belgrade

25 to the north.

Page 11806

1 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. And there was no other flight for 892

2 on the 21st of November, according to this log; is that correct?

3 A. That's correct.

4 JUDGE PARKER: Could you look now at the next day, the 22nd of

5 November. Aircraft 892 is shown again as having three flights where one

6 of them was aborted; is that correct?

7 A. Yes. The mission was aborted. They took off, and for some reason

8 they landed and the mission was aborted.

9 JUDGE PARKER: The first flight appears to be that which is first

10 there at 0800. The pilot was Milosevic, and Nikolic as co-pilot; is that

11 correct?

12 A. Nikolic was a mechanic, because the helicopter of the Gazelle make

13 only -- is only flown by one pilot.

14 JUDGE PARKER: Was that flight from Batajnica to Dedinje?

15 A. Are you referring to the aborted mission?

16 JUDGE PARKER: No, the 0800, first flight of the day on the 22nd.

17 A. That was a flight from Batajnica to Dedinje. That's what

18 transpires from the log.

19 JUDGE PARKER: What interests the Chamber is how the aircraft got

20 from Negoslavci on the 21st of November, at the end of its last flight, to

21 Batajnica at the beginning of its first flight on the 22nd.

22 A. I don't know that. I can't help you there.

23 JUDGE PARKER: It would appear that there must have been a flight

24 that is not recorded in the log; is that correct?

25 A. Or possibly an error occurred in the entering of the data.

Page 11807

1 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you for that.

2 Is there anything further, Mr. Vasic, arising from that that you

3 want to mention?

4 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I believe that the next

5 witness will be more pertinent to answer the question. That's Nenad

6 Novicevic, and I will use that opportunity when he takes the stand. Thank

7 you.

8 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Vasic.

9 Sir, you'll be pleased to know that completes the end of your

10 questioning. The Chamber is grateful for your assistance and for your

11 attendance here, and you are now free to return to your ordinary life.

12 Thank you very much.

13 [The witness withdrew]

14 JUDGE PARKER: While the next witness is coming, Mr. Vasic, it's

15 been pointed out to me there's a transcript error in my question at

16 page 18, line 25. The question was that it is not reported in the log.

17 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. That was indeed the

18 question.

19 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Tapuskovic.

20 MS. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, while we're waiting

21 for the next witness, the Defence for the accused Miroslav Radic would

22 like to clarify a matter that was raised yesterday, namely the release of

23 Mr. Radic from the obligation to keep a military secret. Mr. Moore

24 referred to that yesterday, and you said that we should in our

25 communication, mutual communication, address the matter.

Page 11808

1 I wish to inform you and my learned friends from the OTP that all

2 the witnesses, the four witnesses for the accused Radic, were released

3 from the obligation to keep the military secret. The date is the 7th of

4 September. We received that information, and we have to state that we

5 feel quite uncomfortable with the fact that certain matters are being

6 raised before the Trial Chamber before other channels are used to verify

7 some information necessary for the parties. We believe it would be

8 necessary to first double-check the information received before it is

9 presented with the -- presented to the Trial Chamber, which results then

10 in an unpleasant situation for the Defence teams.

11 Thank you.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Domazet.

13 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, quite a different

14 matter before the next witness comes in. I have the obligation to inform

15 the Trial Chamber of something, but could we first move into private

16 session, please.

17 [The witness entered court]

18 JUDGE PARKER: If the witness would sit down for a moment, please.

19 [Private session]

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 11809











11 Page 11809 redacted. Private session.















Page 11810

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 [Open session]

23 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.


25 [Witness answered through interpreter]

Page 11811

1 JUDGE PARKER: Sir, would you please stand and read aloud the

2 affirmation on the card.

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak

4 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

5 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much. Please sit down.

6 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Vasic.

7 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

8 Examination by Mr. Vasic:

9 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, sir. Please state your full name.

10 A. Good morning. My name is Nenad Novicevic.

11 Q. Tell us, during your service in the JNA, which schools did you

12 graduate from, and which positions did you hold?

13 A. I graduated from the air force academy. Upon completion of my

14 education, I was flight teacher at a schooling centre, whereupon I became

15 part of the squadron for reconnaissance, and as of 1989, I was a member of

16 the transport squadron in Batajnica.

17 Q. Please tell us which squadron were you a member of as of 1989?

18 Does it have its title or number?

19 A. That was the 890th Transport Mixed Squadron within the

20 138th Transport Brigade.

21 Q. You said mixed squadron. What does that mean? Can you explain?

22 A. This means that it had two squads of transport helicopters, MI8

23 and one squad of light reconnaissance or transport helicopters of the make

24 Gazelle.

25 Q. You mentioned this one squad of light transport helicopters of the

Page 11812

1 Gazelle type. Can you tell us which types of helicopters were part of the

2 squad at the time you were there?

3 A. I don't understand the question.

4 Q. Did the squad of Gazelle helicopters have several different types

5 of helicopters in terms of the power engine?

6 A. Oh, yes. Now I understand. There were two types, SA341 and

7 SA342. One of them had 600 horsepower and the other one had 900

8 horsepower.

9 Q. Could we please have Exhibit 764. That's the flight log of the

10 80th [as interpreted] Transport Squadron for the Gazelle make of

11 helicopters. Do you have that before you? Could we have, please, page

12 1D040080 in the B/C/S, and in English 1D040086.

13 Beneath the term "squadron" it says H42/45. What does it mean?

14 A. H42 is the military code for SA341 Gazelle, whereas the H45 is the

15 military code for the SA342 helicopter, which is the one which has 900

16 horsepower.

17 Q. Does this mean that this flight log contains data for both types

18 of Gazelle helicopters?

19 A. That's correct.

20 Q. Tell me, during your career as a pilot, which helicopters did you

21 fly?

22 A. If you're referring to H42 and H45, I flew both.

23 Q. Thank you. We're interested in the year 1991. Which unit did you

24 fly in in 1991?

25 A. In the 890th Transport.

Page 11813

1 Q. Which type of helicopters did you fly?

2 A. HT42 and HT45.

3 Q. We're interested in the events at the Vukovar battlefield in 1991.

4 Was your squadron given a mission relative to the Vukovar battlefield and,

5 in particular, related to the needs of the Motorised Guards Brigade?

6 A. Yes. We provided air support to the Motorised Guards Brigade in

7 terms of transporting commanding officers and wounded.

8 Q. Can you tell us which helicopters were used for the task of

9 providing transport support to the Guards Motorised Brigade?

10 A. All types of helicopters that were flown in the squadron, and that

11 means MI8 and the Gazelle.

12 Q. Do you know how many aircraft were at the disposal of the Guards

13 Motorised Brigade for the -- these purposes?

14 A. I don't remember that exactly. I do know that in the place of

15 Negoslavci at the pitch there in Vukovar we always had one MI8 and one

16 Gazelle.

17 Q. As you flew the Gazelle helicopter of -- and more precisely you

18 flew both types of the Gazelle helicopter, can you tell us for what

19 purposes this type of helicopter was used in Negoslavci in 1991?

20 A. The Gazelle was used for transporting commanders, officers, and

21 for any urgent cases of transportation of wounded over to the Military

22 Medical Academy.

23 Q. Thank you. When the wounded were transported, was it necessary to

24 effect some changes in the Gazelle helicopter, or could it just fly in its

25 original condition?

Page 11814

1 A. The Gazelle helicopter is a light helicopter for transporting

2 passengers and wounded. Where the wounded were transported, certain

3 preparations had to be made, and these included the removal of the left

4 seat of the co-pilot, the removal of the back seat in order to place a

5 stretcher there. In such condition, the helicopter could hold one wounded

6 person, one person escorting the wounded person, and a pilot.

7 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us whether the commander of the Guards

8 Motorised Brigade used this type of helicopter only whenever he needed the

9 services of his squadron? Are you aware of this?

10 A. I know that he flew on the Gazelle, and I personally flew the

11 aircraft when he was on several times.

12 Q. The pilots of this Gazelle helicopters, what was the practice?

13 How was their stay regulated? Did they stay throughout at Negoslavci?

14 A. As far as I remember, the Vukovar operation lasted roughly two

15 months. We rotated every seven to eight days. The crews would rotate.

16 The duty days would be around seven days, and at that time we would be put

17 up with the command of the Guards Brigade at Negoslavci.

18 Q. Were there strictly regulated rotations in terms of the number of

19 days, or could they vary depending on the flight schedule you had?

20 A. No. This was not strictly regulated. It could be further apart

21 or closer in terms of rotations. There were four or five of us in all,

22 and we rotated according to how we saw fit. And when I say "how we saw

23 fit," we also had to coordinate our work with our families, and we tried

24 to accommodate each other.

25 Q. Thank you. Let us go back to what is contained in Exhibit 764,

Page 11815

1 the flight log. What sort of a document is a flight log, please, in the

2 briefest of terms?

3 A. The flight log records the activity of a squadron on a given day.

4 It contains the members of the crew, helicopter type, time of takeoff,

5 time of landing, duration of flight, the conditions under which the flight

6 was carried out, was it at night or during daytime, number of passengers,

7 and that would be it.

8 Q. Do you know who entered the data into the flight log?

9 A. The flight log is a document kept by the squadron command.

10 Q. I presume that the commander or an officer designated by the

11 commander is duty-bound to enter data into the log.

12 A. Yes. The commander has an assistant who is tasked with that

13 precise duty.

14 Q. Do the pilots themselves enter the information on the flights

15 carried out in some sort of a document?

16 A. Yes. Pilots enter data into a flight schedule. The squadron

17 commander assigns a mission through the flight schedule. And in view of

18 the fact that these missions are sometimes completed in the course of the

19 day and sometimes only on the following day, upon their return from the

20 flight pilots enter information on all these different elements into the

21 flight schedule, which had earlier been drafted in the form of an order,

22 which data are later entered into an operational flight log of the

23 squadron.

24 Q. Is that the flight log that we have in front of us, sir?

25 A. Yes, it is.

Page 11816

1 Q. You say that pilots when back from a mission enter the relevant

2 information, the relevant flight information. What about those who were

3 on duty in Negoslavci for a couple of days? Do they enter the same sort

4 of information into the logbook once everything has been carried out?

5 A. Having returned from a mission, they report to their squadron

6 commander about their flights, the destination, the duration, and the

7 number of passengers ferried.

8 Q. So this information is entered into the flight schedule, the

9 flight schedule that you told us about, right?

10 A. Indeed.

11 Q. If I understand you correctly, you say that there's a person who

12 is in charge of entering information into this log containing all the

13 exact times, and then they would copy information from the flight schedule

14 and enter this information into the flight log. Is my understanding

15 correct, sir?

16 A. Yes, that's right.

17 Q. Now for something that the Chamber has dealt with with the

18 previous witness, but I think you are probably the best placed person to

19 explain about the identification numbers pertaining to the helicopters

20 mentioned in this log.

21 Can you please have a look at the log, sir. Specifically the date

22 is the 18th, the 19th, the 21st, the 22nd, and the 24th of November. That

23 is 1D0483 in the B/C/S and 0489 in the English. And the exhibit number

24 is 764. Do you have that page in front of you, sir?

25 A. Yes.

Page 11817

1 Q. Among other information entered are the ID numbers of helicopters

2 carrying out certain missions. We see that information recorded in column

3 two; is that right?

4 A. Indeed.

5 Q. There's something there that I believe might need clarifying. On

6 the 18th of November, if you can have a look, please, the following crew:

7 Pantovic and Marceta. Can you tell us the ID for that helicopter and its

8 destination for this particular flight?

9 A. The ID number is 893, the drill number is 61, the route being

10 Batajnica, Banjica, Negoslavci.

11 Q. This was the last flight on that day, at least according to the

12 log, right?

13 A. Yes. The next date appears to be the 19th.

14 Q. So according to this, the helicopter should be in Negoslavci,

15 the 893, right?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Could you please look at the following entry where this helicopter

18 is mentioned. The number is -- the date is the 21st of November, 1991.

19 Is that right? Can you read the entry for us, please, with the helicopter

20 ID number? I'm talking about the 20th of November. Can you tell us what

21 the crew was and the destination?

22 A. You probably mean the 21st, right?

23 Q. Yes.

24 A. HT45, 893, Pantovic, Marceta, Negoslavci-Banjica-Batajnica.

25 Q. There are no other flights entered for that day after this one,

Page 11818

1 right?

2 A. Yes. That appears to be the last flight on that day.

3 Q. So the helicopter should now be at Batajnica. That's what the

4 document indicates, isn't it?

5 A. Yes. What it says in relation to 893, its location after 12.20

6 should be Batajnica.

7 Q. And now the next entry in relation to the 893. That is on the

8 24th of November, 1991. 9.10 is the time. Can you please have a look? I

9 think you actually flew this helicopter. Can you tell us what the crew

10 was and the destination?

11 A. Novicevic, Bajic, the number is 893, Negoslavci-Mladenovo,

12 takeoff 9.10.

13 Q. The 24th of November is when this helicopter left Negoslavci and

14 flew to Mladenovo, and you were the pilot, right?

15 A. That's right.

16 Q. If we can just please go back to the previous entry on the 21st of

17 November where we established that the helicopter was supposed in

18 Batajnica, right?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Not in Negoslavci?

21 A. You're quite right.

22 Q. We'll clarify later how that came to pass.

23 Let's now go to 892, the other helicopter that is logged on this

24 page and follow its movements. Let's start with the 19th of November,

25 1991. The entry in relation to 892, helicopter 892, please read that out

Page 11819

1 for us. What was its route? I see it made two flights on that day?

2 A. On that day the 892 took off at 1535, the crew being Minic,

3 Nikolic, the route being Batajnica-Kovin.

4 Q. What about the same helicopter on the same day? Did it make

5 another flight?

6 A. That's right. At 1700 hours it left Kovin and returned to

7 Batajnica with the same crew Minic, Nikolic.

8 Q. So at the end of that day the 19th of November, the 892 was

9 supposed to be at Batajnica, right?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. The next entry in relation to that helicopter is on the 21st of

12 November, 1991. I see that you were one of the crew. Can you please read

13 the crew and the destination for us?

14 A. 21st of November, the 892, Novicevic, Bajic, the route was

15 Batajnica-Topcider-Negoslavci, takeoff at 0800 hours.

16 Q. So placed on this it seems that the helicopter had been left at

17 Batajnica on the 19th the -- two days before. You took off in that

18 helicopter and you landed in Negoslavci, right?

19 A. That's right.

20 Q. Let's particular it a step further with this helicopter, and I am

21 I'm talking about the following day, the 22nd of November, 1991. Please

22 read the entry in relation to that helicopter's takeoff on the 21st of

23 November. What is the crew and what is the destination?

24 A. 22nd of November, 892, Milosevic, Nikolic, Batajnica-Dedinje.

25 Q. Based on the previous entry that helicopter should be at

Page 11820

1 Negoslavci not at Batajnica. Wouldn't that seem to be the case?

2 A. Indeed it would.

3 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm not sure if this is

4 a convenient time for our break.

5 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. We will resume at ten minutes to 11.00.

6 --- Recess taken at 10.29 a.m.

7 --- On resuming at 10.51 a.m.

8 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Vasic.

9 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

10 Q. Mr. Novicevic, let us now go back to the flight log, Exhibit 764,

11 more specifically the page containing the entries for the 18th and

12 the 24th of November. We've look at the chronology for the 893 and the

13 892. I think the only day they overlap is the 21st of November, 1991.

14 Based on the logbook, where is the 892 supposed to be after the

15 21st of November, 1991?

16 A. The 892, after the 21st, should be at Negoslavci.

17 Q. What about the 893?

18 A. Looking at the entry for the 21st of November, the 893 should be

19 at Batajnica. However, that wasn't the case. There probably was an error

20 when recording this information.

21 Q. We'll come back to this area later on.

22 The 892 was supposed to be at Negoslavci. Where does it take off

23 from the next time it does? Can you find that in the log, please?

24 A. Of course, I can. The 892 takes off on the 22nd of November from

25 Batajnica and is en route for Dedinje.

Page 11821

1 Q. There seems to be a discrepancy there. Instead of Negoslavci it

2 takes off from Batajnica, does it not?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. What about the 893 at the end of the 21st? It's supposed to be at

5 Batajnica, isn't it? Can you tell us where it took off from next,

6 the 893, the next time it flew?

7 A. The next flight of the 893 was on the 24th of November, on the

8 Negoslavci-Mladenovo route, and I was the pilot for that flight.

9 Q. So the error consists in the fact that the recording indicates

10 that the aircraft was supposed to be in Batajnica, whereas you actually

11 took off from Negoslavci. Is that what you're saying?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. So what actually constitutes this error? Is this something you

14 can spot?

15 A. This is probably when happened: Mr. Pantovic, who was at

16 Negoslavci on the 21st of November with the 893, and I, who landed on

17 the 892, we exchanged our places in Negoslavci on that day. So

18 Mr. Pantovic was off to Belgrade on the 892 instead. When the flight

19 schedule was being drawn up, as he was supposed to be on the 893, he drew

20 a thick red line here, and whoever entered the relevant timing recorded

21 Pantovic as being on the 893.

22 Q. So what that means is that Pantovic was off to Belgrade on

23 the 892, and the 893 remained in Negoslavci. Is that what you're

24 suggesting?

25 A. Precisely.

Page 11822

1 Q. Things being what they are, how would this have worked? Would

2 that imply that there was a lack of logic or precision in relation to the

3 flights that followed over the following days, or would everything be all

4 right on the 21st, for example, if we had the 893 instead of the 892 and

5 vice versa?

6 A. Yes, yes. Actually, the timings for the 21st should say 892 in

7 both cases, the flight log. Pantovic, Marceta, 892, and Novicevic, Bajic

8 892 as well.

9 Q. The day you landed in the 892, Pantovic took the same helicopter

10 and flew to Belgrade, right?

11 A. Yes. If I may just add something. So before the -- such

12 takeoffs, the commander would orally tell us if we were to return a

13 helicopter or if a helicopter was supposed to stay where it was. So the

14 helicopter that is in Vukovar stays, just by way of an example, and

15 Pantovic goes back on the same helicopter that I had come in on.

16 Q. Would you please explain along these same lines. So Pantovic was

17 off in the 892. Where does that helicopter take off from the next time

18 around for its next flight?

19 A. That is on the 22nd of November. The 892 goes Batajnica-Dedinje.

20 Q. The pilot being?

21 A. Milosevic. And the mechanic was Nikolic.

22 Q. Pantovic brought the helicopter to Batajnica, but the next person

23 flying the helicopter was Milosevic. Was this a change of shift? How did

24 this come about that the crew changed in the meantime?

25 A. It's very simple. On the 22nd of November, the helicopter landed

Page 11823

1 at Batajnica at 12.20. The next day, on the 22nd of November, Milosevic

2 was in charge of the mission. He went to Dedinje and then back to

3 Negoslavci.

4 Q. I think there must be an error in the transcript. 35, line 3, it

5 should be the 22nd of November that the helicopter landed at Batajnica.

6 Were you at the heliport when pilot Pantovic took this helicopter

7 away, the one which you say you had flown in on?

8 A. Yes. It was usual practice for us to see each other off.

9 Q. When you say usual practice seeing each other off, who do you mean

10 and in what cases specifically?

11 A. When there was a change in shift, the arriving pilot would see off

12 the one who was due to take off and go to Belgrade.

13 Q. Did Pantovic have any assistants on that flight? Do you remember

14 that?

15 A. I think there was a total of four men on that flight, four

16 passengers. A total of four, I mean. A total of four persons. The

17 mechanic plus two passengers and the pilot. I think there was a lady with

18 them and a gentleman wearing a uniform. The reason I rather that is that

19 it wasn't very often that ladies were flown.

20 Q. According to the log, when was this flight made, what time?

21 A. You mean when Pantovic is on his way back to Belgrade?

22 A. Yes, that's what I mean.

23 Q. It took off at 11.30.

24 Q. What is recorded in the log, does that tally with how you remember

25 this to have occurred; namely, that he took off around this time, the time

Page 11824

1 recorded here, given the time of your arrival in Negoslavci on that same

2 day and the time you spent there?

3 A. It's very difficult to remember specifically but just by looking

4 at these documents I know that the documents that were kept were accurate.

5 So a pilot's report was always accurately recorded.

6 Q. Thank you. Did you know Colonel Mrksic at the time?

7 A. Of course I did.

8 Q. Did you see him at the heliport or inside the helicopter flown by

9 Pantovic on the 21st of November?

10 A. No, I did not.

11 Q. Thank you. If you look right next to the entry for the 21st of

12 November where your name is mentioned, you say that your name was also

13 mentioned in relation to the 24th of November; is that right?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Do you remember where you went on at that day, where you flew to,

16 and who was on board?

17 A. Yes, I do remember. We flew with Mr. Mrksic to Mladenovo, and we

18 stayed there until half past 2.00. The headquarters was at Mladenovo. I

19 think there was a meeting with the commander-in-chief. I didn't attend

20 the meeting myself.

21 Q. Thank you. When you say commander-in-chief, you mean the

22 1st Military District, right?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Thank you very much, Mr. Novicevic. Just another thing. This

25 helicopter ID number, is that reflected in any other type of document in

Page 11825

1 relation to helicopters that made certain flights except for this flight

2 log? Can you find that ID number anywhere else?

3 A. You can find it in the daily flight schedule in relation to that

4 day.

5 Q. How long is that document kept for?

6 A. The flight plan, I don't know exactly how long it's kept for,

7 especially at the time. This was the JNA. Regulations have changed

8 since.

9 Q. But what I would like to know is is this sort of document also

10 kept for a hundred years, like the other one, but it appears not to be the

11 case, is it?

12 A. No. I think flight schedules were kept from six months up to a

13 year. The log would normally be kept for ten years in the records of the

14 Yugoslav air force. That's how I remember it to be, but that doesn't

15 necessarily have to be the case.

16 Q. Thank you very much, Mr. Novicevic.

17 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have no further

18 questions for this witness. I've tried to clarify the matter that you had

19 previously raised. Thank you.

20 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Vasic.

21 Mr. Borovic.

22 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. No questions.

23 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Lukic.

24 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] No questions. Thank you.

25 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

Page 11826

1 Mr. Moore.

2 Cross-examination by Mr. Moore:

3 Q. Can I just clarify? You have really two missing flights on the

4 documents. That's correct, isn't it?

5 A. Two flights? Can you be more specific?

6 Q. Yes. I don't want to go through it all again, but 892 and 893,

7 for example, if one looks at the 893 on the 21st of November, we have got

8 Pantovic, and the helicopter should be staying at BT, but the next

9 movement actually is on the 24th of November. It's not from BT. It's

10 from Negoslavci. Isn't that right? For the 893.

11 A. That's correct. That's what it says here.

12 Q. Yes. Well, that's -- that's what I'm trying to suggest. And

13 the 892, there is a missing flight. When we look at the 21st of November,

14 we've got Novicevic, yourself, coming into Negoslavci. And when we look

15 at the 892, we can see on the 22nd of November it's not at Negoslavci,

16 it's at BT.

17 So what I'm suggesting to you, that there are two missing flights

18 on these documents. Really a perfectly simple point. That's right, isn't

19 it?

20 A. I see it slightly differently. I just explained a while ago that

21 the person who kept the document must have been confused.

22 Q. Well, we'll deal with the confusion in a minute, but am I right in

23 saying that there's two missing flights on the documents? I mean, it's

24 indisputable, isn't it?

25 A. I really don't know what to say. Based on what is written here, I

Page 11827

1 can tell you that all things are in order. Pantovic went back on the

2 helicopter on which I flew in on the 21st. If you take that bit into

3 account, everything else comes -- falls into place. It's logical.

4 Q. That's not what I've asked. I've asked a perfectly simple

5 question, and I'd suggest you're deliberately avoiding it.

6 On the documents there are two missing flights. There is the not

7 explained 21st of November arrival of the 892 at Negoslavci, and the next

8 time it flies it don't fly from Negoslavci, it flies from BT. That is

9 correct, isn't it?

10 A. That's correct.

11 Q. Thank you very much. And I think it's right to say that you used

12 the phrase -- that you used the phrase, when asked to clarify, "This is

13 probably what happened."

14 Do you remember saying that?

15 A. Yes, I do remember saying that. I have to tell you that on the

16 basis of this document -- well, first of all, I did not draft this

17 document. I flew into Negoslavci on the helicopter on the 21st, and my

18 next flight was on the 24th from Negoslavci. That's as much as I know.

19 Now, about the 892 that flew from Negoslavci to Batajnica, I

20 didn't know other missions, because the squadron commander does not give

21 missions to all the crews collectively. They are given their missions

22 individually, and I don't know what other crews' missions were.

23 Q. Please understand I am not criticising you, and I'm not trying to

24 catch you out. Do you understand?

25 A. Yes, I understand.

Page 11828

1 Q. All I'm simply saying is that when you use the phrase "this is

2 probably what happened," you actually don't know. You are trying to

3 estimate as best you can.

4 A. I'm speaking from my memory of how these things were done, how the

5 documentation was produced in 1991.

6 Q. And I think you've told us it's very difficult to remember

7 specifically, but that a pilot report is always accurate.

8 A. That's correct. Before we take off, we enter the time, and as

9 soon as we land we also enter the time into our notebook, and subsequently

10 this information is conveyed to the squadron commander. It's as simple as

11 that. All the pilots do that, and all of them have to take care of their

12 times of flight, of their fuel and other matters.

13 Q. And the reality is you don't actually know what happened.

14 A. In what respect? Happened -- what happened?

15 Q. In why this document has the discrepancies it has, because you

16 didn't compile it.

17 A. That's correct. The document is filled out by the squadron

18 headquarters.

19 Q. And when you use the phrase "this is probably what happened," it

20 is not from your knowledge, it is what you believe what happened, your

21 interpretation.

22 A. That's correct.

23 MR. MOORE: I have no further questions. Thank you.

24 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Vasic.

25 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. My learned

Page 11829

1 friend was quite brief, and I will try to do the same.

2 Re-examination by Mr. Vasic:

3 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Novicevic, you explained to us that when you

4 flew into Negoslavci on the 21st of November, 1991, at 8.40, having taken

5 off at 8.00, and that the next flight was on the 24th of November at 9.10

6 from Negoslavci. How would you know that a colleague of yours had flown

7 in the aircraft in the period between 21st and 24th, the one that you

8 would use to take off? You would know that, wouldn't you, that someone

9 had flown it in?

10 A. Yes, I would.

11 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Moore.

12 MR. MOORE: I was objecting to the question. It is merely a

13 repeat of examination-in-chief.

14 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Moore.

15 Carry on, Mr. Vasic.

16 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

17 Q. Therefore, you were perhaps unaware of what happened with the

18 flight log because that was within the purview of the squadron

19 headquarters, but you knew what was going on at the heliport at

20 Negoslavci, that the helicopter that you used to take off for Mladenovo

21 with Colonel Mrksic on the 24th had all the while been at the heliport in

22 Negoslavci?

23 MR. MOORE: I object to this question.

24 JUDGE PARKER: I quite agree, Mr. Moore.

25 How can you put that, Mr. Vasic, in re-examination? You are

Page 11830

1 working out now your theory, which is not the subject of any evidence so

2 far from this witness.

3 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this witness --

4 JUDGE PARKER: [Previous translation continues] ... perhaps very

5 carefully and seeing what he said. Instead you've given all your theory

6 and your answers in your question, and he only has to say yes. That's not

7 good enough.

8 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] You're right, Your Honour. I will be

9 more careful in that respect.

10 JUDGE PARKER: Well, it means that his answer isn't really going

11 to help anybody now on that question. That's the obvious penalty, you

12 see.

13 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. Mr. Novicevic, do you know, do you remember who it was who gave

15 you the mission to fly over to Mladenovo on the 24th of November, 1991,

16 from Negoslavci?

17 A. I could only have been given the mission from my commander, squad

18 commander, Mr. Minic.

19 Q. In giving you this assignment, did Mr. Minic give you certain

20 guidelines in terms of the time, place, and aircraft to be used?

21 MR. MOORE: I object. I object to this question. I object on two

22 bases. One, it's leading; and two, it doesn't arise out of

23 cross-examination. There was no cross-examination on this topic at all.

24 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Vasic, do you seek to justify the question as

25 arising out of cross-examination?

Page 11831

1 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I believe this arises

2 from cross-examination because it has to do with the aircraft highlighted

3 by my learned friend Moore in his cross-examination where he claimed that

4 there was one flight missing, the flight involving this particular

5 aircraft.

6 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Vasic, that was all led very specifically by

7 you in your evidence-in-chief, and you didn't go to ask this sort of

8 question then.

9 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour, because I thought

10 that the witness explained the situation in the examination-in-chief. I

11 will, however, put a very simple question to him, and I believe that will

12 suffice to clarify the situation without going into details about flights.

13 Q. Mr. Novicevic, how long have you been a pilot for?

14 A. I have been flying since 1987.

15 Q. The -- how much do you know about the keeping of the documentation

16 underlying these flights in your capacity as an experienced pilot?

17 A. Periodically I performed the duties of squad commander whenever

18 Mr. Minic was absent. I stood in for him.

19 Q. Can you explain for us what sort of situation would involve the

20 loss or discrepancy in flight documentation such as the one that my

21 learned friend alluded to?

22 A. That was impossible. It could only have happened after the

23 bombing in 1999, and only if such documentation burnt out or burnt through

24 for some reason.

25 Q. Thank you, Mr. Novicevic.

Page 11832

1 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have no further

2 questions.

3 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Vasic.

4 Questioned by the Court:

5 JUDGE PARKER: Do you have any personal records, other than this

6 it official log, of your flights in the period we've been looking at?

7 A. I do not, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE PARKER: Does that mean you do not maintain pilot's logbook?

9 A. I do maintain my logbook, and up until 1997 I had a military

10 logbook. Since 1997 I have been engaged in civilian flights, and I have

11 been keeping a different logbook, because it was at that point that I left

12 the army.

13 JUDGE PARKER: Are you saying that your military logbook remained

14 with the military, or do you still have it?

15 A. There is one military logbook which is the flight record and

16 record of flights carried out, the military booklet of flights that were

17 carried out; whereas this other flight booklet remained with the

18 headquarters, the military headquarters after I left the army.

19 JUDGE PARKER: So you have not been able to check your flights on

20 the 21st of November and either side of that in any record other than this

21 logbook which we have in front us; is that correct?

22 A. No. I could have checked that in my flight booklet.

23 JUDGE PARKER: And you've not done so?

24 A. What do you mean I haven't done so?

25 JUDGE PARKER: Have -- you say you could have checked it. Have

Page 11833

1 you done so?

2 A. Yes, I have, and it tallies with this document.

3 JUDGE PARKER: Could you also look at Exhibit 764, the flights on

4 the 22nd of November. They're all flights of helicopter 892; is that

5 correct?

6 A. That's correct.

7 JUDGE PARKER: The first flight at 0800 hours was from Batajnica

8 to Dedinje.

9 A. That's correct.

10 JUDGE PARKER: The next flight was aborted.

11 A. That's correct.

12 JUDGE PARKER: The third flight commenced at Batajnica. Does the

13 log reveal how the aircraft got from Dedinje to Batajnica?

14 A. No, it does not.

15 JUDGE PARKER: This log is used not only for mission but also for

16 total flight time recording; is that correct? For the maintenance of the

17 aircraft?

18 A. That's correct.

19 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much then. You'll be pleased to

20 know that that completes the questioning of you. The Chamber would like

21 to thank you for your attendance here in The Hague and the assistance

22 you've been able to give, and you're now free, of course, to return to

23 your ordinary activities. So thank you very much indeed.

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25 [The witness withdrew]

Page 11834

1 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Vasic, we appear to have reached the time of

2 which Mr. Domazet gave us some warning. We need to wait until Thursday

3 for the next witness; is that correct?

4 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Evidently

5 what Mr. Domazet told you and me, we will have to wait until Thursday,

6 especially in light of what Mr. Lukic told us about Mr. Jaksic. I believe

7 Mr. Jaksic will be an interesting witness for all those present in the

8 courtroom, and the waiting period will not be in vain.

9 JUDGE PARKER: Well, thank you for that, lifting our interest and

10 excitement, Mr. Vasic.

11 Now, can we deal with two other matters as we have some time.

12 First, Mr. Moore, is there anything you would want to submit in

13 response to Ms. Tapuskovic?

14 MR. MOORE: Yes, and three other matters in addition to -- four

15 other matters in addition.

16 With regard to Ms. Tapuskovic, I've been informed now by the team

17 on behalf of Mr. Radic that the application for the four waivers was made.

18 Our information - and we've not only double-checked we've actually

19 triple-checked - from Serbia was that they had only received three. I

20 accept the word of my learned friends. They say it's four and that

21 they've received now signed notification in respect of that, that

22 apparently being dated the 7th of September. I think that's the date. So

23 I'm operating on the basis that they have seen those waivers and they are

24 signed. So that matter, I think, hopefully now falls away.

25 JUDGE PARKER: Well, could you just pause and I'll check.

Page 11835

1 Is that resolving your concern, Ms. Tapuskovic?

2 MS. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] This fully resolves our conflict

3 if we can term it that or, rather, the misunderstanding that arose between

4 the parties as to whether a waiver was obtained for the four witnesses.

5 That was in fact obtained on the 7th, which takes care of our problem.

6 Thank you.

7 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

8 Now, Mr. Moore.

9 MR. MOORE: Your Honour, yes. May I deal with some other

10 housekeeping matters that refers to my learned friends? If I -- thank you

11 very much.

12 With regard to the case of Mr. Mrksic, that is going a little

13 quicker than had been anticipated, I believe.

14 JUDGE PARKER: We would put it that it's on timetable at the

15 moment.

16 MR. MOORE: Your Honour knows how bad I am on time. But in any

17 event, there is a military expert's report to be served. From memory and

18 having spoken to my learned friend, I think it was to be served by the

19 18th of September. Given the proposed timetable, it may well be that the

20 case for Mr. Mrksic will finish earlier than they had originally believed

21 and we had anticipated. What concerns us is clearly if it is an expert's

22 report, we should have an appropriate time to receive it and look at it

23 and reply if necessary, and the 18th perhaps puts it very tight to the

24 wire, if I may use that phrase, when it comes to the calling of that

25 witness.

Page 11836

1 I would firstly ask the following question: Whether there is a

2 report in being that could be served now, which would then remove the

3 difficulties on time or certainly diminish them. That would be the first

4 submission that I make in relation to that topic.

5 May I move on to the other topics. With regard to the 002 diary,

6 I have been asked by my learned friends on behalf of Mr. Radic if they

7 could see the original document, which of course they are perfectly

8 entitled to do so. I think it's right to say that there is a desire for

9 an expert to look at it. If that is the case, we would clearly wish to

10 have our own expert look at it, and from my own experience, though not as

11 widespread as the Court's, it is probably desirable if the two experts

12 look at it simultaneously. If there are any samples of handwriting that

13 are required, they should be done with the experts present.

14 I for my part am quite prepared for the diary to be taken to

15 Belgrade or any other location that my learned friends deem to be

16 appropriate. The difficulty is the liaising of the experts. I received

17 that information this morning, and we are now taking steps to ensure that

18 that is done expeditiously.

19 I don't know what the third step will be. It may well be as a

20 result of some findings that an application will be made to the Court, but

21 I'm not going to put the cart before the horse in relation to that.

22 So with regard to the diary, the answer is the Prosecution are

23 willing to facilitate my learned friends. We need experts, and it's

24 really a question of a timetable and location. So perhaps if my learned

25 friends could assist on that.

Page 11837

1 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

2 Mr. Borovic.

3 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we talked to the OTP

4 as you had ordered. We believe that the war diary or note is an important

5 document. We only got it once the cross-examination of that witness had

6 been completed. We have noticed a number of things that indicate that

7 there is a need for a handwriting expert to have a look, and the OTP

8 agrees. I think the two experts should work together, the OTP handwriting

9 expert and an expert to be proposed by the Defence. The modus operandi

10 should be simple enough.

11 If this is studied in Belgrade, the diary or the note, then this

12 protected witness should be called to provide a sample of his handwriting.

13 The experts could then withdraw for an analysis of the original document.

14 It's difficult to have a copy analysed because of the pressure

15 applied when putting pen to paper and that sort of thing. The Trial

16 Chamber is fully aware of all these things. So the first thing is

17 authenticity.

18 On the other hand, I think the Defence is right when saying that

19 after all of this the handwriting should be analysed again. We have

20 noticed that the sections proposed as singled out by the OTP must be

21 considered as part of the overall context that stemmed from the

22 examination-in-chief as well as the cross-examination, to check whether

23 the witness provided truthful and legitimate answers.

24 I don't think this should be a difficult matter to tackle since

25 there is goodwill both on the part of the OTP and the Defence. Even as

Page 11838

1 soon as next week would be a convenient time to study the diary. We have

2 successfully deciphered our photocopy.

3 I must inform the Chamber that we only received interpretations of

4 portions of this diary, not the whole diary. Some of the paragraphs have

5 not been translated at all, which the Defence believes to be extremely

6 important. It is in relation to these untranslated passages that I've

7 been successful in deciphering them since I can read the handwritings.

8 There are a great many matters that I believe might be of interest to the

9 Chamber as well.

10 So we have this joint proposal, on the one hand, to have the

11 document fully translated into English. That means including all the

12 remaining passages that for the time being remain untranslated.

13 That said, I believe we are entirely under on the right track,

14 Your Honour.

15 [Trial Chamber confers]

16 JUDGE PARKER: We agree, Mr. Borovic, that in the circumstances it

17 would be highly desirable for the two experts to work together. In the

18 majority of cases, they reach a common mind, and if that's so, we can all

19 proceed with confidence. And if you see a need for translation, you will

20 have to arrange that or discuss it with Mr. Moore.

21 I don't understand there to be need for any particular order for

22 the diary to be provided at Belgrade. I think that has already been

23 sufficiently ordered. Has it not, Mr. Moore?

24 MR. MOORE: Well, even if it wasn't, we would ensure that it was

25 done.

Page 11839

1 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. The Chamber will leave that then for

2 counsel to liaise and hopefully the matter can be clarified, and we'll get

3 reports, if necessary, in due course.

4 Now, Mr. Moore, there was any other matter?

5 MR. MOORE: Yes. In relation to Witness 001, I've suggested that

6 my learned friend Mr. Vasic had not put the case as disclosed by the

7 summary. We checked that, and it is correct that that element of the case

8 came by way of supplementary note. My learned friend was correct. We

9 were not. I explained it to him last week and apologised, and I regret I

10 did not inform the Court. It slipped my mind. My apologies for that.

11 But I did speak to my learned friend about it.

12 JUDGE PARKER: We're grateful for that, Mr. Moore. Thank you.

13 MR. MOORE: And the only other matter was in relation to

14 Mr. Sljivancanin's case, and I'm going to leave that to Mr. Lukic.

15 JUDGE PARKER: Yes. To gather strength before facing Mr. Lukic's

16 submission, we will now just have a short break, perhaps five minutes.

17 The tapes won't need to be changed because we can still finish, I expect,

18 within the predicted time, but it will give everybody a chance to be

19 refreshed.

20 We adjourn for five minutes.

21 --- Recess taken at 11.39 a.m.

22 --- On resuming at 11.46 a.m.

23 JUDGE PARKER: Can we expect Mr. Vasic shortly? Very good.

24 Now, Mr. Lukic.

25 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] During the break I asked Mr. Moore

Page 11840

1 what the subject was that I was supposed to tackle in such an important

2 manner. The two of us, however, have been talking during the previous

3 break about the duration of my case, and I expect that the matter is of

4 interest to the Chamber too. I would like to use this opportunity to

5 raise another matter not related to this one.

6 What I really like about Mr. Moore, and I think I should say that

7 publicly, is he says, according to him, the time that I have envisaged for

8 my witnesses is reasonable. Just to give you his position on that on the

9 record.

10 Last Friday, as I gave you the list to familiarise yourself with,

11 the way in which I drew up the time schedule for Mr. Sljivancanin's

12 Defence case, since the Chamber is now familiar with a great many persons

13 and names from this list, I probably needn't even go into the nature of

14 some of these witnesses. That is probably the case for most of these

15 witnesses as far as the facts in this case are concerned. I've drawn your

16 attention to the fact that some of these witnesses have provided very

17 extensive statements to the OTP already, which only goes to show that the

18 OTP seem to have had quite a number of issues to raise with these persons.

19 Furthermore, many of these witnesses appeared in the Ovcara trial

20 in Belgrade, some of them even on multiple occasions. And during the OTP

21 case, the Chamber surely realised that this is a time-consuming exercise

22 when the witnesses are confronted with statements and evidence from the

23 Ovcara trial in Belgrade.

24 Some of these witnesses we believe to be of exceptional interest

25 to the other Defence teams as well. So when I thought about the

Page 11841

1 cross-examination, I think two-thirds of the allotted time should go to

2 the other Defence teams. We're still thinking about Rule 89. We've seen

3 all these witnesses come and go very quickly these days. They speak about

4 simple facts. We may have such witnesses. We may bring them here to

5 testify, whereas we may drop some others. The crucial witnesses will take

6 up the most of our time, including the appearance of Mr. Sljivancanin

7 himself, and that is why the result is what it is in terms of our

8 envisaged case duration.

9 I'm open to any questions and any issues that need raising about

10 this. That's one topic.

11 The other topic, and probably Mr. Moore will have something to say

12 about this, too, that is not related to this matter, but I would like to

13 see what the Chamber's position is.

14 You have already ruled on the right of the OTP to interview some

15 of these 65 ter witnesses list -- some of the witnesses from the Defence

16 65 ter list. I know that some of these witnesses have already been

17 summoned to the ICTY office in Belgrade to be interviewed over the

18 following period. I asked Mr. Moore about your ruling, and he said he'd

19 be informing me in due course and in good time about when they would be

20 interviewing these witnesses.

21 Nonetheless, there is one thing that I would like to know the

22 Chamber's position on, just to see whether I'm wrong or whether I'm in

23 fact on the right track. When I read your ruling, your decision, my

24 understanding was that the right of the OTP to interview these witnesses

25 arose out of the need for a rebuttal or re-examination of those witnesses.

Page 11842

1 My interpretation of your decision was that this right for the OTP stemmed

2 from the fact that the Defence were not serving on the OTP any witness

3 statements, and we are not required to. So this was the only way for the

4 OTP to find out about these circumstances, namely, by interviewing these

5 witnesses.

6 One specific witness, number 13 on my list, has so far given

7 evidence before the security administration, before the military court,

8 twice in the Ovcara trial. The transcripts of his testimony run into

9 about 40 pages. Plus, in 2003 he was interviewed by the OTP, and the

10 interview is about 50 pages long, plus another 50 if you take into account

11 the translation, plus the audiotape, because the interview was recorded.

12 And this was only in relation to matters relevant to this trial. They

13 have now informed me that they wish to speak to this witness again.

14 The thing is, I really believe that there is a possibility after

15 so much evidence he has already provided the OTP wish to speak to him yet

16 again. I understand the OTP's ambition, but I think the witnesses that

17 can be interviewed are witnesses that the OTP knows nothing about, and the

18 summaries may not be sufficient, and yet we have a position now, a

19 situation where the OTP knows so much about a witness and yet they wish to

20 talk to him yet again, and I think this opens an avenue for the OTP in the

21 future to interview witnesses as many times as they like, whereas in

22 relation to this particular witness they have literally truckloads of

23 material to familiarise themselves with all the relevant matters that

24 might be raised in cross-examination.

25 I did not understand your ruling to be about that and to be to

Page 11843

1 that effect; namely, entitling the OTP to talk to whoever they liked,

2 especially in this case since they already have a number of different

3 statements and lot of evidence from this witness.

4 So much for the envisaged duration of our case, Your Honour.

5 Thank you.

6 JUDGE PARKER: We were -- we were really hoping to learn from you

7 a little more about the extent of your defence case, Mr. Lukic. In that

8 respect, are you effectively saying, "We've pruned it as -- to as much a

9 degree as we safely can, we have been conservative in the hours that we've

10 allowed, and even Mr. Moore agrees"?

11 MR. MOORE: Not even.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Even, Mr. Moore. That's the high point of the

13 strength of Mr. Lukic's submission, you see.

14 Is that essentially what you're putting?

15 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] That is precisely my point, in

16 essence. In relation to what was originally envisaged in terms of the

17 duration of our case and the 65 ter list, we've been pruning the duration

18 of all of our chiefs. If I were to start paring back even more, I would

19 maybe place myself into a situation where I would be reprimanded by the

20 Chamber, and I don't want to keep watching the time as I'm examining a

21 witness.

22 I do, however, believe that there are witnesses that will be

23 appearing during our case that merit due attention, and that is what my

24 estimate is about.

25 JUDGE PARKER: And so you effectively see yourself as perhaps

Page 11844

1 needing 36 days, is that it?

2 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Roughly speaking, yes. I mean, if

3 you're holding me to it, I would like to exercise the right that Mr. Moore

4 mentioned at the Pre-Trial Conference. He said it would only take four

5 months, his case, and yet it took a total of seven. Try as hard as I

6 might to prune my case as Your Honour has suggested, I think this remains

7 a realistic estimate. I'm not sure if the punishment imposed on me would

8 be the same as that imposed on Mr. Moore, were my case to transcend the

9 limits envisaged.

10 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Lukic.

11 [Trial Chamber confers]

12 JUDGE PARKER: We would like to record our appreciation of the

13 efforts made by Defence counsel in reviewing their requirements to present

14 their cases, and we are somewhat encouraged by the success of their

15 efforts.

16 Given the circumstances, the Chamber will really proceed upon the

17 basis now advanced by the Defence without proposing to impose any greater

18 restriction of witnesses or time.

19 That being so, as we would see it, the case for Mr. Mrksic should

20 finish by Friday -- no later than Friday, the 6th of October, which, as

21 the way things are going, may allow you a little bit of spare room,

22 Mr. Vasic. If it is spare, I know your friends would like to have it. So

23 don't slow down, but you could run through until the 6th.

24 On Mr. Borovic's estimate, that should mean that his case would

25 conclude by Friday, the 20th of October, giving him his full measure.

Page 11845

1 And Mr. Lukic would be Friday, the 8th of December, as we do a

2 rough calculation of the time ahead, which hopefully will be the programme

3 that we will be able to maintain.

4 Mr. Vasic, the expert report mentioned by Mr. Moore, when do you

5 think that is to be available?

6 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, over the previous break I

7 spoke to my learned friend, Mr. Moore, about this matter. The expert

8 report was drafted and has been passed over to the translation service. I

9 hope that the translation will be completed by the end of this week and

10 that on Monday we can submit it to Mr. Moore.

11 The expert report itself is not very lengthy, and I can therefore

12 reassure Mr. Moore that in fact he will not need as much time as he

13 thought. The B/C/S original version of the expert report has around 12

14 pages, and the English version will be thereabouts. I believe that this

15 will enable Mr. Moore to review the report and respond to it within the

16 set time-limit.

17 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you for that, Mr. Vasic. That's, I think,

18 helped with that.

19 Could we mention two other matters in respect of timetable. As

20 you know, a Plenary requires that the Chamber not sit tomorrow. There has

21 been a further Plenary proposed by the President for Wednesday of next

22 week, but it is one which this Chamber is able to avoid attending. So we

23 will be able to sit next week according to the programme, and we will only

24 attend the afternoon of the Plenary that day.

25 Mr. Borovic's case, if all goes as we all hope, should finish by

Page 11846

1 Friday, the 20th of October. The following Tuesday is United Nations Day

2 and a holiday. It seemed that it might be to the advantage of everybody

3 if we did not sit on the Monday. If that can be kept in mind, especially

4 as Mr. Lukic plans his witness arrivals. We would then be able to have a

5 longer weekend that weekend and commence evidence on the Wednesday.

6 Now, Mr. Moore, that brings us to Mr. Lukic's other point. Can I

7 say the Chamber is not usually in the position or the habit, and it is not

8 appropriate for it to be explaining its decisions, and we won't. But if

9 there is a current problem about one witness mentioned by Mr. Lukic, can

10 you assist us with your position, Mr. Moore?

11 MR. MOORE: There is no problem.

12 JUDGE PARKER: That won't quite do, Mr. Moore.

13 MR. MOORE: Well, we abide by the ruling of the Court.

14 JUDGE PARKER: Are you wanting to interview this witness again,

15 Mr. Moore?

16 MR. MOORE: Yes, of course. Issues have arisen in the trial.

17 JUDGE PARKER: Yes. And?

18 MR. MOORE: And in light of the Court's ruling, we wish to

19 interview him again.

20 JUDGE PARKER: Yes. Now, there was a comment made by Mr. Lukic

21 that you're summoning witnesses to be interviewed by you. Is that

22 correct?

23 MR. MOORE: Your Honour, my understanding is for a witness to

24 come, it's not a summoning from this Court but it's required within the

25 Serbian jurisdiction. It's nothing more than that.

Page 11847

1 JUDGE PARKER: No, I don't mean for witnesses to attend here but

2 for you to speak to witnesses.

3 MR. MOORE: Yes, that's correct. One has to arrange a specific

4 date. My understanding is that you arrange a specific date and therefore

5 that clarifies the date, and appointments are made.


7 MR. MOORE: That is the way. It's not in any oppressive form.

8 JUDGE PARKER: And I take it from that you're not proceeding on

9 the basis that the witnesses must give you a further statement if they

10 decline to do so?

11 MR. MOORE: No. There's a second procedure that exists if needs

12 be, but that's -- it's a matter for them. That is my understanding of the

13 law. Although if I find a number of witnesses consistently doing it,

14 one -- well, anyway.

15 My understanding of the law is they are summoned. It is a matter

16 for them whether they wish to give evidence or not, and if they do not,

17 then other matters may --

18 JUDGE PARKER: No. It's a matter for them whether they wish to

19 speak to you or not and give you further information or a further

20 statement.

21 MR. MOORE: That is correct.

22 JUDGE PARKER: Yes. Very well. Thank you, Mr. Moore.

23 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise.

24 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Borovic.

25 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise for interrupting you.

Page 11848

1 I'd like to know what Mr. Moore's further position is in the event

2 the witnesses refuse to participate in the interview. What follows next?

3 That is what we'd like to know.

4 Thank you.

5 JUDGE PARKER: Are you in a position to indicate your position,

6 Mr. Moore, or not?

7 MR. MOORE: I will wait and see what happens.

8 JUDGE PARKER: I'm not aware, Mr. Borovic, of what Mr. Moore has

9 in mind. In the understanding of the Chamber, if anything more was to

10 happen, it would require the matter being brought before the Chamber, and

11 then there is some nice questions. But I haven't studied that yet because

12 we don't have an actual case before us. We do have an actual case, it

13 seems, from Mr. Lukic.

14 [Trial Chamber confers]

15 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Lukic, there remains a motion by Defence

16 affecting this issue which we are yet to determine, but subject to that,

17 in the view of the Chamber the decision that it has given already would

18 allow the Prosecution to seek to speak to any of the witnesses at this

19 stage, whether it is for the first or a repeat time, and what the witness

20 does about that is a matter for the witness. And in those circumstances,

21 the Chamber is not at the moment minded to make any further or different

22 order.

23 Well, in view of the circumstances, as there appear to be no other

24 loose ends about at the moment, we will now adjourn to resume on Thursday,

25 at 9.00 in the morning.

Page 11849

1 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.11 p.m.,

2 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 14th day

3 of September, 2006, at 9.00 a.m.