Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 7091

 1                           Monday, 15 June, 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 2.47 p.m.

 5             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Good afternoon to everybody in and around the

 6     courtroom.  Madam Registrar, will you please call the case.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Good afternoon, Your Honours.  This is case

 8     number IT-04-81-T, the Prosecutor versus Momcilo Perisic.

 9             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you very much.  May we have appearances for

10     the day starting with the Prosecution, please.

11             MS. BOLTON:  Good afternoon, Your Honour.  It's Carmela Javier,

12     Lorna Bolton, and Mark Harmon for the Prosecution.

13             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you so much.  And for the Defence.

14             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Good afternoon to everyone in the courtroom --

15     in and about the courtroom.  Daniela Tasic, Chad Mair, Milos Androvic,

16     Tina Drolec, and our intern Kay Marshall.  I'm Gregor Guy-Smith on behalf

17     of Mr. Perisic.

18             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you very much, Mr. Guy-Smith.

19             Ms. Prosecution, Madam Bolton.

20             MS. BOLTON:  Thank you.  The next witness for the Prosecution,

21     Your Honour, will be Mr. Sacirbey.

22             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you very much.  I guess he is coming by

23     videolink.

24             MS. BOLTON:  He is.

25             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Good afternoon.  Mr. Haider, good afternoon.

Page 7092

 1     Mr. Sacirbey, can you hear me?

 2             THE WITNESS:  Good afternoon.

 3             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Good afternoon.  Can you hear me well?

 4             THE WITNESS:  Yes, I can.

 5             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you very much.

 6             THE WITNESS:  Yes, I can.

 7             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Will you please make the declaration,

 8     Mr. Sacirbey.

 9             THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

10             I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth,

11     and nothing but the truth.

12             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you very much.  You may be seated.

13             THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

14             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.  Mr. Sacirbey, before we start and

15     before I hand you over to the counsel for the Prosecution, the Chamber

16     has been approached by Registry indicating that you request to have your

17     lawyers with you while you testify.

18             THE WITNESS:  That is correct, Your Honour.

19             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Okay.  Just to let you know your request has been

20     granted, you can have your lawyers next to you before you start.

21             THE WITNESS:  Thank you, Your Honour.

22             JUDGE MOLOTO:  You are welcome.

23             MR. GUY-SMITH:  If I might, Your Honour.

24             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Yes.

25             MR. GUY-SMITH:  With regard to the witness's request, in the

Page 7093

 1     United States, as a matter of practice, a witness is allowed confer with

 2     counsel not only during their testimony but also when they are not

 3     testifying, and with regard to that particular practice, I trust that the

 4     court will make an order that although Mr. Sacirbey can have his counsel

 5     present, his counsel may not communicate with him whatsoever in any

 6     respect from this time forward unless we reach an issue with regard to

 7     matters concerning his potential criminal liabilities, which is a

 8     different issue.

 9             JUDGE MOLOTO:  In fact, my understanding was that that's the

10     basis for wanting his lawyers to be present with him, and if he wasn't

11     able to communicate with his lawyer, it would nullify the very presence

12     of the lawyer.  So I would expect that the lawyer would only come in when

13     matters of self-incrimination arise.

14             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well, I'm not --

15             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I will make that warning before we start --

16             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Okay.

17             JUDGE MOLOTO:  -- to the lawyers and to him.

18             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Thank you.  Unless, then perhaps we could have

19     some further understanding because unless the Prosecution intends to

20     raise this matter with Mr. Sacirbey during the case in chief, it would be

21     inappropriate for the lawyer to be present during that time unless they

22     are going to be touching about those matter that revolve around any

23     issues concerning his self-incrimination and his privilege against that.

24             JUDGE MOLOTO:  As I understood him, the Prosecution's motion that

25     it actually wanted to exclude that very kind of examination, I wouldn't

Page 7094

 1     expect them to go and do something that they asked not to have done.

 2             Madam Bolton, if you can place on record your shaking of the

 3     head.

 4             MS. BOLTON:  Yes, Your Honour, I have no intention of going into

 5     that area in examination-in-chief.

 6             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you so much.  Is that okay?

 7             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Yes, that is.  And with that in mind I would ask

 8     that his lawyer be excluded from the proceedings until my

 9     cross-examination because that would be the time that issue would come

10     up.  If it comes up it comes up at the point in time that he would be

11     concerned about being involved in the answers that would incriminate him.

12     Other than that, his presence is not necessary.

13             MS. BOLTON:  Your Honour, I have no difficulty with him not

14     communicating about any matters that come up in chief.  I suppose that

15     like any other interested member of the public, the counsel would be

16     entitled to be present in the sense of listening to the proceedings, but

17     I certainly don't expect them to be communicating.  And, of course, as

18     counsel I would expect them to abide by any warning you gave about

19     communications and the limits of communications.

20             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Yes, and Mr. Guy-Smith, just for the free flow of

21     the proceedings without having to stop to allow lawyer to come in.

22     Obviously, they could have been very much in the gallery and listening,

23     and so if they are sitting next to him provided they don't discuss with

24     him, that they don't communicate with him, do you have any objection to

25     them being there next to him?

Page 7095

 1             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well, I can see him and I take it that the

 2     attorney -- if at some point he could identify himself, I take it that he

 3     will be able to remain stone-faced throughout these proceedings.

 4             MR. GUIRGUIS:  Yes, Your Honours.  My name is Peter Guirguis.

 5     I'm from the International Law Firm of Fulbright & Jaworski, and I'm here

 6     to represent Mr. Sacirbey.  I am familiar with the court's rules and I

 7     understand that I'm not to communicate with him about the substance of

 8     his testimony, I appreciate the opportunity to be hear with him and hear

 9     the direct testimony so that I can have context for any issues as they

10     are raised on cross-examination.

11             JUDGE MOLOTO:  You said your name is?

12             MR. GUIRGUIS:  Peter Guirguis, last name is spelled

13     G-u-i-r-g-u-i-s.

14             JUDGE MOLOTO:  You are -- okay.  Mr. Guirguis, thank you so much.

15     I did want to say to you that -- yes, you did mention it, that you are

16     not supposed to talk to the witness while he is testifying.  The only

17     time you may intervene is if and when any questions that may cause him to

18     self-incriminate arise.

19             MR. GUIRGUIS:  Understood, Your Honour.  I'll only discuss those

20     matters with him.

21             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you so much.

22             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Only if I might add, I'm referring to the

23     Chamber's decision paragraph 13.

24             JUDGE MOLOTO:  We are on paragraph 5, paragraph 13 or line 13?

25             MR. GUY-SMITH:  No, I'm sorry.  I'm referring to the Chamber's

Page 7096

 1     decision with regard to this particular issue.

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Okay.  I am sorry.

 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             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I just want to say, yes, that order was given in

19     line with the jurisprudence of the Tribunal without having had the

20     benefit of the request from the witness himself for the presence of his

21     lawyer in court, and the only reason that we change that part now was

22     simply because of that request.  Do I understand you to be saying that

23     notwithstanding the ruling, sir, that you still insist that you are

24     re-opening the matter?  You want a reconsideration?

25             MR. GUY-SMITH:  I'm not re-opening the matter.  I'm --

Page 7097

 1             JUDGE MOLOTO:  What --

 2             MR. GUY-SMITH:  What I'm saying is that based -- based upon the

 3     Trial Chamber's previous ruling, in the ostensible purpose for counsel to

 4     be there, it is inappropriate for counsel to be there at this time.  I am

 5     not suggesting that during cross-examination it would be inappropriate

 6     for counsel to be there, I believe that it would be.  And as a matter of

 7     fact I would encourage it.  I come from that tradition.  But at this

 8     point in time it would not be, but I remain in the Chamber's hands.

 9                           [Trial Chamber confers]

10             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Madam Bolton, do you have any final things to say

11     on this point?

12             MS. BOLTON:  Simply that again I reiterate that there's -- a

13     Registrar is present, so if there were to be any difficulties or any

14     suggestion that Mr. Guirguis were communicating inappropriately, he would

15     actually be there to see it.  And if Mr. Guirguis, if he were any other

16     member of the public, would be entitled to watch the proceedings, and he

17     has indicated that he like to be present so that if any issues arise in

18     cross-examination, notwithstanding the fact that I don't intend to go

19     into this area, I can't control, you know, everything the witness says or

20     what comes up sometimes in examination, he would like to hear so that he

21     has the context if anything arises on cross.

22             JUDGE MOLOTO:  We'll let the ruling stand as it is then.

23     Madam Bolton.

24             MS. BOLTON:  Thank you.

25                           WITNESS:  MUHAMED SACIRBEY

Page 7098

 1                           Examination by Ms. Bolton:

 2        Q.   Mr. Sacirbey, can you hear me all right?

 3        A.   Yes, I can thank you.

 4        Q.   And, sir, could you first tell us what your date of birth is?

 5        A.   July 20, 1956.

 6        Q.   And where were you born?

 7        A.   Sarajevo Bosnia-Herzegovina.

 8        Q.   And in what country could you currently reside?

 9        A.   The United States of America.

10        Q.   And when did you come to reside in the United States?

11        A.   In July 1967, actually June 5, 1967.

12        Q.   And approximately how old were you at the time?

13        A.   Ten year old.

14        Q.   And what is your current country of citizenship?

15        A.   The United States of America.  I also have citizenship of

16     Bosnia-Herzegovina, which I inherited from the former Yugoslavia.

17        Q.   And how long have you been a US citizen?

18        A.   Since 1973.

19        Q.   Are you able to communicate in B/C/S?

20        A.   Yes, although frankly English is more of my language of personal

21     and professional use.

22        Q.   Can you read Cyrillic?

23        A.   Very difficult.

24        Q.   Can you tell us what your educational background is, sir?

25        A.   Yes.  I have a bachelor of arts from Tulane University, summa cum

Page 7099

 1     laude.  I have a law degree that is a doctor of jurisprudence from Tulane

 2     University.  I have a master of business from Columbia University in New

 3     York.

 4        Q.   You indicated you have a law degree, were you ever called to the

 5     bar?

 6        A.   Yes, I was in New York.

 7        Q.   Did you ever practice as a lawyer?

 8        A.   Very briefly.  Most of my professional practice was as an

 9     investment banker.

10        Q.   And how long did you work in that field, sir?

11        A.   I worked as an attorney for approximately four to five years.

12        Q.   And sorry --

13        A.   Most of that was as --

14        Q.   Please, continue.

15        A.   Most of that practice was as counsel to Standard & Poor's

16     Corporation.

17        Q.   You had mentioned a career in investment banking, and what year

18     did you have that career start in and how long did you do that for?

19        A.   I moved over from counsel to Standard & Poor's to the business

20     side of the company in 1983, 1984, and I continued to practice until in

21     fact 1992.

22        Q.   And what was your career change in 1992?

23        A.   I was expecting it to be only a momentary diversion, but I was

24     asked to become the ambassador of Bosnia-Herzegovina to the United

25     Nations.

Page 7100

 1        Q.   Who approached you and asked to you assume that post?

 2        A.   President Izetbegovic, then chair of the Presidency of the

 3     Bosnia-Herzegovina.

 4        Q.   Where were you living at the time that you were approached to

 5     take that post?

 6        A.   New York, in the United States.

 7        Q.   And where were you going to be posted if you assumed the job of

 8     ambassador to the United Nations for Bosnia-Herzegovina?

 9        A.   It was New York, United States.

10        Q.   How long did you hold the post of ambassador?

11        A.   From 1992 until the end of 2000.  Actually from May 22nd, 1992,

12     when Bosnia was admitted to the United Nations, in the meantime, of

13     course, I held several other positions on behalf of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

14        Q.   Sorry, I think you told us the date you took the post being May

15     22nd, 1992.  And my question was how long did you hold the post?

16        A.   That would amount to almost nine years or over eight and a half

17     years.  I guess I should highlight that at that time I also in fact, at

18     least for a short time, continued my private professional work as an

19     investment banker.  I was assuming that I was holding that post really

20     for only a short duration until the war ended.  Clearly it did not.

21        Q.   Okay.  You told me or you told us that you were approached by

22     President Izetbegovic, and can you tell me, did you have any diplomatic

23     experience prior to being approached by the president?

24        A.   Unfortunately not.  Obviously my experience as an attorney and

25     one involved in negotiations and investment banking was probably the most

Page 7101

 1     pertinent.

 2        Q.   When you assumed the post in May 1992, could you tell me did you

 3     have any staff or were you the only person working as a representative of

 4     the Bosnia-Herzegovina at the UN?

 5        A.   Actually, Bosnia's first mission was my business office, and

 6     therefore the only staff and the only assets that I had were those

 7     personal to me or to my partners in my business profession.  Over time,

 8     of course, that evolved.

 9        Q.   Could you tell me when Bosnia-Herzegovina was recognised as an

10     independent country by the United States of America?

11        A.   That was in April of 1992.  If I'm not mistaken.

12        Q.   And were any other or did any other countries recognise

13     Bosnia-Herzegovina at that time?

14        A.   Yes.  Countries recognised Bosnia-Herzegovina one by one.  Either

15     on the basis of being approached by us, as was usually the case later on

16     when I was the representative of the United Nations, or in fact they did

17     it before Bosnia was admitted to the United Nations.  Most of the early

18     recognition came from what we refer to as the western European countries

19     and United States.

20        Q.   Okay.  Sir, you should have in front of you, I hope, a series of

21     binders, and perhaps the Registrar can assist you with this?

22             JUDGE MOLOTO:  If I may just interrupt you before you go to the

23     binders.  Can you tell us when Bosnia and Herzegovina was admitted to the

24     United Nations, sir?

25             THE WITNESS:  Yes, Your Honour.  That was May 22nd, 1992.

Page 7102

 1             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you so much.

 2             Yes, Madam Bolton.

 3             MS. BOLTON:  Yes.

 4             MR. GUIRGUIS:  Excuse me, Your Honour, this is Peter Guirguis,

 5     and I beg your forgiveness, Ms. Bolton, but I just wanted to alert the

 6     court to the fact that co-counsel for Mr. Sacirbey, Annemarie Corominas,

 7     has joined me here in the room.  She's also familiar with the court's

 8     ruling and the court's rules with respect to the limitations of our

 9     discussions with Mr. Sacirbey.  Just wanted to make the court aware of

10     that before we proceeded.  She just entered the room.

11             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Yes, but --

12             MR. GUIRGUIS:  My apologies to the court.

13             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you very much for your apology,

14     Mr. Guirguis, but is there a need for both of you to be in there?

15             MR. GUIRGUIS:  Ms. Corominas is more familiar with the background

16     of Mr. Sacirbey's case and she's travelled here today from the

17     Philippines to be here with Mr. Sacirbey as well, and I would ask the

18     court to allow her to stay.

19             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Can I hear any submissions.  Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.

20             MR. GUY-SMITH:  In the entire time that I've been practicing

21     before this Tribunal, I've seen many witnesses come who would like the

22     benefit of some support.  Some of the witnesses who I've seen come who

23     would like the benefit of some support, also in need of the benefit of

24     legal support.  I have yet to see ever - this is the first time that I've

25     ever seen - a witness who is lawyer, and I think that the Chamber will

Page 7103

 1     find soon - a seasoned -- a diplomat well versed in the ways of a

 2     sophisticated give and take of questions and answers, and well versed in

 3     what I would call the conflicts that exist during verbal trials.

 4             JUDGE MOLOTO:  May I interrupt you, Mr. Guy-Smith.

 5             MR. GUY-SMITH:  To have such support --

 6             JUDGE MOLOTO:  May I interrupt you.  I don't think the

 7     qualifications of the witness have to do -- have anything to do with

 8     whether or not that witness is entitled to a lawyer.  We are now dealing

 9     here with just the question of the extra lawyer that is now coming into

10     the room.  How --

11             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well, I object.

12             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you so much.

13             MR. GUY-SMITH:  I object.  I object.

14             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Madam Bolton.

15             MS. BOLTON:  Yes, Your Honour.  Obviously, it's an unusual

16     situation for the Prosecution because I don't know much about the

17     allegations that are out there.  There is obviously an issue of

18     client/solicitor privilege that attaches to those issues, and I don't

19     know also very much about the background of the two counsel.  I know that

20     the issues that are outstanding relate to both criminal matters and

21     extradition matters, and I don't know whether they have different areas

22     of expertise or different backgrounds.  So I'm not really in a position

23     to tell you very much.  I think probably Mr. Guirguis and Ms. Corominas

24     are better placed to explain why there is a need for both of them to be

25     present.

Page 7104

 1             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I don't think that it's necessary for them to

 2     explain because they actually have no right of audience before this

 3     Tribunal.  The only thing is they can only answer questions that are put

 4     to them if there are any questions put to them, and I do not intend to

 5     prolong this process.  I think, Mr. Guirguis, I understand what you are

 6     saying, if it is possible for your colleague to listen from another

 7     place, it would be appreciative if she could do that because we are

 8     having quite a bit of problems here.  I think one of you is enough in the

 9     room where the witness is testifying from.

10             MR. GUIRGUIS:  Yes, Your Honours.

11             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.

12             THE WITNESS:  You can change places at some point in time.

13             MR. GUIRGUIS:  Yes, perhaps -- with the Court's permission, could

14     we at least have the opportunity to switch positions in the courtroom

15     here if a different issue arises, because as Ms. Bolton actually

16     suggested and as I should have suggested to Your Honour, Ms. Corominas's

17     expertise and background with Mr. Sacirbey's case does relate more to his

18     extradition issues.  And so if any of those issues come up, then I think

19     she would be the one better placed in the room.  So I'll start in the

20     room now with her, and if it seems appropriate, then we'll switch out if

21     Your Honour's ruling is that only one of us is permitted at a time.

22             JUDGE MOLOTO:  At that time if you can raise the issue with the

23     Court, and then we'll decide it the time.

24             Okay?

25             MR. GUIRGUIS:  Thank you, Your Honour.

Page 7105

 1             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Let me just place on the record that the Chamber

 2     has had redacted a portion read by Mr. Guy-Smith which related to an

 3     issue of the 18th of May, 2009, in which the Chamber says -- that's from

 4     page 5, lines 10 to 22, that's where the redaction is, because apparently

 5     something confidential is contained in there.  Thank you.

 6             MR. GUY-SMITH:  That was my understanding.  We received a note

 7     and we sent something back quite quickly saying we agreed.  One, and I

 8     truly do hate to belabour the issue, but I overheard -- first of all, I

 9     see the witness speaking with his attorney which not supposed to occur at

10     all.  And second of all, I overheard the attorney indicating to the --

11     I'm sorry, I missed her name, the co-counsel that they have a -- have a

12     method of listening to the proceedings outside of the room.  Therefore,

13     much of what has been said thus far and has been represented thus far,

14     with regard to this particular attorney being present, that's Mr.

15     Guirguis, I think is quite frankly disingenuous.

16             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Well, I didn't hear that and I don't know whether

17     you want us to go into a trial within a trial about that.

18             MR. GUY-SMITH:  No, I absolutely don't, Your Honour.  I actually

19     want to try the case that we have before us.

20             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you so much.  Madam Bolton --

21             MS. BOLTON:  Thank you.

22             JUDGE MOLOTO:  -- you may proceed.

23             MS. BOLTON:

24        Q.   We were referring -- about to refer to a binder, sir, which

25     should contain documents --

Page 7106

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   -- from 1992, I believe is how they are labelled?

 3        A.   That is correct, I have it here.

 4        Q.   Okay.  Could you please turn to the first tab where you should

 5     find a document 65 ter 4999?

 6        A.   Yes, I think I have it in front of me.

 7        Q.   Okay.  And it should be Resolution 755?

 8        A.   That is correct.

 9        Q.   And what did that resolution accomplish?

10        A.   This resolution was --

11             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Excuse me, I think before the witness begins to

12     give his opinion as what resolutions accomplish, there needs to be a

13     further foundation laid.

14             MS. BOLTON:

15        Q.   Can you read witness?

16             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well, if he is going to be reading --

17             THE WITNESS:  Well, we have the --

18             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Excuse me, if he's going to be reading the

19     resolutions, that's surely a waste of our time here.  The Chamber can

20     read the resolution.  We don't need a witness reading resolutions to us.

21             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Madam Bolton, any response?

22             MS. BOLTON:  There's nothing inappropriate with the question,

23     Your Honour.  He's already, in fact, been asked and answered on what date

24     the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina became a member of the United Nations.

25     I am now asking him to look at a document and identify what that document

Page 7107

 1     was and place that document in context.

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  If you can just sort of ask the questions that lay

 3     some kind of foundation for the document.

 4             MS. BOLTON:  Okay.

 5        Q.   Sir, as a result of your of your work as ambassador for

 6     Bosnia-Herzegovina to the United Nations, did you have occasion to attend

 7     meetings of the Security Council?

 8        A.   Yes, I did.

 9        Q.   And are you familiar, sir --

10             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Madam Bolton, I'm sorry to do this to you.  I know

11     you are -- the Registrar has just told me that the Registrar in New York

12     has just communicated to her that he confirms that the counsel outside

13     the room cannot hear what is taking place inside the room, as

14     confirmation from the Registrar from New York.

15             MS. BOLTON:  Okay.  Thank you.  Sorry Your Honour, I didn't hear

16     the last thing you said.

17             JUDGE MOLOTO:  You may proceed.

18             MS. BOLTON:  Thank you.

19        Q.   Yes, Mr. Sacirbey, we were talking about your role as ambassador

20     to the United Nations and whether you attended meetings of the Security

21     Council, and in that capacity were you present when resolutions were

22     passed with respect to Bosnia-Herzegovina?

23        A.   Yes, I was.

24        Q.   Are you familiar with the resolutions that were passed with

25     respect to Bosnia-Herzegovina between 1992 and 1995?

Page 7108

 1        A.   Yes, I am.

 2        Q.   Okay.  Do you recognise the document that's before you, sir,

 3     Resolution 755?

 4        A.   That is correct, I do recognise it.

 5        Q.   And what did that accomplish?

 6        A.   That resolution in fact was an endorsement, a recommendation one

 7     would say, where the Security Council forwards to the General Assembly

 8     the recommendation that Bosnia-Herzegovina be admitted to the United

 9     Nations as a full member with all the rights and obligations.  I would

10     just like to caution that when this resolution was passed, I was not yet

11     the ambassador of Bosnia-Herzegovina, that would only happen a couple of

12     days later, but I did have access at that time to Security Council

13     members and of course to at least some of the proceedings.

14        Q.   Okay.

15             MS. BOLTON:  I wonder if this document to be entered as an

16     exhibit, Your Honour.

17             JUDGE MOLOTO:  It is admitted into evidence.  May it please be

18     given an exhibit number.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, the document will become Exhibit

20     P2428.

21             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you so much.

22             Yes, Madam Bolton.

23             MS. BOLTON:

24        Q.   Sir, could you tell us when the Republic of Slovenia Bosnian

25     became a member of the United Nations?

Page 7109

 1        A.   It was on the same date, May 22nd, 1992.

 2        Q.   And could you turn to the next document in the tab that you have

 3     open, and it should be 65 ter 4998.

 4        A.   I am there.

 5        Q.   Sorry, one moment, sir.  Yes, sir.  Sir, and can you confirm for

 6     us what this resolution accomplished?

 7        A.   This is the same context as in the case of Bosnia and

 8     Herzegovina; however, this is for the Republic of Croatia, a

 9     recommendation that it be admitted as a member with full rights and

10     obligations.

11        Q.   Okay.  And we are looking at Resolution 753; is that correct?

12        A.   That is correct.

13        Q.   And Resolution 754 which is on the same page, what did it

14     accomplish?

15             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Just before we go to that one, I thought your

16     questions, Madam Bolton, related to the Republic of Slovenia.

17             MS. BOLTON:  It did, sir, and the next question I think is going

18     to clarify what the witness is talking about.

19             JUDGE MOLOTO:  But what you were talk about previously, you were

20     talking about Slovenia, and he said it was a resolution about Croatia.

21             MS. BOLTON:  Yes, he has -- if I could ask the Court to scroll to

22     Resolution 754, which is on the same page.

23             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Okay.  Proceed, ma'am.

24             MS. BOLTON:  Yes, thank you.

25        Q.   We got a little out of order there, sir, Resolution 754, what did

Page 7110

 1     it accomplish?

 2        A.   It was the same as in the context of the Republic of Croatia and

 3     Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, which is a recommendation by the Security

 4     Council for the United Nations General assembly to admit Slovenia as a

 5     full member with all the rights and obligations.

 6        Q.   And looking at the document --

 7        A.   The three countries were -- the three countries were admitted at

 8     exactly the same time during the same proceedings in the General

 9     Assembly.

10        Q.   And I just notice that the date on this resolution is actually

11     the 18th of May, 1992, and you've told us the actual date of admission is

12     the 22nd May, 1992.  Can you just explain that?

13        A.   Yes.  These are recommendations of the Security Council which

14     then are left up to the General Assembly to in fact proceed, and number

15     one, of course, have a vote, and second to actually through the proper

16     proceedings admit these three states.  So, in fact, the Security Council

17     may take up this matter, this recommendation, at a separate time from the

18     General Assembly, and in fact may take up the issue in each country

19     individually and separately as it deems appropriate.

20             MS. BOLTON:  Okay.  If that document can be marked as the next

21     exhibit, please, Your Honour.

22             JUDGE MOLOTO:  The document is admitted into evidence, May it

23     please be given an exhibit number.  Now, which document is this, ma'am?

24     I know it's 4998, but is it Resolution 754, 753, or both.

25             MS. BOLTON:  It's both, please, Your Honours.

Page 7111

 1             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.

 2             MR. GUY-SMITH:  No objection.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  The document will become Exhibit P2429, Your

 4     Honours.

 5             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you so much.

 6             Yes, Madam Bolton.

 7             MS. BOLTON:

 8        Q.   Before we go on to consider some other documents, sir, I just

 9     want to discuss a little bit about the United Nations itself and

10     particularly the General Assembly and the Security Council which we've

11     already been referring to here today.  What -- can you tell me what the

12     work is or what the General Assembly's jurisdiction is?

13        A.   The General Assembly of course consists of all the member states,

14     and it addresses issues of general concern.  It also has several other

15     sub-bodies associated with it, that is various committees, agencies,

16     institutions, if you would, these bodies may even in fact recommend to

17     the Security Council, but generally the resolutions of the General

18     Assembly do not have the same power; i.e., Chapter 7 or Chapter 6 power

19     that the Security Council resolutions do.

20        Q.   And when you are talking about power, what are you talking about?

21        A.   I'm really talking about mandatory performance under the chapters

22     of the Chapter 7, for example, of the Security Council --

23             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.

24             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Excuse me, I do not believe that the witness has

25     been called as an expert to interpret the various provisions of the

Page 7112

 1     United Nations.

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Sure, but this question was not put to him, he

 3     volunteered this information.

 4             MR. GUY-SMITH:  But --

 5             JUDGE MOLOTO:  And he --

 6             MR. GUY-SMITH:  I think we need to be very careful here because

 7     the manner in which the question was put was put in terms of

 8     jurisdiction, and with regard to the issue of jurisdiction, specifically

 9     because it is - as we all know - a legal term of art, I think we need to

10     be stepping carefully, and I understand the Chamber's view with regard to

11     issues concerning answers that come from witnesses as to whether or not

12     they can be stricken or they can be limited.

13             JUDGE MOLOTO:  And the other concern here is that you stand up at

14     a time when the witness is answering, not at the time when the question

15     has been put.

16             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well --

17             JUDGE MOLOTO:  You know, so the impression you are leaving me is

18     that you are objecting to the answer, not to the question.

19             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well, I'm objecting to both.

20             JUDGE MOLOTO:  At least if you object to the question, if you

21     could please stand up at the time the question has been asked.

22             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Sure.

23             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Not in the middle of an answer by the witness.

24             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Sure.

25             JUDGE MOLOTO:  For purposes of this objection, I think I must

Page 7113

 1     allow this to -- just finish off that point that you are raising, Madam.

 2             MS. BOLTON:

 3        Q.   Yes, sir, if you could clarify what you meant when you were

 4     talking about -- you started to answer and to talk about mandatory

 5     compliance versus and then you were cut off, what were you talking about,

 6     sir?

 7        A.   That is correct.  The United Nations Security Council has unique

 8     authority in an actual context, which is to address great threats to

 9     peace and security, and in this context it can apply what's called

10     Chapter 7 or Chapter 6 authority.  Chapter 7 has the full weight of the

11     international community behind it.  And in fact, it is not only

12     compulsory, but various methods may be applied to ensure compliance with

13     such resolutions.

14             Clearly, when we speak of chapter -- when we speak of UN Security

15     Council versus General Assembly, the General Assembly is more, one would

16     say, of a body that advises, that takes stands on international issues,

17     while in fact this UN Security Council, in fact, is one that can impose

18     measures including mandatory measures, including potentially forced

19     sanctions, things of that sort.

20        Q.   Just going back to the General Assembly, sir, when it meets are

21     its meetings held in public or in private?

22        A.   They are always in public.

23        Q.   And how about the Security Council when it meets?

24        A.   The UN Security Council may meet in private consultations.  In

25     fact, there's a special room on the side of the Security Council Chamber

Page 7114

 1     for such consultations.  As far as I am aware of, all the votes of the

 2     Security Council, though, are taken in public, and such debates

 3     associated with those votes are in public.  And UN Security Council

 4     members do have a history of meeting also in partial membership, that is

 5     two, three, five members may meet to discuss these issues beyond any sort

 6     of formal setting.

 7        Q.   How many members are there on the Security Council?

 8        A.   As of today it's 15.

 9        Q.   How many of those seats of the 15 -- are any of those seats of

10     the 15 permanent seats that don't change?

11        A.   Five are permanent members.

12        Q.   And the other ten then?

13        A.   The other ten rotate in two year terms.  Actually five and five,

14     so there are elections every year for five members, and those

15     non-permanent members stay on the council for a period of two years.

16        Q.   And during the time of the Bosnian war in 1992 to 1995, were any

17     of the parties to the conflict Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, were they --

18     either of them have a seat in the Security Council?

19        A.   No, not until not -- well, until the late 1990s.

20        Q.   And did the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia have a seat in the

21     Security Council during that time-period?

22        A.   No, it did not.

23        Q.   You've mentioned that this Security Council can meet in private

24     and you indicated that the number of members who would attend those

25     sessions would vary.  If you weren't a member of the Security Council,

Page 7115

 1     and by that I mean you don't have a seat on the Security Council, could

 2     you attend those meetings?

 3        A.   You may be called upon by some of those countries to consult.

 4     Bosnia and Herzegovina was frequently called upon by some of those

 5     countries to provide insight.  Sometimes to relay information to other

 6     Security Council members through those meetings.  We frequently met with

 7     what was then called a non-align group.  Sometimes we met with what

 8     were -- what was called the P3, P4, P5, or P3 plus 2.  For example the P3

 9     plus 2 was a reference to the two permanent EU member, the United States,

10     and generally there were two other EU members that were non-permanent on

11     the council.

12        Q.   Okay.  Let me stop you there, sir.  With respect to the public

13     meetings of the Security Council that you have alluded to, if you didn't

14     have a seat in the Security Council, could you attend those meetings?

15        A.   That is correct.  If the meeting what a formal meeting, you would

16     actually sit on the side of the Chambers, and each county does actually

17     have a seat designated for it to the extent that there were informal

18     consultations going on in the anti-Chamber, if you would, most of us were

19     not only aware of it but we made sure we were present, and we were

20     present in what's called the Security Council delegates lounge where in

21     facts we exchanged views, provided information, or whatever was

22     appropriate in that diplomatic context.

23        Q.   I'm only interested right now, sir, on -- in your ability to

24     participate in the public sessions and be present in the public sessions.

25     So you've told us, I think, that you could be present in those sessions;

Page 7116

 1     is that correct, the public sessions?

 2        A.   That is correct.  That is correct.

 3        Q.   Okay.  And were you entitled to participate in the discussions as

 4     right?

 5        A.   Yes, we would have to make an application to participate.  That

 6     application did not have to be granted, and that application could be

 7     limited to the ability to sit at the table and observe, that is as one

 8     that is considered a party to the issue, or in fact you could participate

 9     with the right to speak.

10        Q.   And would you ever have a right to vote in the Security Council

11     as a member state that didn't have a seat?

12        A.   No, you would not.

13             MS. BOLTON:  I see the time Your Honour did you want to take the

14     break at the regular time.

15             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Indeed we would.  We'll take the break and come

16     back at 4.00.

17             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Excuse me, Your Honour, does the admonition stand

18     with regard to no contact between the witness and the lawyer?

19             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Can you say that again?

20             MR. GUY-SMITH:  The admonition stand with regard to the issue of

21     no contact between the witness and his lawyer?

22             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I don't know whether we can still find them.

23             MR. GUIRGUIS:  I'm here, Your Honour, and I understand the

24     admonition not to discuss any substance of the witness's testimony with

25     him over the course of the entire week absent any issues that arise with

Page 7117

 1     respect to incrimination or things to that effect.

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you very much.

 3             MR. GUIRGUIS:  The rule is well understood.

 4             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you very much.  You are so warned.  May we

 5     adjourn.

 6                           --- Recess taken at 3.34 p.m.

 7                           --- On resuming at 4.09 p.m.

 8             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Madam Bolton.

 9             MS. BOLTON:  Thank you, Your Honour.  Before I continue, the

10     clerk pointed out to me during the break that the first exhibit that was

11     marked today, being Exhibit P2428, actually contains two resolutions,

12     Resolution 755, that we discussed, and there's another resolution, 763,

13     and I'll just clarify for the record that the Prosecution isn't relying

14     on Resolution 763.

15             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you, Madam Bolton.

16             MS. BOLTON:

17        Q.   Mr. Sacirbey, before the break, we were talking about your work

18     at the United Nations, and we briefly touched on the fact that when you

19     first became the ambassador, that you were basically working out of your

20     home and so forth.  Was there ever a time when there was anyone other

21     than yourself working for the mission on behalf of Bosnia-Herzegovina at

22     the United Nations?

23        A.   Yes, there was.

24        Q.   Okay.  Can we touch now on the status of the Federal Republic of

25     Yugoslavia at the United Nations during this time-period.  And I want to

Page 7118

 1     start by asking if the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had been

 2     a member of the United Nations?

 3        A.   Yes, it had.

 4        Q.   And we've already established that when it began to break up that

 5     Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, as well as Slovenia applied for and were

 6     granted membership in the United Nations.  Can you tell me whether the

 7     Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Serbia Montenegro --

 8             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Excuse me, before we go any further the question

 9     is as it's presently put forth, which is "when it began to break up," is

10     historically inaccurate to the extent that it's going to be of any issues

11     to the Chamber.  The question should be properly framed.

12             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Madam Bolton.

13             MS. BOLTON:  I don't think, Your Honour, that there's any issue

14     with respect in these proceedings.  My friend's objection to the use of

15     "break up," it doesn't have any connotation.  I can reword the question

16     if you would like, Your Honour.

17             JUDGE MOLOTO:  If you like to reword, reword it.

18             MS. BOLTON:

19        Q.   When Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina and Slovenia declared

20     themselves independent, after that process, sir, can you tell me whether

21     the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia followed suit and applied for

22     membership at the United Nations?

23        A.   No, it did not.  Not at least during the period of the conflict.

24        Q.   What was its -- what was the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia's

25     position on membership -- its entitlement to membership at the United

Page 7119

 1     Nations?

 2             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well, at this point unless there's a foundation

 3     laid, I would object to the question.

 4             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Foundation for what, Mr. Guy-Smith?

 5             MR. GUY-SMITH:  For the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia's position

 6     with regard to its entitlement to its membership.

 7             JUDGE MOLOTO:  And what kind of foundation should be laid for

 8     that kind of question?

 9             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well, there is as a matter of fact a series of

10     legal documents to discuss this matter and was a hotly contested legal

11     issue, Your Honour.

12             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I'm not quite sure.  Are you discussing legalities

13     or are you discussing time-frames, ma'am?

14             MS. BOLTON:  I'm not discussing the legalities, I'm trying to

15     discuss what its status was at the United Nations, what rights it had,

16     and my friend is right that there is some documents but I can't -- I'm

17     trying to introduce into evidence those documents so that we can have

18     clarification as to what its status was.  I'm not asking for a legal

19     question at all, I'm just asking for the historical context, Your Honour.

20             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I think if you can tie to your question a

21     time-frame, it will be allowed.

22             MS. BOLTON:  Certainly.

23        Q.   In -- let's look at the spring of 1992, Mr. Sacirbey, could you

24     tell me what position the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was taking with

25     respect to membership for the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in the

Page 7120

 1     United Nations?

 2        A.   It was a fluid situation.  Certainly the -- many of the diplomats

 3     that were once representing the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

 4     did in fact continue to represent the Serbia Montenegro.  Others, in

 5     fact, resigned from those posts and went on either into private life or

 6     into representing other countries.  It was, though, quite clear that

 7     there was a continuity of the presence of some of these diplomats,

 8     although not until the September of 1992 was the status of Serbia

 9     Montenegro, that is the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, addressed by the

10     United Nations General Assembly.

11        Q.   All right.  Before we get to September of 1992, could you tell us

12     if there was any discussion in the Security Council on this issue?

13        A.   Yes, there was.  Certainly at that period of time immediately

14     before September, but throughout the time, and the question was did in

15     fact the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, that is Serbia Montenegro, have

16     the right of continuity to the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

17        Q.   What do you mean by that?

18        A.   If Bosnia-Herzegovina --

19        Q.   Sir, what do you mean?

20        A.   Well, a continuity -- let me give you another example.  Russia

21     was assumed to have continuity for the Soviet Union, but in fact in the

22     case of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the Federal

23     Republic of Yugoslavia was not assumed, and there was no agreement

24     regarding its continuity, and in fact Slovenia, Croatia,

25     Bosnia-Herzegovina, and other states subsequently did challenge that

Page 7121

 1     continuity, that is that in fact Serbian Montenegro, that is the Federal

 2     Republic of Yugoslavia, would need to make its own application to become

 3     a member.

 4        Q.   When you are talking about continuity, can you just clarify what

 5     you mean, continuity?

 6        A.   State continuity.

 7             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Excuse me, once again if we are talking about

 8     this from a standpoint of a legal standpoint, there has been no

 9     foundation laid for this gentleman to discuss the matter.  If we are

10     talking about it from another standpoint, then I don't object to the

11     question but since the question as phrased is sufficiently vague and

12     there are legal issues with regard to all of these terms that are of

13     importance to the Trial Chamber's consideration, I would request that the

14     questions framed are quite specific.

15             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I didn't understand the question to be from a

16     legal standpoint, and I thought it was sufficiently specific and clearly

17     excluding the legalities, it was just asking what this witness knows as a

18     person who was in United Nations at the time.

19             MS. BOLTON:  Thank you, Your Honour.

20        Q.   Could you explain what you are talking about when you are talking

21     about continuity with respect to membership in the United Nations?

22        A.   We were talking about state or legal continuity which means that

23     in fact the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, that is Serbia and

24     Montenegro, would not need to make an application to become a member as

25     in fact Russia did not in the case of the break-up of the Soviet Union.

Page 7122

 1             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well, Your Honour --

 2             THE WITNESS:  In this case in fact it was the -- a different

 3     situation.

 4             MR. GUY-SMITH:  I think the answer given by the witness indicates

 5     the exact problem that I raised, specifically -- especially after your

 6     particular ruling in which the witness said "We were talking about state

 7     or legal continuity..." right after you had indicated in your

 8     understanding that the question was not to be from a legal standpoint.

 9             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Mr. Guy-Smith, my understanding is that this

10     witness is a fact witness, he's not an expert.  And I'm -- he's telling

11     us what he understands the facts to have been, and whether those facts

12     were legal or not legal, we will hear evidence on as to when the legal

13     succession took place.

14             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well, you may -- as a matter of fact you may or

15     you may not, Your Honour, and with regard to the --

16             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Well, if we don't then it's not a hotly disputed

17     issue.

18             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well, to the extent that this witness is

19     rendering opinions that deal with legal matters predicated upon his

20     understanding of legal matters, it is of some moment.  But if we are

21     going to be in a situation where we are going to have expert evidence,

22     for example, on Article 6 and Article 7, if we are going to be going

23     through an entire discussion of how the United Nations is put together

24     and how these specific provisions apply to member states or non-member

25     states, and the Prosecution is intending on doing such things, fine.

Page 7123

 1             But in the absence of that, which you have, is you have a

 2     gentleman who is giving legal opinion about -- in areas where he has not

 3     been yet established as any expert and as you yourself said.  He has been

 4     called as a fact witness not as a legal witness.

 5             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Yes, but the thing is --

 6             MR. GUY-SMITH:  I'm sorry, and expert witness.

 7             JUDGE MOLOTO:  -- I haven't heard him giving -- opining.  I've

 8     heard him tell us what he knows from what he observed when he was there.

 9     He hasn't given opinion.

10             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well, he used specifically the terminology that

11     you had but a moment before indicated was not the thrust of the question.

12             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Do you have any response, Madam Bolton.

13             MS. BOLTON:  I do, Your Honour.  The -- and my friend can object

14     to my questions, but he continues to object to the witness's answers, and

15     these are matters he can deal with in cross-examination rather than

16     continually interrupt my examination-in-chief.

17             MR. GUY-SMITH:  I understand Ms. Bolton's position, however,

18     there's a problem here.  And I understand the court's ruling with regard

19     to the -- its view that witness's answer that is non-responsive or goes

20     far afield from the question is not something that can be objected to.  I

21     happen to take issue with that and don't believe that should be the state

22     of the law but that is what you have ruled.  This is not helpful,

23     however, to the Chamber.  This is not helpful at all because if you have

24     a witness who is engaged in giving you non-responsive answers, and going

25     far afield from the issue at hand, we are engaged in a couple of things:

Page 7124

 1     One is a wasting of time; two is a witness who is being, in fact,

 2     utilized in a manner for which they're not called.  He is being utilized

 3     as an expert when he is a fact witness, and there's slippage, and the

 4     slippage is inappropriate.

 5             JUDGE MOLOTO:  To the extent you comment on my ruling, I just

 6     want to say to you, sir, that that ruling stands that I made earlier.

 7     And whether you take issue with it or not it's another matter.  You can

 8     decide what you want to do about that.  And I just want to say to you, if

 9     anything comes from the witness that is not -- that is far afield from

10     issues before Court, the proper basis is relevance.  And, unfortunately,

11     yes, I still say, it is not in my knowledge permissible to object to a

12     witness's answer because then otherwise you might as well take the stand

13     and answer on behalf of the witness.  If the witness has been asked a

14     question and he answers the way he answers, that's how he answers.  You

15     can object to a question, and I stand by that ruling, and what you want

16     to do with that is your decision.

17             MR. GUY-SMITH:  I understand you in that regard.  There's common

18     objection in American jurisprudence called objection, none responsive to

19     the question.

20             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Yes.  We are not in American jurisprudence.

21             MR. GUY-SMITH:  I appreciate that.

22             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you so much.

23             MR. GUY-SMITH:  But to the extent you have a witness who is going

24     far afield, we need to have some remedy, perhaps the remedy is for the

25     Court to instruct the witness to answer the question asked as opposed to

Page 7125

 1     going off on a lark.

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Relevance becomes the basis of objections.  If

 3     anybody goes far afield, the question becomes relevance, not none

 4     responsive.

 5             MR. GUY-SMITH:  So I'm clear with regard to the Court's position:

 6     If a witness gives an answer which I deem to be not relevant, am I in a

 7     position to object to that answer on the grounds of relevance?

 8             JUDGE MOLOTO:  You'd have to object to the question that's not

 9     relevant.

10             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well, I'm saying if the question is a relevant

11     question but the answer is an irrelevant answer, is the Court's ruling

12     that I can object --

13             JUDGE MOLOTO:  No, that's not the --

14             MR. GUY-SMITH: -- on the grounds of relevance.

15             JUDGE MOLOTO:  No, that's not the Court's ruling.

16             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Very well.  I understand the --

17             JUDGE MOLOTO: [Overlapping speakers]

18             MR. GUY-SMITH:  -- then I -- then I understand the Court's

19     ruling.

20             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Okay.  Thank you.

21             Madam Bolton, you may proceed.

22             MS. BOLTON:  Thank you.

23        Q.   Sir, in the binder before you, perhaps to clarify this issue, I

24     could ask you to turn to the next document, which is tab 2, Resolution

25     757 which is Prosecution Exhibit 202 in these proceedings.

Page 7126

 1        A.   Thank you, we are getting there.

 2        Q.   Yes, okay.

 3        A.   I have that in front of me, thank you.

 4        Q.   Thank you, sir.  If you could turn to the second page of the

 5     resolution.  There is a paragraph that starts with the underlined word

 6     "noting" approximately halfway down the page.  Are you able to locate

 7     that, sir?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   The text says:

10             "Noting that the claim by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

11     Serbia and Montenegro to continue automatically the membership of the

12     former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in the United Nations has

13     not been generally accepted."

14             Does this document, sir, accurately reflect the position the

15     Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was taking on this issue in the spring of

16     1992?

17        A.   It reflects, of course, the view of the United Nations that it

18     was not generally accepted.  On the other hand, of course the Federal

19     Republic of Yugoslavia was contending that it may have had or did have

20     automatic membership.

21        Q.   Okay.  You've alluded to the fact, sir, that there was eventually

22     in September 1992 a ruling of sorts on this issue or clarification in the

23     Security Council, and I wonder go you could please turn to the second

24     document in that same tab.  It is Defence Exhibit 30 in these

25     proceedings.  Resolution 777.

Page 7127

 1        A.   That's correct.  I have it in front of me.

 2        Q.   Is this the document you were referring to in your previous

 3     testimony, sir, or were you referring to some other document?

 4        A.   No, this is the recommendation of the Security Council to the

 5     General Assembly upon which the General Assembly did eventually act.

 6        Q.   And did the General Assembly agree with the recommendation or

 7     disagree with the recommend?

 8        A.   It, in fact, did agree.

 9        Q.   As a result of that ruling, could you tell me what rights the

10     Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had in the General Assembly?

11        A.   It did not have the right to be seated or to participate in the

12     actual work of the General Assembly.  Obviously did not have the right to

13     vote.  Although, in fact, there was a plaque left in the General Assembly

14     reflecting the Federal Republic -- or actually the name Yugoslavia.

15        Q.   When you talk about participate in the actual work of the General

16     Assembly, would that include participating in discussions in the General

17     Assembly?

18        A.   That is correct.

19        Q.   When the General Assembly and the Security Council were, for

20     example, considering passing resolutions, was there any information that

21     would be circulated about those draft resolutions?

22        A.   There would be.  Usually before the resolution was adopted, there

23     at least would be a draft resolution that would be circulated and of

24     course once it was adopted then it no longer would be a draft.

25        Q.   And did the General Assembly and the Security Council circulate

Page 7128

 1     other kinds of documents to member states?

 2        A.   They did.  They may have been reports from the

 3     Secretary-General's office, that is the Secretariat.  It may have been

 4     documents from other institutions or agencies of the United Nations,

 5     rapporteurs, and of course of member states.

 6        Q.   And what were the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia's rights to

 7     receive those kind of documents?

 8        A.   First of all, we do know that they did receive those documents,

 9     and second of all, we do know that they in fact did also circulate

10     documents at least subsequent to this period.

11        Q.   And the reason you say you know they received those kinds of

12     documents is what?

13        A.   Because we had firsthand knowledge.  In part because we really

14     were quite focused on the issue of what was the status of Serbian

15     Montenegro and to what extent they in fact did have certain rights of

16     membership while maybe not having all the rights of membership.  They

17     certainly did have diplomats accredited to the United Nations, visas were

18     issued, documents were distributed and received.  Even at some point in

19     time they participated in the discussions of the Security Council upon

20     their request.

21        Q.   Were their rights of participation in the Security Council any

22     different than the rights enjoyed by Bosnia-Herzegovina?

23        A.   That's a little bit difficult to say because we as a member state

24     had the right to ask to be seated and to participate.  Serbian Montenegro

25     also did subsequently make the same request and at some point in time in

Page 7129

 1     fact they were granted.  Whether it was perceived by the Security Council

 2     members and others to be exactly the same right or not is difficult to

 3     say, but from a perspective of actually being there, receiving documents,

 4     being part of the discussion, it was very much similar.

 5        Q.   Who was -- you mentioned the fact that there had been a

 6     representative of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia at the

 7     United Nations.  Do you remember what that person's name was in the

 8     spring of 1992?

 9        A.   I don't remember his full name to be very honest with you, I only

10     had one interaction with him and he actually left before we became --

11     that is before Bosnia-Herzegovina became a member of the United Nations.

12        Q.   Okay.  Who became the FRY representative at the -- Federal

13     Republic of Yugoslavia representative at the United Nations?

14        A.   The time-frames are interesting in a sense that there was, of

15     course, what would he call a Charge d'affair at one time.  Then there was

16     Ambassador Dzokic and Ambassador Jovanovic who were there most of the

17     time when I was there.

18        Q.   And how do you spell Ambassador Jokic's name?

19        A.   It's -- well, in --

20        Q.   In English.

21        A.   In our language it would -- yes, I guess that would be

22     J-o-k-i-c-h.  But the spelling would be quite different in the Bosnian

23     Croat or Serba.

24             JUDGE MOLOTO:  And what would that spelling be in Bosnian and

25     Croatian spelling?

Page 7130

 1             THE WITNESS:  That would be different.  It's actually -- D-z --

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Could you spell it in B/C/S?

 3             THE WITNESS:  Yes, D-z-o-k-i-c.

 4             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.

 5             THE WITNESS:  Your Honours, there's little thing at the end of

 6     the C that indicates it's a CH sound.

 7             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Okay.

 8             MS. BOLTON:

 9        Q.   Dealing with Ambassador Dzokic, did he have any staff?

10        A.   Yes, he did.  In fact, the staff was there, I believe, before he

11     arrived.

12        Q.   Approximately how large was his staff?

13        A.   Again, during this period of time there were probably anywhere

14     from ten to as many as 20 plus staff.  Now, how many of them were

15     accredited diplomats, probably it was more like 5 to 10, again depending

16     on the time-frame.  Usually, also countries would tend to bring in more

17     staff when there were particular issues of great interest or, for

18     example, during the General Assembly session in the fall, countries would

19     tend to bring in temporary diplomatic staff to address the greater

20     workload.

21        Q.   Do you know whether the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had a

22     military attache at any time from May of 1992 to the end of 1995?

23        A.   I'm actually not certain of that.

24        Q.   Could you tell me how much contact you or your staff had with

25     Mr. Dzokic on a day-to-day basis or weekly basis?

Page 7131

 1        A.   There was actually pretty extensive contact.  I personally

 2     refrained from direct contact because the fact that Serbian Montenegro

 3     did not provide Bosnia-Herzegovina with diplomatic recognition.  I did

 4     not wish, therefore, to reciprocate with any legitimacy.  It was in fact

 5     a diplomatic option.  But there was certainly interaction and it was not

 6     one of those combative situations, but because again of the diplomatic

 7     situation we did not interact that frequently.

 8        Q.   Would your staff share with you what happened in those

 9     interactions?

10        A.   Absolutely.  And I would encourage them to do so.

11             THE INTERPRETER:  Excuse me, could the speakers please make

12     pauses before question and answer for benefit of the accused.

13             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you very much.  I'm sorry, Mr. Interpreter.

14             Yes, Madam Bolton, and you, Mr. Sacirbey, both of you are

15     speaking in English and we are having interpretation into various other

16     languages.  If you could please have a pause between question and answer

17     to allow for the interpretation to flow smoothly.  Thank you so much.

18             MR. GUY-SMITH:  And if we might get a time-frame or some

19     specificity with regard to the interaction between these two parties,

20     that would be of some assistance, as opposed to the general and rather

21     ambiguous state of the record as it stands right now.

22             MS. BOLTON:

23        Q.   I am talking -- sir, just for clarification of my last series of

24     questions, I'm talking about the entire time-period from May of 1992 to

25     the end of 1995.  That's what I intended when I asked the question of how

Page 7132

 1     many contact you or your staff were having, and if -- could you please

 2     clarify if there were time periods where there was more or less contact

 3     than you've already indicated?

 4        A.   The contact probably was more frequent toward the end of that

 5     period or at least the middle of it.  In parts, because of course the

 6     staff that I had evolved into significantly more, in part because an

 7     exchange of information sometimes was in fact necessary.  Nonetheless,

 8     the exchange was continuous during that time-frame.  There were many

 9     diplomats eventually that we brought on on behalf of Bosnia-Herzegovina

10     that knew some of the diplomats of Serbian Montenegro personally and

11     interacted with them quite more regularly than I would, and including my

12     deputy at that time Ivan Misic, and they in fact did fill me in on those

13     discussions or those talks.

14        Q.   And based on the information you were receiving from your staff,

15     could you comment on how well informed Mr. Dzokic appeared to be on the

16     events that were transpiring in Bosnia-Herzegovina --

17             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Mr. Guy-Smith.

18             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well, I'm going to object on a couple of grounds.

19     It calls for speculation based upon multiple unsourced hearsay, except to

20     the extent that we've had the name of one individual who was his deputy

21     staff.

22             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Madam Bolton.

23             MS. BOLTON:

24        Q.   Can you give us the names of your staff, sir?

25        A.   Yes.  During that time-frame it was quite extensive, so let me

Page 7133

 1     make sure that I'm as complete as I can be.  But I doubt if I'm going to

 2     get everyone in there.  There was Miles Raguz, there was Ivan Misic,

 3     Nenad Periskic, Amela Sapcanin, those were my immediate diplomatic staff.

 4     I'm sure I'm leaving several others.  Michael Young [phoen].  Phil Colin

 5     [phoen].

 6        Q.   Is that your list, sir?

 7        A.   I'm sure I'm leaving some people out.  At any point in time we

 8     had probably at least five accredited diplomats starting, let's say, with

 9     the fall of 1992.  That number was rather fluid and the personalities

10     were fluid.  Many of them were volunteers, and they were many times

11     employed to be addressing the specific United Nations committees, for

12     example the 3rd committee or the 1st committee so that in fact

13     Bosnia-Herzegovina could be active in all the work of the United Nations.

14        Q.   Okay.  And you've talked about diplomatic staff specifically.

15     Who would have actually had contact with the Federal Republic of

16     Yugoslavia's staff?

17        A.   Actually, most frequently would have been either Ivan Misic or

18     Miles Raguz or Amela Sapcanin or John Kraljic [phoen] which is a name I'm

19     adding just now.  Or Phil Colin, I think -- I think those were the ones

20     that would have been more frequently involved.

21        Q.   So based on the reports that you received back from those five

22     individuals as to their discussions with Mr. Dzokic, could you comment on

23     how well informed Mr. Dzokic appeared to be?

24             THE COURT:  Mr. Guy-Smith.

25             MR. GUY-SMITH:  First of all, the question as posed

Page 7134

 1     mis-characterizes the witness's answer, so I'll start with that.  And

 2     we'll go from there.

 3             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Madam Bolton.

 4             MS. BOLTON:  I'm not sure what the alleged mischaracterization

 5     is, Your Honour.

 6             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Mr. Guy-Smith.

 7             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Question asked on page 40, line 6 through 8 deals

 8     with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Staff.  That would be multiple

 9     individuals, none of whom have been named.  Question at page 40, lines 13

10     through 15 deal with specifically as to their discussions with Mr.

11     Dzokic, but that's not the state of our record.  The state of our record

12     is that he was discussing who his staff talked to with regard to the

13     Federal Republic of Yugoslavia's staff, not with Mr. Dzokic.

14             MS. BOLTON:  So I'm trying to locate the record, Your Honour.  My

15     initial question which had to do -- that my friend objected to which had

16     to do with the fact that he received reports from his staff, and then we

17     talked about the fact that there were five individuals basically who had

18     contact with the FRY diplomatic mission, and in my position, with

19     respect, Your Honour, is that when you combine those two statements, it's

20     clear that we are talking about the same individuals as being individuals

21     who reported their contacts with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

22     mission.

23             MR. GUY-SMITH:  That's an entirely different position than

24     whether or not anybody spoke to Mr. Dzokic, and she's identified the

25     question with regard to Mr. Dzokic.  Now, whether or not the identified

Page 7135

 1     individuals of Mr. Sacirbey's staff spoke with individuals in the FRY

 2     staff is something that I believe probably happened.  Who those

 3     individuals were I have no way of knowing because there's no information

 4     about that, but more importantly what she has done is she's taken a

 5     collective hearsay grouping of individuals on both sides and then refined

 6     it to Mr. Dzokic which is inappropriate because that's not what the

 7     witness answered.

 8             MS. BOLTON:  Actually, my initial question at page 37, lines 18

 9     to 19 was specific to contact with Mr. Dzokic.

10             MR. GUY-SMITH:  I think Ms. Bolton misses the point, because if

11     she takes a look at page 39, beginning at line -- I think it's line 5

12     through the end of that particular section is where this -- we went off

13     on this particular unfortunate journey.

14             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Madam Bolton, I understood you to be asking two

15     different questions.  You asked about contact with staff and then you

16     asked when the -- your opposite number objected, it was when you asked

17     him about reports from Mr. Dzokic, from discussions with Mr. Dzokic.

18     Maybe just so that we can run a little bit smoothly, if you could just

19     focus your question if you want to talk about reports, and I suspect when

20     you talk of reports you're talking of official reports between

21     specifically Mr. Dzokic and any of the staff of the BiH embassy.

22             MS. BOLTON:  When I use the term "report" I'll clarify with the

23     witness, Your Honour --

24             JUDGE MOLOTO:  If you could, please.

25             MS. BOLTON:  -- if Your Honour is confused.

Page 7136

 1             JUDGE MOLOTO:  If you could, please.

 2             I guess I seem to sense that Mr. Guy-Smith's problem is he

 3     doesn't know -- want a mixture of hearsay of evidence from unknown

 4     sources to specific information coming from specific people to specific

 5     people.

 6             MS. BOLTON:  All right.

 7        Q.   Yes, my question, Mr. Sacirbey, if we could go back to the

 8     beginning is, did your -- you've given us the name of five diplomatic

 9     staff.  Can you tell me how much contact on a day-to-day basis during the

10     conflict those individuals would have had with Mr. Dzokic?

11        A.   I'm quite certain that at least one of them, which is my deputy

12     at that time Ivan Misic, had quite regular contact with Mr. Dzokic.  I

13     would also add that frequently when we were dealing with diplomats from

14     other states, we were not necessarily dealing with them on a first name

15     basis.  The references in the United Nations generally are to people as

16     the country that they represent.  It is quite common in the United

17     Nations that you are not always dealing with people whose first or last

18     name you would know.  But with Mr. Dzokic, I remember very clearly that

19     Mr. Misic frequently gave me the updates of his discussions with Mr.

20     Dzokic.

21        Q.   Okay.  And when gave you updates and reported what he discussed

22     with Mr. Dzokic, could you tell me how well informed Mr. Dzokic appeared

23     to be, based on those reports, as to events that were transpiring in

24     Bosnia-Herzegovina?

25        A.   I was left with the strong impression that the information was

Page 7137

 1     extensive and in many cases detailed.

 2        Q.   Sorry, what do you mean when you say that the information was

 3     extensive and in many cases detailed?  My question was how well informed

 4     Mr. Dzokic appeared to be?

 5        A.   He seemed to be well informed.

 6        Q.   What kind of issues would your representatives discuss with Mr.

 7     Dzokic or members of his staff?

 8        A.   Frequently they were --

 9             MR. GUY-SMITH:  I do apologise, if we could have some time-frame

10     with regard to this apart from a three year time-frame.  There are many

11     many things that happened during those three years, and they have

12     different legal as well as factual import to the matters before this

13     Chamber.

14             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Madam Bolton.

15             MS. BOLTON:  Sorry, Your Honour, I was under the impression that

16     I was running my examination-in-chief and my friend may want to clarify

17     in cross-examination issues such as this, but it's not a proper objection

18     to a question that doesn't -- that it's not specific enough to suit

19     counsel's needs.

20             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well, it's vague as to time.

21             JUDGE MOLOTO:  We've been given a time-frame of 1992 to 1995.  If

22     you're unable to hone in on a shorter time, fine.  If you are not, that's

23     the time we have got to live with and Mr. Guy-Smith can clarify things in

24     cross-examination.

25             MS. BOLTON:  Thank you.

Page 7138

 1        Q.   Yes, Mr. Sacirbey, if you could answer my question about the

 2     kinds of issues that were discussed and during that time-frame 1992 to

 3     1995?

 4             MR. GUY-SMITH:  If I might, the importance of this is that we do

 5     have --

 6             THE INTERPRETER:  The speakers are kindly asked to make pauses

 7     before question and answer for the benefit of the accused.

 8             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I hope you heard what the interpreter said.

 9             Mr. Guy-Smith, you can start your -- what you wanted to say.

10             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Yes, if I might, we do have an indictment here

11     and the indictment period is discrete and does not cover the entire

12     period of time that Ms. Bolton's question discusses.

13             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Madam Bolton, how I now understand Mr. Guy-Smith

14     is -- you are going outside the time-frame of the indictment.

15             MS. BOLTON:  Well, there's already been, I think, Your Honour, a

16     series of rulings in this case that indicate that matters precede the

17     indictment period may still be relevant in terms of issues such as

18     foreseeability.  What I'm trying to establish at this point in time, Your

19     Honour, the relevance is the flow of communication, the knowledge of the

20     federal -- the representatives of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

21     It's relevant that they knew of events, for example, in 1993, and I

22     appreciate that there will be a separate issue to be argued as to the

23     extent to which General Perisic was updated on any information that was

24     available, but I think it's still relevant that the FRY representatives

25     knew what was going on -- sorry, the diplomatic representatives knew what

Page 7139

 1     was going on in 1992, 1993, for example.

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Objection would be overruled then.

 3             MS. BOLTON:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 4        Q.   Sorry, Mr. Sacirbey, if we could go back then.  We were talking

 5     about generalities here of the time-period of 1992 to 1995, and if you

 6     could just highlight for us what kind of issues were typically discussed

 7     with the FRY mission by your representatives?

 8        A.   Certainly the primary issue we would try to bring to their

 9     attention are the reports of various atrocities, actions, military

10     actions within Bosnia-Herzegovina, and of course the implications for the

11     population as well as the country.  The FRY may also wish to discuss the

12     issue of sanctions.  Within that context we may also ask the transport of

13     military goods and other goods or people that may in fact come from

14     Serbian Montenegro into Bosnia-Herzegovina.  We may discuss, in fact, the

15     status of Serbian Montenegro at the United Nations.  We may discuss,

16     depending on the moment, the various reports issued by the

17     Secretary-General reporting on the condition of the population on the

18     military actions, where those military actions may have come from, and of

19     course the consequences for the humanitarian situation, things like

20     delivery of food and medicines.

21             I'm sure I can go on for quite sometime, but I hope that serves

22     the purpose.

23        Q.   And when you use the word "we may discuss," are you indicating

24     that these issues were or were not discussed?

25        A.   No, they were.  Again, of course, keeping in mind the time-frame,

Page 7140

 1     all of these issues were discussed.

 2        Q.   Tell me, was there ever a time between May 1992 and the 24th day

 3     of November, 1998, when the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was not

 4     represented at the United Nations in New York?

 5        A.   Not that I can recall.

 6        Q.   I take it, sir, that there were times when the Bosnian war was

 7     the subject of discussions in the General Assembly?

 8        A.   That is correct.  We, in fact, initiated such a discussion as

 9     early as the fall of -- actually late summer fall of 1992.

10        Q.   And were there occasions when the Bosnian war was also the

11     subjects of discussions at the Security Council?

12        A.   That was very frequent.

13        Q.   And to the best of your recollection, were there ever occasions

14     when the subject of the Bosnian war was being discussed in either of

15     those forums when someone from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia's

16     mission was not present?

17        A.   I cannot recall such a moment.

18        Q.   Were there any occasions between May of 1992 and the end of 1995

19     when you were permitted to address the Security Council on matters

20     relating to Bosnia-Herzegovina?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   On the occasions that you spoke, could you tell us how frequently

23     or infrequently someone from the FRY, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, was

24     present, and by that I mean a member of their mission?

25        A.   As far as I know, they were always present.

Page 7141

 1        Q.   In the context of having discussions at the General Assembly and

 2     the Security Council at the United Nations, would I be correct in

 3     assuming that there had to have been some efforts for the Security

 4     Council and General Assembly to keep abreast of what was happening in the

 5     region?

 6        A.   That is correct.

 7        Q.   What sources of information did the Security Council have

 8     available to it in terms of what was actually happening in the region?

 9        A.   First of all, they may have had various reports from the

10     Secretariat, that is UN representative agencies.  Whether it was UNPROFOR

11     or such other missions, rapporteurs, as those were institutions directly

12     associated with the United Nations, and there were multiple such

13     institutions.

14             They may have also received reports from other international

15     institutions, for example, the EU monitoring mission.  They may have

16     received reports from related institutions, for example, various

17     groupings of states, and of course, they would receive information from

18     member states themselves, and those member states might in fact also

19     include media reports.

20        Q.   And you've used the word "may" again, does that mean they did or

21     did not have information available from the sources you've listed?

22        A.   In fact in all of those instances were reflected at least on

23     several occasions in actual sources.  I do know that, of course, even

24     Bosnia-Herzegovina, in my capacity as ambassador, did at times convey to

25     the Security Council media reports.

Page 7142

 1        Q.   You mentioned the fact that information was available from

 2     UNPROFOR at times, and I wonder if I could ask you to turn to tab 15A in

 3     the binder that's before you.  And this is 65 ter number 5986.

 4        A.   We are having just a little bit of difficulty identifying the

 5     document.

 6        Q.   It should be tab 15A.

 7        A.   It was just in a separate book, I believe.

 8        Q.   No, it should be in that -- oh, yes, sorry, you have the Bosnian

 9     translations, you are correct.  I'm sorry.

10        A.   Yeah.  Thank you.  Okay.  And what is the number --

11        Q.   I am sorry, it's 65 ter 5986, and the title at the top of the

12     document should be "UNPROFOR Press and Information Press Release, 16

13     March, 1993."

14        A.   That is correct.

15        Q.   My question is with respect to the release of information from

16     UNPROFOR, how often did they release press releases such as this one

17     during the time-period of the conflict?

18        A.   It was frequent but by no means comprehensive.

19        Q.   Sorry, I don't know what you mean by comprehensive?

20        A.   The information was released very frequently, but it does not

21     mean that in fact every and any information was released.

22        Q.   Would the information that the Security Council be the same as

23     the information that was released to the press?

24        A.   Not necessarily.  We have been -- we know that there were some

25     confidential briefings that were given to the Security Council as a

Page 7143

 1     whole, but more likely at least to some Security Council members.  But by

 2     and large, most of the information that was available to the Security

 3     Council was eventually available to all member states, to others that

 4     were part of the diplomatic staff, and of course the media.

 5        Q.

 6             MS. BOLTON:  If that document, Your Honour, could be marked as

 7     the next exhibit.

 8             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Document is admitted.  May it please be given an

 9     exhibit number.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, the document will become Exhibit

11     P2430.

12             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you so much.

13             Yes, Madam Bolton.

14             MS. BOLTON:  Thank you.

15        Q.   In your capacity as ambassador for Bosnia-Herzegovina, did you

16     have access to any sources of information that wouldn't have been

17     available to the Security Council?

18        A.   Yes, I would.

19        Q.   Were there ever occasions when you came into possession of

20     information that you wanted to place in front of the Security Council or

21     make them aware of?

22        A.   Yes, I would.

23        Q.   How would you go about doing that?

24        A.   Well, as we just discussed, once a document was made a document

25     of the General Assembly or the Security Council, then in fact it was

Page 7144

 1     available to all, and it was quote unquote a public document.  So to the

 2     extent that we in fact would received information from any source that we

 3     believe was credible, we would then submit it to either to the

 4     Secretary-General's office or more likely to the president of the

 5     Security Council or in some instances it may have been also made a

 6     document to the General Assembly.  Regardless, when we requested that it

 7     be distributed as a document of those bodies, of those institution, then

 8     in fact it would be a public document.

 9        Q.   And in what form would you report the information?

10        A.   What we would do is we would attach a letter to one of these

11     institutions, most of the times it was the president of the Security

12     Council, asking that in fact that information be distributed as a

13     document of the Security Council.  At that point in time, again it would

14     be a public document.

15        Q.   And was the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, notwithstanding the

16     issue of its status, receiving copies of your documents?

17        A.   Yes, it was.  And in some instances we would actually make

18     certain that those documents would be even directly mailed to the

19     representatives of or and to other member states.  So that in fact some

20     of the documents may have even gone directly from our office.

21        Q.   Apart from the fact that some of the documents were mailed, how

22     else do you know that they were in fact receiving copies of your

23     correspondence?

24        A.   Once in fact -- actually, I want to make sure I'm correct in my

25     representation.  Most of the times, at least during that time-frame,

Page 7145

 1     documents were either faxed to other countries, or they may have been

 2     hand delivered.  But once a document was made a document of the United

 3     Nations Security Council or the other institution that I mentioned, then

 4     all member statements in fact would receive that, and we knew that in

 5     fact the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia/Serbian Montenegro was on the

 6     distribution list.  Needless to say, these documents were sometimes

 7     discussed, they were part of those discussions that we mentioned before

 8     with representatives of Serbian Montenegro.

 9        Q.   Any reason to believe that representatives from the Federal

10     Republic of Yugoslavia mission read any of your letters?

11        A.   Simply because there was reply either in person or subsequent in

12     some form of a formal response.  I am not aware of any instance where

13     those documents had caught anyone by surprise at the Federal Republic of

14     Yugoslavia.  That is that somehow they did not receive it.

15        Q.   What kinds of topics would you discuss in your correspondence,

16     typically?

17        A.   Most of the time they related, of course, again to the human

18     situation on the ground.  The abuse of the population, what we referred

19     to at that time as genocide, and we still believe it.  What we discussed

20     as the humanitarian situation, the interruption of food and medicines.

21     Frequently the supply of military goods and men coming from Serbian

22     Montenegro, attacks initiated from across the border, violations of

23     sanctions, violations of the border monitoring.  And in some instances,

24     of course, we may have relayed -- particular conditions may be related it

25     to Bosnia-Herzegovinian citizens being held in the other neighbouring

Page 7146

 1     countries, particularly Serbian Montenegro.

 2        Q.   And what were you -- sorry, would you be able to estimate or give

 3     us any idea of how many letters you might have written between 1992 and

 4     1995 on the topics that you articulated?

 5        A.   We were quite persistent.  We of course tried to convey not only

 6     the specific deeds that were involved, but a systematic approach on the

 7     part of the forces of Serbian Montenegro and their agents in Bosnia.  I

 8     would say we probably averaged a document more frequent than every other

 9     day.  Let's say about 200 documents a year.  Sometimes multiple documents

10     during even a single day.

11        Q.   What were you trying to achieve by writing that many letters?

12        A.   In part each one of those events needed to be noted, particularly

13     if there was something that was related to the human condition.  I felt

14     it was my obligation to take note of each victim, take note of each crime

15     committed against the Bosnian people.  I did not wish those victims to be

16     forgotten.  So that was my way of conveying some sort of respect to their

17     individual identity.  But also, it was important, I think, to convey that

18     there was a systematic effort underway to not only undermine the

19     sovereignty and territorial integrity of Bosnia-Herzegovina, but in fact

20     to engage in great violations of international humanitarian law, that is

21     genocide.

22        Q.   Who were you trying to convey that to?

23        A.   Of course, the international community as a whole.  The member

24     states.  The media.  And of course Serbian Montenegro.

25        Q.   We began this discussion by talking about information that was

Page 7147

 1     available to the Security Council in making their decisions and you

 2     indicated that one of the sources of information were media reports.  Can

 3     you tell us what kind of access to media resources such as television,

 4     radio, newspaper, delegates had at the UN headquarters?

 5        A.   We would have access of course to all of that through various

 6     channels, but we might also have access to more in the view of the fact

 7     that most media institutions, or at least a the larger ones are

 8     represented at the United Nations.  There are various media reports that

 9     were also put out beyond the normal channels in what was called the UN

10     correspondence association area on the third floor of UN headquarters.

11     We may in fact have some of these media reports also sent out to us

12     specifically by such reporters.  On several occasions certainly I was

13     contacted directly either to ask questions or more accurately, I guess,

14     in response to your question, to convey certain pieces of information

15     that might be relevant to the work of the United Nations Security

16     Council.

17        Q.   You talked about there being a correspondence association area on

18     the third floor of UN headquarters.  Would you have to go up and get

19     information or request information from them, or would they distribute it

20     without asking, or what was the procedure?

21        A.   First of all, at the time when I was present, and I believe that

22     practice still continues, countries and sometimes media institutions will

23     put out the reports in like a filer.  And also of course sometimes those

24     filers would be actually directly faxed or sent to all the member states.

25             Most of the time that was employed by other member states, but at

Page 7148

 1     times it could be also employed by some of the media organisations.

 2        Q.   Okay.  One of the resources I was asking about was television.

 3     What access to television coverage was there at the UNHQ,

 4     UN Headquarters?

 5        A.   There was, of course, the United Nations TV which was something

 6     that was available to all -- well, let me rephrase that.  It was

 7     available to in fact all of Manhattan on cable.  And I know that my

 8     mission in fact did have access to that UN television channel.  And then

 9     of course we would have access to all the other media, in particular CNN,

10     BBC, the other major broadcast stations in the United States, ABC, CBS,

11     NBC, at that time.  And they --

12        Q.   When you say you may have -- sorry.  When you are talking about

13     we had access, are you talking specifically about your mission?  Or are

14     you talking about this being available in public areas or something else

15     entirely?

16        A.   Yes, I think I should be very specific.  I know what I had

17     available to my mission, and of course I could easily move the channels

18     around.  I know also that in several public areas of the United Nations

19     including at the United Nations Security Council delegates area, there

20     was a television set up.  Most of the time it was broadcasting CNN.

21        Q.   And that delegates area is the area you've already discussed as

22     being by the Security Council anti-room; is that correct?

23        A.   That is correct.  It's the UN Security Council lounge.

24        Q.   Okay.  I want to now start to deal with the situation in

25     Bosnia-Herzegovina chronologically, sir.  And if we could -- if you could

Page 7149

 1     turn your mind back to May 1992, can you tell us what the situation was

 2     the time you assumed your post with respect to the ability of the

 3     government of Bosnia-Herzegovina to acquire arms?

 4        A.   Bosnia and Herzegovina was deemed to be subject to an arms

 5     embargo imposed upon what at that time was the Socialist Federal Republic

 6     of Yugoslavia or actually the territory of the former Yugoslavia.

 7        Q.   Could you turn to tab 5 in the binder that you previously had.

 8     And this is --

 9        A.   Yes, we are going there.

10        Q.   Thank you.  It's 65 ter 6036.

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   You were just talking about an arms embargo having been imposed

13     on the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.  Could you look at this

14     document and tell me if this is the document that you were discussing.

15        A.   Yes.  And this document was referred to in subsequent

16     resolutions.  That's why I'm very familiar with it.

17        Q.   Okay.

18             MS. BOLTON:  Could this document please be tendered as an

19     exhibit, Your Honours.

20             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Its admitted.  May it please be given an exhibit

21     number.

22             THE REGISTRAR:  The document will become Exhibit P2431,

23     Your Honours.

24             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you so much.  Yes, ma'am.

25             MS. BOLTON:

Page 7150

 1        Q.   You indicated that this arms embargo resolution was referred to

 2     in subsequent documents, and if you could turn to the next page in that

 3     same tab, you should see a document 65 ter 4997.

 4        A.   We are just having a little difficulty locating it, let me make

 5     sure.  Resolution 740?

 6        Q.   Yes.  And if you could look at chapter -- sorry, brief

 7     indulgence.

 8             Yes, on the first page you have before you there's paragraph that

 9     starts with the words underlined "expressing concern," do you see that?

10        A.   Yes, I do.

11        Q.   Is this one of the resolutions, then, that referred to

12     Resolution 713?

13        A.   That is correct.  Although, I will note again that I was not the

14     permanent representative of Bosnia at that time.

15        Q.   I take it you weren't present then when this resolution was

16     discussed?

17        A.   No, I was not.

18        Q.   Okay.  Are you able it to say, sir, whether this text is a

19     authentic copy of Resolution 740?

20        A.   Again, because it was referred to by subsequent resolutions, I

21     did review all of these during my tenure, yes.

22             MS. BOLTON:  Could this be marked as an exhibit, please,

23     Your Honour.

24             JUDGE MOLOTO:  It is so marked.  May it please be given an

25     exhibit number.

Page 7151

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit P2432, Your Honours.

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.

 3             Madam Bolton.

 4             MS. BOLTON:

 5        Q.   At any point during May 1992 to the end of 1995, was there any

 6     discussion of lifting the arms embargo with respect to Bosnia and

 7     Herzegovina?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   Who initiated that discussion generally?

10        A.   Certainly Bosnia-Herzegovina did, but there were other states who

11     felt that the situation was one where Serbian Montenegro was in fact

12     fully armed while Bosnia-Herzegovina was left without the means to defend

13     its sovereignty and territorial integrity and that in fact the arms

14     embargo created an uneven situation where in fact contributed to the

15     conflict rather than reduced it.

16        Q.   Did the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia ever take a position on

17     the issue either orally or in writing, of whether -- and the issue I mean

18     whether the arms embargo with respect to Bosnia-Herzegovina should be

19     lifted?

20        A.   It was very clear in its preparations that the arms embargo

21     should continue with respect to Bosnia-Herzegovina.

22        Q.   Was any explanation offered as to why they were opposed to

23     lifting the arms embargo?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   What was the explanation?

Page 7152

 1        A.   That, in fact, Bosnia was -- if Bosnia-Herzegovina, as they

 2     referred to us at that time Bosnian Muslims were given weapons that it

 3     would somehow increase the war, increase the fighting, and that in fact

 4     it would just only fuel the conflict.

 5        Q.   Next document I'd like or development I'd like to discuss with

 6     you, sir, is Resolution 752 which we'll find at tab 6 of the binder.  And

 7     this is already in evidence as Exhibit P201.

 8        A.   Yes, thank you, I have it.

 9        Q.   Now, my first question is, the date on this resolution is the

10     15th of May, 1992, which was before you officially became the ambassador

11     of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  Could you tell us whether you were present when

12     this resolution was debated and passed?

13        A.   Actually, I was present because by then our admission to the

14     United Nations was envisioned, and I was acted as an informal

15     representative of the Bosnia-Herzegovina at the time.

16        Q.   And we've already talked a bit about the fact that there was a

17     transition period with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the

18     Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the change in delegates, can

19     you recall whether there was anyone from Serbian Montenegro in attendance

20     when this was discussed, or from the Socialist --

21        A.   Yes, I can.

22        Q.   Or from the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?

23        A.   At that time I believe the name was only used Yugoslavia, and,

24     yes, there was present.

25        Q.   Who, do you remember?

Page 7153

 1        A.   I do not.  I do not remember the individual by name.

 2        Q.   The resolution, looking at the first page of the document, it's

 3     divided obviously into paragraphs, and the third paragraph on the first

 4     page starts with the words "deeply concerned."  Have you located that

 5     paragraph, sir?

 6        A.   I'm just -- yes, I have.

 7        Q.   It says:

 8             "Deeply concerned about the serious situation in certain parts of

 9     the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and in particular

10     about the rapid and violent deterioration of the situation in

11     Bosnia-Herzegovina."

12             And I am going to go slower, I'm sorry.  And then there is, if

13     you would turn your attention to - brief indulgence - the second page,

14     there are numbered paragraphs, there's a numbered paragraph 6, where

15     there is a reference to: "the forcible expulsion of persons from the

16     areas where they live and attempts to change the ethnic composition of

17     the population."  My question for you, sir, is could you tell us what

18     events in Bosnia-Herzegovina, what was going on that prompted the

19     inclusion of that language by the Security Council?

20        A.   First of all, there were reports received from independent

21     sources including UN sources, European sources, certain human rights

22     groups and media.  Also at that time with Dr. Haris Silajdzic, the

23     foreign minister of Bosnia, we had started to provide our own information

24     to the Secretary-General's office regarding the events.  As well as to

25     certain member states who in fact accorded us an opportunity to meet with

Page 7154

 1     them.  And I remember this very vividly because one of the discussions

 2     was, Do we call these events genocide?

 3        Q.   Okay.  I'm sorry, sir, I've got to interrupt you because --

 4        A.   Yeah.

 5        Q.   -- we are going to need to take a break in a moment.  But could

 6     you just answer the question which was, you know, what were the actual

 7     events before we discuss how they were or weren't going to be

 8     characterised.

 9        A.   Yes, they were already events happening.  In particular, we were

10     out in the Drina river valley, several towns at that time were under

11     attack.  We knew that in fact individuals either had been murdered or

12     forced out of their homes.  We had seen refugees coming to other urban

13     centres in the region, like Sarajevo or central Bosnia, and there were of

14     course many refugees already pouring outside of the borders of Bosnia and

15     Herzegovina, and we were trying as best as we could to accumulate these

16     reports or rely upon other independent sources.

17             MS. BOLTON:  Okay.  We'll come back to this issue, but I think

18     it's time for tour next break, sir.  We'll take a break and come back at

19     quarter to 6.00.  Court adjourned.

20                           --- Recess taken at 5.19 p.m.

21                           --- On resuming at 5.47 p.m.

22             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Madam Bolton.

23             MS. BOLTON:  Thank you.

24        Q.   Mr. Sacirbey, before the break you were talking about reports you

25     were receiving from the Drina river valley, around the time that preceded

Page 7155

 1     or were part of the discussion of Resolution 752, and you talked about

 2     the fact that individuals were either being murdered or forced out of

 3     their homes.  When you talk about individuals, who are you referring to?

 4        A.   I'm referring to the non-Serb population, particularly the

 5     Bosniak or Bosnian Muslim population, but also any of those that in fact

 6     stood up the para-military as well as the regular military forces that at

 7     that time were occupying Bosnia-Herzegovina.

 8        Q.   Apart from the reports from the Drina river valley, were you

 9     receiving reports from any other regions at the time?

10        A.   Yes, we were receiving some reports from the Krajina region, some

11     reports from Herzegovina, which is the southwestern part of

12     Bosnia-Herzegovina, and of course Sarajevo.  At that time Sarajevo had

13     practically been encircled and was already under sniper fire and

14     shelling.

15        Q.   Okay.  I'm looking at again the text of Resolution 752, and I

16     note that at numbered paragraph 3, that the Security Council included a

17     demand that all forms of interference from outside Bosnia-Herzegovina,

18     including by units of the Yugoslavia People's Army as well as elements of

19     the Croatian army, cease immediately.  Can you tell me why there was

20     reference to the Yugoslav People's Army or JNA are included in this

21     resolution?

22        A.   Yes, the JNA was involved, if not always in actual campaigns of

23     what was then called ethnic purification, then they in fact were involved

24     in consolidating those position that were achieved through ethnic

25     cleansing or purification, and in fact they were also involved in the

Page 7156

 1     siege of Sarajevo and several other towns.  The JNA had been asked to

 2     leave by the government of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, in fact

 3     had not complied, and we viewed them as in fact not only a combat as an

 4     adversary to the territorial integrity and sovereignty of

 5     Bosnia-Herzegovina.

 6        Q.   There is a further reference in this document, and I'm looking at

 7     the first page of the document, sixth paragraph from the top, paragraph

 8     starts with the words "having considered" and there is then a reference

 9     to an announcement made by Belgrade on the 4th of May, 1992?

10        A.   Yes, I note that.

11        Q.   Yes.  What was the announcement that Belgrade made?

12        A.   Under pressure Belgrade in fact was asked to withdraw from -- any

13     of its military forces from Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and

14     in fact was supposed to comply under that provision.

15        Q.   I'm sorry, so the announcement from Belgrade then, was that to

16     the effect that they would comply or not comply, or?

17        A.   As we understood it, it was one that they would comply.  But

18     there was, of course, some lack of commitment that we understood there.

19        Q.   In terms of information that was subsequently received in the

20     wake of that announcement by your government, and by that I mean the

21     government of Bosnia-Herzegovina, what did you understand was happening

22     with respect to the -- to the withdrawal of the JNA?

23        A.   We received very little indication that actually withdrawal had

24     been underway, and there were even indications to the contrary.

25        Q.   As far as your government was concerned, what was happening with

Page 7157

 1     the JNA troops in Bosnia-Herzegovina?

 2        A.   Certainly it had been hoped at the beginning of the year that the

 3     JNA would at least be a neutral force, if not somehow providing some

 4     sense of nullifying the para-military force that had already become

 5     active.  But at this time it was quite evident that the JNA was in fact

 6     undertaking military operations which were against the territorial

 7     integrity and sovereignty of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and, of course in

 8     particular, in many ways inflicting harm upon the population as well as

 9     besieging cities.

10        Q.   Sorry, my question wasn't specific enough.  When I referred to

11     what was happening with the JNA, I meant to be specific to the issue of

12     whether -- we were talking about whether it was withdrawn.  What was your

13     understanding as to what the JNA was doing in terms of the actual

14     withdrawal?

15        A.   We had no indications of withdrawal, I certainly was not given

16     indications and my government felt there that was no withdrawal.

17        Q.   So if the troops weren't withdrawing, what were they doing?

18        A.   They were staying put, actually in some cases digging in, and as

19     I said we actually received some indications that even new troops and new

20     materiel was coming across the Drina river, from Serbian Montenegro to be

21     more precise.  Some troops had also by the way come in from the other

22     side, withdrawing JNA troops had come in from Croatia, presumably

23     withdrawing through Bosnia-Herzegovina to Serbian Montenegro but in fact

24     had stayed in Bosnia-Herzegovina.  I should also emphasise that point.

25        Q.   And those troops that stayed in Bosnia-Herzegovina, did they stay

Page 7158

 1     under the banner of the JNA?

 2        A.   Of course depends on the time-frame, but yes, through May they

 3     did.  The time-frame of this resolution, that is accurate.

 4        Q.   And post-May?

 5        A.   At some point in time, we were informed that in fact these troops

 6     had changed in effect the banner, as you called it, or the patch on their

 7     uniforms and in fact had redesignated themselves as the Army of Republika

 8     Srpska, and overnight or within a matter of minutes they had gone from

 9     being the Army of Yugoslavia, that is Serbian Montenegro, into the Army

10     of Republika Srpska.

11        Q.   Was that information available to the Security Council or just to

12     your government?

13        A.   That information was issued subsequently in a report to the

14     Security Council which, to be very honest, at least caught me by surprise

15     because we did not see a substantive withdrawal of the JNA.

16        Q.   We'll come back to that issue in a moment, just for

17     clarification, sir, but I want to look at one further part of this

18     resolution, which is found at numbered paragraph 4 on the second page of

19     the resolution.

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   And could you tell us what was suppose to happen to the weaponry

22     the JNA had in Bosnia-Herzegovina according to this provision?

23        A.   Well, this was a key point, and it was certainly consistent with

24     the arms embargo resolution which is that the weapons that were part of

25     the JNA, and remember the JNA was of course an army of all Yugoslavia

Page 7159

 1     including its former republics, that is Croatia, Slovenia,

 2     Bosnia-Herzegovina, so the weapons in fact were either supposed to be

 3     left within the authority of the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina or to

 4     be placed under United Nations monitoring or actually control, I

 5     shouldn't even say the monitoring.  It was supposed to be delivered to

 6     the international body.

 7        Q.   Does the provisions actually indicate the weapons are to be left

 8     under the authority of the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

 9        A.   It says "... or subject to the authority of the government of

10     Bosnia-Herzegovina or be disbanded and disarmed with their weapons placed

11     under effective international monitoring."  The point was that since we

12     were the legal authority we, of course, had the right to those weapons if

13     in fact the international did not take control of them.

14        Q.   I believe that document is already an exhibit in these

15     proceedings, so if I could ask you to turn to the next document in your

16     binder.  Sorry, actually to tab 3 in your binder, I'm sorry --

17        A.   Okay.

18        Q.   -- which is 65 ter 9183.  You should have a document before you

19     that appears to have a date of 27 May, 1992, you described as a letter

20     from the Charge d'affair of the permanent mission of the government of

21     Yugoslavia.  Do you see that document?

22        A.   That's correct, yes, I do.

23        Q.   Okay.  Who authored this -- first, do you recognise this

24     document, sir?

25        A.   Yes, I do.

Page 7160

 1        Q.   The first page looks like it's signed by Dragomir Dzokic, and

 2     then there is an annex which is signed by Branko Kostic.  Who is

 3     Mr. Kostic?

 4        A.   As outlined in the document, he's vice-president at the time of

 5     the Serbian Montenegro, the FRY.

 6        Q.   You said you recognised this document, where did you recognise it

 7     from, sir?

 8        A.   I actually received -- excuse me, I'm rushing into your answers.

 9     I apologise to the interpreters.  I recognise it as having in fact been

10     relevant to the discussion as to whether or not the Federal Republic of

11     Yugoslavia, that is, the JNA forces had withdrawn from

12     Bosnia-Herzegovina.

13        Q.   Did you receive a copy of this document back in May 1992, to the

14     best of your recollection?

15             THE INTERPRETER:  You are kindly requested to switch off your

16     microphones while not using them, you are also kindly requested to pause

17     between questions and answers.  Interpreters are having a lot of

18     background noise, thank you.

19             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.  Madam Bolton.

20             MS. BOLTON:

21        Q.   Sorry, sir, you can speak now.

22        A.   Okay.  Thank you.  Yes, I actually -- I remember seeing it

23     several days, well, a day or two after it was released.

24        Q.   Okay.  Sir, there's three aspects of this document I'd like to

25     discuss with you.  The first aspect you'll find at -- the first aspect

Page 7161

 1     you've already averted to, which is the issue of whether they were

 2     complying with Resolution 752.  And if I could turn your attention to

 3     page 3, there is a paragraph and that -- sorry, is page 3 of the entire

 4     document, is page 2 of the annex.  And there's a paragraph that starts

 5     with the word "thirdly"?

 6        A.   Yes, I see that.

 7        Q.   Okay.  There is an indication here -- the text reads:

 8             "Thirdly, the Presidency of Yugoslavia decided on the day of the

 9     promulgation of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,

10     that is on 27th April, 1992, that it would reduce the Army of Yugoslavia

11     to the territory and citizens of Yugoslavia.  As a result, all of the

12     citizens of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia who had been in the YPA,

13     Yugoslav People's Army, troops, in that republic were withdrawn by 19th

14     May, 1992, together with their share of equipment and armaments."

15             I'm going to ask about that last phrase, "together with their

16     share of equipment and armaments."  Had there been any discussion at the

17     Security Council surrounding Resolution 752 to suggest that the JNA was

18     entitled to take with it a share of equipment and armaments?

19        A.   First of all, there was no such discussion that in fact any of

20     the military weapons would be left in the hands of those other than the

21     legitimate government of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  As you can

22     see from this paragraph, there is no reference to the government of

23     Bosnia-Herzegovina.  They frequently just referred to that authority in

24     Sarajevo as the Muslims.  Second of all, you asked me if I had seen this

25     letter before.  I did not view it as being authoritative on the issue of

Page 7162

 1     whether or not the United Nations itself had in fact concluded that

 2     Resolution 752 had been complied with, and when I saw this letter, I did

 3     not believe that in fact that resolution had been complied with.  And

 4     this particular paragraph it itself indicates that it had not been

 5     because it implies that in fact some of the weapons was not delivered

 6     either to international control, that is UN control, or to the control of

 7     the legitimate government of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

 8        Q.   The second aspects of the letter I want to direct you to is the

 9     paragraph directly above the paragraph we've just been discussing, and

10     that's the paragraph that starts with the word "secondly."

11             The text reads:

12             "Secondly" --

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   "...  the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has demonstrated a

15     maximum degree of tolerance with respect to the premature decisions on

16     the international recognition of Bosnia and Herzegovina."

17             Could you tell me what we are talking about when we talk about a

18     country being internationally recognised?

19             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Excuse me.

20             Mr. Guy-Smith.

21             MR. GUY-SMITH:  I take it that we are asking the question in the

22     same manner that we've asked it before which is factual and not legal in

23     nature.

24             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Madam Bolton.

25             MS. BOLTON:  Yes, Your Honour.

Page 7163

 1             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Any response?

 2             MS. BOLTON:

 3        Q.   Yes, sir.  Could you answer the question I posed.

 4             JUDGE MOLOTO:  No, no.  Any response to the objection?

 5             MS. BOLTON:  My friend was I thought asking for clarification

 6     that I was asking it as a factual question not as a legal question, I'm

 7     asking for his understanding of a term of art at the UN.

 8             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.  I thought --

 9             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Then I have an objection with regard to relevance

10     of what his understanding of "a term of art at the UN" may be.  It either

11     has legal significance or it doesn't.

12             THE WITNESS:  Your Honour, if I may interject.  This is the

13     witness, Mr. Sacirbey, if I may interject, Your Honour, I can maybe help

14     explain.

15             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Yes.  You want to interject, Mr. Sacirbey, yes?

16             THE WITNESS:  Yes, maybe I can help clarify the issue that seems

17     to be coming back as to whether these are legal or factual issues.

18             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Yes, you what do you want to tell us?

19             THE WITNESS:  Well, Your Honour, of course these issues have a

20     legal context, but in fact I was dealing with them in the factual

21     elements of the institutions within which I was working.  Whether my

22     legal interpretations were accurate or not, I don't believe is something

23     that is particularly at issue here.  It is in fact in how these matters

24     were being handled in the context of my responsibilities as a

25     representative of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and therefore that is what I am --

Page 7164

 1     I believe I am addressing here, Your Honour.

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Okay.  Would you like to perhaps find out how he

 3     handled it in his capacity as a representative of the Republic of

 4     Bosnia-Herzegovina.

 5             MS. BOLTON:  Certainly.

 6        Q.   Sir, can you explain to me in terms of the job that you had to do

 7     as ambassador, was it significant to you whether or not

 8     Bosnia-Herzegovina was recognised internationally?

 9        A.   It was very significant.  First of all, every country that

10     recognised Bosnia-Herzegovina then accredited it certain rights to

11     Bosnia-Herzegovina, including treaty obligations, including various

12     matters related to international relations, but most importantly, each

13     country that recognizes Bosnia-Herzegovina at that time also recognizes

14     its territorial integrity and sovereignty.

15             From this then we could also develop our membership in

16     international institution, including the United Nations.  It would be

17     very difficult for Bosnia-Herzegovina to be admitted to an international

18     body like the United Nations unless there was either an existing

19     recognition or an intent to recognise Bosnia within its existing borders,

20     its territorial integrity.  Also, Bosnia when it in fact applies for

21     membership, commits itself to abide by the rules of that international

22     institution and also to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty

23     of neighbouring states.  In particular in this context we represented on

24     numerous occasions that we would respect the territorial integrity and

25     sovereignty of Serbian Montenegro; that is, the Federal Republic of

Page 7165

 1     Yugoslavia.

 2        Q.   At any point during the conflict, so 1992 to 1995, did the

 3     Federal Republic of Yugoslavia reciprocate and recognise

 4     Bosnia-Herzegovina?

 5        A.   No, it did not.

 6        Q.   Was it ever called upon to do so?

 7        A.   Yes, it was, on numerous occasions.

 8        Q.   By whom?

 9        A.   First of all by Bosnia-Herzegovina, and second of all by other

10     international institutions or let's say member states.

11        Q.   During the conflict, did you become aware at any point in time of

12     the strategic objectives of the Bosnian Serbs?

13        A.   Yes, I did, but to be more accurate, we understood it as

14     strategic objectives of Serbian Montenegro along with their allies in

15     Bosnia-Herzegovina.

16        Q.   What do you recall as some of those objectives being?

17        A.   It was --

18             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Sorry, I'm not quite sure whether you are on the

19     same page.  Your question was about strategic objectives of Bosnian

20     Serbs, the answer was:

21             "We understood it as strategic objectives of Serbian Montenegro

22     along with their allies in Bosnia-Herzegovina."

23             MS. BOLTON:  Thank you, I will clarify, Your Honour.  I

24     understand your point.

25        Q.   When you are talking about the allies of Serbian Montenegro in

Page 7166

 1     Bosnia-Herzegovina, who are you referring to?

 2        A.   We refer today them frequently, to be again more accurate, I

 3     appreciate Your Honour's comment as well, as their agents.  Sometimes we

 4     would refer to them as the Pale Serbs.  Sometimes we would refer to them

 5     by the general designation of Serbian.  We actually did not refer to them

 6     as representing all of the Bosnian Serbs and did not accredit them that

 7     view.

 8        Q.   Okay.  So when I speak about the Bosnian Serbs, would you equate

 9     that with the term Pale Serbs that you've just given us?

10        A.   That is correct.  We did not wish to give this conflict the

11     perspective of an ethnic or religious conflict which we believe the other

12     side did.

13        Q.   So going back then to what you understood were these joint

14     objectives shared by - according to your understanding - both Serbian

15     Montenegro and the forces in Pale, led by Pale, what do you recall about

16     those objectives?

17        A.   To put it in very broad terms, and you will please ask me to

18     specify it if anything more is needed, it is a Greater Serbia with

19     contiguous, that is, continuous borders, that in fact there would not be

20     an internationally recognised border between the Republic of

21     Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbian Montenegro.  We also recognised that the

22     territorial ambitions were rather dynamic, to use that term.  In fact,

23     that the -- if in -- I understood that in fact if all of Bosnia was

24     conquered that in fact it all would become part of some Republika Srpska

25     and that in fact that would become all part of some Greater Serbia.

Page 7167

 1        Q.   You have indicated that you believed there was commonality and

 2     objectives between the government and Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and

 3     the forces in Pale.  My question is if the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

 4     had recognised Bosnia-Herzegovina, would that have had any impact on the

 5     ability to realise what you consider to be or what you believe to be the

 6     strategic objectives?

 7             MR. GUY-SMITH:  That question is --

 8             THE WITNESS:  Absolutely.

 9             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Sorry Mr. Sacirbey.  Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.

10             MR. GUY-SMITH:  That question is both speculative and vague.

11             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Madam Bolton, would you like to answer.

12             MS. BOLTON:  The witness seems to have not had any difficulty in

13     answering the question, Your Honour.  And if the response he gives

14     indicates that he did not -- that he thought the question was too vague,

15     then we will ask follow-up questions.

16             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I'm not quite sure I find -- I don't see the

17     vagueness.  Let the witness answer and we'll hear.

18             MR. GUY-SMITH:  But -- a two-part objection.

19             JUDGE MOLOTO:  I don't understand what you are saying,

20     Mr. Guy-Smith.  You gave us one objection, now you're saying two-part

21     objection.

22             MR. GUY-SMITH:  I gave you two objections.  I said it was

23     speculative and it was vague.  The question is -- is speculative and it

24     is vague.  Thus far, we've dealt with the issue of it being vague.

25             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Would you like to say anything about speculation,

Page 7168

 1     Madam Bolton.

 2             MS. BOLTON:  In my view it doesn't call on him to speculate.  The

 3     question calls on him to give an answer, and if he can't give an answer

 4     that isn't based on speculation then he will so indicate, Your Honour,

 5     but he started to answer without any difficulty before my friend

 6     interrupted.

 7             MR. GUY-SMITH:  As a classic issue, when somebody asks a question

 8     that has within it the word "if" it is by definition speculative.

 9             JUDGE MOLOTO:  The basis for this question, as I understand it,

10     is that the witness has testified that the strategic objective was that

11     if the entire Bosnia-Herzegovina could be conquered, it would be made

12     part of a Greater Serbia.  Now, obviously if Bosnia-Herzegovina is

13     recognised, I guess it's a question of logical deduction whether or not

14     the strategic objective has been achieved or not.  And whether the

15     question is put or not, as I say, it's a very logical deduction and I

16     don't think it's speculation.  From that point --

17             MR. GUY-SMITH:  We're dealing with the issue of the -- in -- and

18     you see, the problem is that you're dealing with the issue of the impact.

19     The question is the impact.

20             JUDGE MOLOTO:  It's fine.  The impact on the strategic objective.

21     The question is allowed.

22             MS. BOLTON:

23        Q.   You may not have heard His Honour, Mr. Sacirbey, he indicated the

24     question was allowed, so could you continue your answer unless you need

25     me to repeat the question?

Page 7169

 1        A.   Thank you, Your Honour.  We certainly felt that the issue had

 2     merit in blunting the objectives on any Greater Serbia, because the

 3     recognition of Bosnia-Herzegovina by Serbian Montenegro, that is at that

 4     time the government in Belgrade, would have at least in the context of

 5     international legal terms prohibited any or all of Bosnia-Herzegovina

 6     being somehow in the future annexed into a Greater Serbia.

 7        Q.   I just want you to skip ahead in time for a moment to the talks

 8     that preceded the Dayton Accord.  Did you participate in those talks?

 9        A.   Yes, I did, as foreign minister of Bosnia at that time.

10        Q.   Was there any discussion at those peace talks around this issue

11     of a Greater Serbia?

12        A.   Yes, there was.  To be more precise on the point, the recognition

13     of Bosnia and Herzegovina was in fact a critical point with the

14     negotiations and it concluded with Serbian Montenegro recognising the

15     sovereignty and territorial integrity of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

16             There were, I must add, some efforts there to also though, at

17     least on the part of Belgrade, which was presumably negotiating on behalf

18     of the Pale Serbs, to bring about a referendum in the so-called Republika

19     Srpska at that time that would allow for Republika Srpska to declare its

20     decision to leave Bosnia-Herzegovina and presumably would be allowed to

21     join at that time Belgrade, that is Serbian Montenegro.  This point

22     ultimately was not left in the Dayton Agreement.

23        Q.   And who on behalf of Belgrade at Dayton was advancing the

24     position that there ought to be a possibility of a referendum on

25     cessation in the Republika Srpska?

Page 7170

 1        A.   Ms. Bolton, this point was addressed to us through many

 2     negotiations leading up to Dayton, but in particularly in Dayton it was

 3     the delegation of Slobodan Milosevic.

 4        Q.   If we could return to the text of the letter, the final aspect I

 5     want to discuss is the issue of paragraph -- page 4, the first paragraph.

 6     So if you would turn the page from the page that we've been dealing with.

 7     The very first --

 8        A.   I'm there.

 9        Q.   The very first paragraph says:

10             "The option of sanctions against Yugoslavia on the basis of

11     unsubstantiated claims of aggression is deeply unfair and wrong.  History

12     knows of no case of a country threatening another without using the army.

13     As of 19th May this year, not a single soldier who is a citizen of the

14     Federal Republic of Yugoslavia remains in that republic, and the borders

15     with Bosnia and Herzegovina have been closed for 30 days now for any

16     crossings of armed individuals or groups who might try to make them."

17             My question to you is this:  The text suggests that the options

18     of sanctions was being discussed against the Federal Republic of

19     Yugoslavia on the basis of claims of aggression.  Does that fairly

20     represent what was in fact happening in the discussions of the Security

21     Council?

22        A.   We referenced both aggression as well as, of course, grey

23     violations of an international humanitarian law, that is, acts against

24     our citizens as I've referred to by the term ethnic purification or

25     genocide.  And I will also note that of course this paragraph does not in

Page 7171

 1     any way reference the delivery of military goods.

 2        Q.   I'm not sure your answer was responsive to my question, which was

 3     in the context of discussions surrounding Resolution 752 --

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   -- does this text accurately summarise the reason why sanctions

 6     against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia were being considered?

 7        A.   They were being considered for two reasons.  One of them is

 8     aggression, that is interference into the affairs or more correctly

 9     violations of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of a neighbouring

10     state, that is Serbian Montenegro violating the territorial integrity and

11     sovereignty of Bosnia-Herzegovina; and second, of course, was the

12     implications that this had in terms of the population.  Violations of

13     international humanitarian law, i.e., genocide.

14        Q.   And the means by which the government of Serbian Montenegro was

15     allegedly engaged in aggression and interfering with the affairs of

16     Bosnia-Herzegovina at that time?

17        A.   The first would have been through its military forces, that is

18     regular military forces.  The second one would have been para-military

19     forces that came from Serbian Montenegro, which I believe the Court is

20     familiar with.  And the third would have been, of course, actual raids

21     across the border conducted by military forces including air power from

22     one side of the border to the next.  I guess the fourth we would say is

23     the supply of goods to whatever we designate those forces within Bosnia

24     to be to carry out this aggression and to carry out the attacks upon the

25     population.

Page 7172

 1        Q.   Notwithstanding the letter that was sent that we've been

 2     discussing, were the sanctions in fact adopted against Yugoslavia?

 3        A.   Yes, they were.

 4             MS. BOLTON:  Could this document we've been discussing please be

 5     marked as an exhibit, Your Honours.

 6             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Admitted into evidence.  May it please be given an

 7     exhibit number.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit P2433, Your Honours.

 9             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you very much.

10             Yes, Madam Bolton.

11             MS. BOLTON:  Thank you.

12        Q.   If you could turn to the next -- one moment, sir.

13                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

14             MS. BOLTON:

15        Q.   Sorry, sir.  Yes, if you could turn to the next tab in your

16     binder being tab 4, you should have in front of you a one-page document

17     which is Exhibit P334 in these proceedings.

18        A.   That's correct.

19        Q.   Can you just take a moment and look at that.  It's -- if you

20     could just read that to yourself for a moment, sir.  Yes, you've read it,

21     sir?

22        A.   Yes, I have.

23        Q.   You were telling us earlier about your recollection of some

24     strategic objectives you became aware of during the conflict.  How does

25     the text of this document compare to your recollection of what you became

Page 7173

 1     aware of during the conflict?

 2        A.   It is very consistent in that it outlines what is called the

 3     strategic objectives for the Serbian people in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

 4     However, as you can see, there are many demarcation lines even left open

 5     including particularly what I note here as Point 6:  Access to the sea

 6     for Republika Srpska, which means that this seem to be a rather open

 7     ended plan for the creation and expansion in effect of Republika Srpska

 8     with few limitations.

 9        Q.   Do you recall whether you ever saw this text while this conflict

10     was ongoing, sir.

11        A.   I do not recall seeing it at the time.  Certainly I was aware of

12     these provisions, but I do not recall seeing this text at the time.

13        Q.   And could you indicate approximately what the time-period was

14     when you first became aware of the strategic objectives?

15        A.   It was actually quite in the beginning of probably in the early

16     summer, late spring of 1992.  We certainly referenced these in the

17     context of the Greater Serbia and we used that term quite frequently.

18        Q.   If you could turn, sir, to a different exhibit.  The tab 7 in

19     your binder, which is Prosecution Exhibit 202 in these proceedings,

20     Resolution 757 of the Security Council.  Do you have that document before

21     you, sir?

22        A.   Yes, I do.

23        Q.   We were talking a few minutes ago about the fact that

24     notwithstanding the letter from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia some

25     sanctions were imposed against the fellow Republic of Yugoslavia.  My

Page 7174

 1     first question with respect to this document is were you present when it

 2     was debated and passed?  When this resolution was debated and passed?

 3        A.   Yes, I was.

 4        Q.   And what was the date this was passed?

 5        A.   If I'm not mistaken, 30th of May, 1992.

 6        Q.   If I could draw your attention to the third page of this

 7     resolution where there are again numbered paragraphs?

 8        A.   Yes, I'm there.

 9        Q.   I'm looking at numbered paragraph 1.  There is a condemnation of

10     a failure of the authorities of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to

11     take effective measures to fulfill the requirements of Resolution 752.

12     What requirements of Resolution 752 did the Security Council determine

13     had not been complied with?

14        A.   Well, as you have, I believe, indicated, despite the previous

15     letter from the authorities, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, in fact

16     there had been failure to withdraw the Yugoslav People's Army from the

17     territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

18        Q.   Looking at beginning at paragraph 4 there is a text which starts

19     with the words "decides that all states shall prevent" then there's a

20     series of subparagraphs and other paragraphs that follows.  What was the

21     effect of this resolution?  What was were the -- sorry, what was -- what

22     did the UN Security Council resolve to do?

23        A.   One of them was to obviously provide sanctions, but as

24     importantly, or more importantly, it was particularly to focus on

25     military goods that could be used to contribute to the war effort led

Page 7175

 1     against Bosnia-Herzegovina.

 2        Q.   What was the -- when you talk about sanctions, who was being

 3     sanctioned?

 4        A.   In this case it was the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, that is

 5     Serbian Montenegro, if you would, the government in Belgrade.

 6        Q.   And what was the nature of the sanctions that the Security

 7     Council imposed?

 8        A.   They had clearly political economic implications.  Political in

 9     the sense that a country should never want to be sanctioned, especially

10     under Chapter 7.  And --

11        Q.   Sorry, sir, I think -- I'm interrupting because I think you've

12     misunderstood my question.  What kinds of sanctions --

13        A.   Please.

14        Q.   What kinds of sanctions was the Security Council imposing?

15        A.   They were imposing mandatory sanctions under Chapter 7, number

16     one, so these were not voluntary to member states, they were mandatory,

17     which means that each member state had to comply with the provision as it

18     relates to their dealing with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.  Number

19     2, they in fact prevented certain goods, transshipments, dealings with

20     the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, some in a more general economic

21     nature, some very specific to products, if you would, goods that could be

22     used, particularly in a military capacity.

23        Q.   In terms of the economic sanctions, what was -- what were the

24     most important elements of that?

25        A.   Particularly trade, and transshipment of goods and of course even

Page 7176

 1     financial implications for that.

 2        Q.   In the context of the discussions that have resulted in passing

 3     of this resolution, was there any discussion of how imposing economic and

 4     other sanctions on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was going to

 5     improve matters in the region?

 6        A.   By looking it at the resolution itself, it outlined -

 7     particularly the previous paragraphs - it outlined why in fact the

 8     Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was being sanctioned, i.e., that it had

 9     not met its obligations under the previous resolution mentioned.  And as

10     a consequence, the desired objective was to compel the Federal Republic

11     of Yugoslavia to comply with that resolution, particularly as it relates

12     to its -- the presence of its forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the

13     actions of those forces both on the issue of aggression, but also the

14     issue of engaging in acts that violated the rights, that is, violated and

15     endangered of course and in many cases inflicted harm upon the population

16     of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

17        Q.   Was this the only resolution imposing sanctions against the

18     Federal Republic of Yugoslavia that was passed by the Security Council

19     during the conflict?

20        A.   No, there were actually several more, quite a few more.

21        Q.   Was there discussion in the context of those additional

22     sanctions, which I promise we will discuss in a little more detail later,

23     was there discussion of what the UN Security Council hoped to achieve by

24     sanctioning the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?

25        A.   Yes, there was.  Both in the context of the resolution, but also

Page 7177

 1     in the context of the statements made by member states of the UN Security

 2     Council.

 3        Q.   So what was the end goal of imposing sanctions on the Federal

 4     Republic of Yugoslavia?

 5        A.   To cease their direct and indirect actions as they in fact

 6     continued to fuel not only the conflict, but also, if you would the

 7     aggression, but also to in fact cease those actions that caused such harm

 8     to the population, as we have come to call them ethnic cleansing.  And

 9     also to bring about a normalization of the relationship between

10     Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbian Montenegro.  This is, of course, a

11     reference to the issue of mutual recognition, and the respect for each

12     other's territorial integrity and sovereignty and the border.

13        Q.   You talk about compelling the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to

14     cease their indirect actions.  What are you talking about?  What was

15     being alleged?

16        A.   Certainly we always knew that there were troops being sent into

17     Bosnia and coming out.  We also know that there were in fact various

18     goods of military value being sent into Bosnia-Herzegovina.  Also

19     so-called para-military forces were given largely free rein to go in and

20     conduct ethnic cleansing and brutal campaigns, and in fact there may have

21     been even what one could consider political actions by were contrary to

22     the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Bosnia-Herzegovina

23     including, of course, the failure to recognise Bosnia-Herzegovina's

24     sovereignty and territorial integrity.

25        Q.   What was the thinking at the UN Security Council in terms of what

Page 7178

 1     would happen if you could successfully eliminate the contributions that

 2     the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was alleged to be making to the

 3     conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina?

 4             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.

 5             MR. GUY-SMITH:  Well, if that's covered by a resolution, that's

 6     one matter.  But now we are dealing with the entire thinking of the UN

 7     Security Council.  The question as is presently posed is vague and I

 8     think is outside the ken of this particular witness's ability to answer

 9     what the thinking was.

10             MS. BOLTON:  I'll rephrase.

11        Q.   Was there discussion in the context of the UN Security Council as

12     to what was hoped to be achieved by eliminating the contributions that

13     were allegedly being made by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?

14        A.   It was the thinking of the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina and

15     reflected by many of the member states of the UN Security Council and

16     other independent observers that without the support, direct and indirect

17     support of Belgrade, there in fact were no viable Pale Serb forces.  That

18     is, the war would in fact be extinguished.

19        Q.   You indicated that was the thinking of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  Did

20     you share that strategy or thinking with any members of the UN Security

21     Council or the council as a whole?

22        A.   Yes, we did.  And vice-versa.

23        Q.   And did any of that -- did any of that thinking occur in the

24     context of discussions of proposed -- or any of that discussion occur in

25     the context of proposed resolutions sanctioning the Federal Government of

Page 7179

 1     Yugoslavia?

 2        A.   That is correct.  Since the objective was to end the war, to end

 3     the ethnic cleansing, obviously the resolutions were designed to stop, to

 4     impede Belgrade's continued direct and indirect support.

 5        Q.   I'm going to change topics a little, sir, and discuss Sarajevo

 6     which we've only touched on very briefly.

 7             Could you tell me what the situation in Sarajevo was in the

 8     spring and summer of 1992?

 9        A.   It dramatically changed from, let's say, mid-spring, that is

10     April, particularly after sniper attacks upon a peaceful March of

11     individuals calling for no war in Bosnia.  Several people were killed at

12     that point in time, and very quickly Sarajevo came under siege.

13             By late that spring, it was very difficult, if not impossible, to

14     come or leave Sarajevo for normal citizens.  And by the end of that

15     period, which you're referring to, Sarajevo was in a very troubled

16     humanitarian situation.  Very limited, if any, access, not only to food

17     and medicines, but even to water.

18        Q.   Under which forces were laying siege to Sarajevo?

19        A.   The Serbian forces.  And these forces particularly at that time

20     not only had encircled the city, but in fact were very frequently

21     involved in military actions from not only sniper fire, but obviously

22     bombardment.  And it was, from what I can tell, it was rather

23     indiscriminate.

24        Q.   Was the topic of the bombardment of Sarajevo and sniper fire,

25     sniper attacks in Sarajevo, were those topics discussed at all in the UN

Page 7180

 1     Security Council in the spring of 1992?

 2        A.   Yes, starting in the spring of 1992, that is correct.

 3        Q.   Just focusing on the spring and the summer of 1992, how

 4     frequently were those topics being discussed at either the UN Security

 5     Council or the General Assembly?

 6        A.   I would say almost daily.

 7        Q.   Did the Security Council pass any resolutions dealing with

 8     Sarajevo in that time-period?

 9        A.   I think it's safe enough to say that the resolutions we have

10     discussed already in fact did incorporate Sarajevo, because in part the

11     demand to withdraw the JNA troops was related to lifting the siege of

12     Sarajevo, and then of course it continued on.

13        Q.   Other than the resolutions we've already discussed, were there

14     any other resolutions passed?

15        A.   Yes, there were, but I'll need to refresh my memory as to the

16     exact time-frame that you want me to address here.

17        Q.   I'm just going to ask you to identify some documents, sir.  You

18     should still be in tab 7, and if you turn the page to the end of the

19     document we've just been discussing we should have --

20        A.   Right.

21        Q.    -- document 65 ter 2075.

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   And those are titled Security Council Resolutions 758, 760, and

24     761.

25        A.   That's correct.

Page 7181

 1        Q.   And just refresh your memory, sir, as to whether these

 2     resolutions all or any individual ones dealt with the situation in

 3     Sarajevo?

 4        A.   Yes.  At this point in time the issue of actually delivering

 5     humanitarian assistance, and even the ability of the international

 6     community to have access to Sarajevo and monitor the situation had come

 7     into play.  These resolutions dealt with that.  So we are going from

 8     resolutions that dealt with the effect of siege of Sarajevo by the JNA

 9     forces to the humanitarian situation, and even to the point where the

10     international can in fact observe and act in its ability or its mandate

11     to improve that humanitarian situation.

12             MS. BOLTON:  Okay.  If I could just ask that this -- these three

13     resolutions be marked as an exhibit, Your Honour.

14             JUDGE MOLOTO:  They are so marked.  May it please be given an

15     exhibit number.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  This document will become Exhibit P2434, Your

17     Honours.

18             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.

19             MS. BOLTON:

20        Q.   If you could turn to tab 8, please, sir.

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   You see Resolution 764, which is 65 ter 2069.  Do you have that

23     document, sir?

24        A.   I do.

25        Q.   Thank you.  Looking at the text of this document, two parts I

Page 7182

 1     want to refer you to, sir.  The first is the second column on the first

 2     page.  There's a paragraph that starts with the words "deeply disturbed."

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   "Deeply disturbed by the situation which now prevails in Sarajevo

 5     and by many reports and indications of deteriorating conditions

 6     throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina."

 7             And then if you would turn the page there is paragraph --

 8     numbered paragraphs and numbered paragraph --

 9        A.   That's correct.

10        Q.   Numbered paragraph 10 indicates:

11             "Reaffirms that all parties are bound to comply with the

12     obligations under international and humanitarian law and in particular

13     the Geneva Conventions of 12th August 1949, and that persons who commit

14     to order the commission of grave breaches of the Conventions are

15     individually responsible in respect of such breaches."

16             Was this resolution passed or triggered by any particular event

17     or events?

18        A.   Yes.  I think to tie into your questions now overall, around this

19     same period of time we had what's referred to generally as the bread-line

20     massacre, which was widely seen in the media where dozens of people had

21     been murdered by the indiscriminate shelling of civilians lined up to

22     receive bread within the town of Sarajevo.  During this period of time,

23     the humanitarian conditions had really come to deteriorate in terms to

24     access to food, medicine, water.  There were lots of reports not only of

25     sniping, but shelling.  And in particular, there were reports -- I

Page 7183

 1     shouldn't say reports, that confirmed of course information, of

 2     individuals from certain parts of Sarajevo, and Sarajevo's made up into a

 3     municipal unit, certain parts of that municipal unit in fact had been

 4     ethnically cleansed, and most of that population had been forced out of

 5     their homes.  Many actually, at least for some time detained, put into

 6     various camps, some deported outside the country, others managed to come

 7     into the territory at that time held by the government of Bosnia and

 8     Herzegovina.

 9             At that time we were also obviously demanding greater action from

10     the international community, to undertake political and/or military

11     action to lift the siege of Sarajevo, and the overall situation in

12     Bosnia-Herzegovina.  It was also the time the French President Mitterrand

13     had flown into Sarajevo.

14        Q.   Okay.  Just dealing with the text where there is discussion or

15     reminding that the parties are bound to comply with international

16     humanitarian law and the Geneva Conventions, was there discussion of

17     whether any of the events that you have articulated were being reported,

18     for example, shelling of people standing in a bread line, sniper attacks,

19     was there a discussion of whether those incidents would constitute

20     breaches of the Geneva Convention?

21        A.   Yes, there was.  There was, as you said, shelling, sniping.

22     There was attacks upon neighbourhood, that is where people were actually

23     then expelled from their home, and of course, there was a denial of those

24     necessities of life, whether it was foods, medicines, or water.  And in

25     fact, there was a denial of movement within the city because the city was

Page 7184

 1     surrounded and besieged.

 2        Q.   In terms of the involvement of the FRY delegation and the meeting

 3     that resulted in Resolution 764, was the FRY delegation represented to

 4     the best of your recollection?

 5        A.   Yes, they were.

 6        Q.   Did you raise the issue of either the bread-line massacre or the

 7     siege generally with the delegation, the mission, FRY mission in New

 8     York?

 9        A.   I did and my staff.  Just to add to your point before, by then in

10     fact our staff had expanded to several individuals although we were still

11     working out of my private business office.

12        Q.   You mentioned that the bread-line massacre was widely reported in

13     the media.  How much media attention did events in Sarajevo attract

14     generally between 1992 and 1995?

15        A.   Tremendous amount.  I don't think I was necessarily biased in

16     that perspective.  It was rather impossible to ignore, almost in any news

17     report.

18        Q.   And how much communication did you have, if any, as the Bosnian

19     ambassador with the press?

20        A.   Extensive at that time.  I probably was giving several interviews

21     a day, maybe four, five, six on the average.

22        Q.   Were there any accredited journalists at the United Nations from

23     within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?

24        A.   Yes, there were.  I seem to recall at least two most of the time.

25        Q.   Would you by chance remember anyone's name or what agency they

Page 7185

 1     worked for?

 2        A.   I don't remember names to be very honest with you, but I do

 3     remember that they worked for -- sometimes they were pool reporters and

 4     sometimes they were specifically associated with some of the largest

 5     media, that is publications in Belgrade.  I also, by the way, spoke

 6     directly sometimes to Belgrade itself, to the media there that called me,

 7     including B92, the radio station.

 8        Q.   In terms of your communications with the media, you've indicated

 9     you gave interviews.  Did you ever give press conferences or hold press

10     conferences?

11        A.   Yes, I did.  Generally, those conferences were scheduled in what

12     is known as the United Nations press room.  Again, right there in UN

13     headquarters, very close to the Security Council Chamber.  Those were

14     formal press conferences, and there usually would actually be sent a

15     schedule indicating that a conference would be held, and we usually tried

16     to alert the media at least several hours -- more likely a day or two in

17     advance, but at least several hours.  Other times in front of the United

18     Nations Security Council, as is the practice today, there would be in

19     fact impromptu press conferences with most of the UN media core present.

20        Q.   Sir, if you could try to keep your answers short, we have a lot

21     of territory to cover.  With respect to the press conferences, could you

22     tell us if they were attended by the media representatives you told us

23     were accredited at the UN from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia as a

24     general rule?

25        A.   Yes, they were.  Both the formal and informal.

Page 7186

 1        Q.   Did you or any of your staff make any effort during the conflict

 2     to monitor what was being reported in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

 3     media?

 4        A.   Yes, we did.  Particularly one of my deputies, Ivan Misic, was a

 5     former reporter, so he paid special attention to that.

 6        Q.   Were allegations of shelling and sniping of civilians in Sarajevo

 7     reported in the media in Belgrade or elsewhere in the Federal Republic of

 8     Yugoslavia?

 9        A.   Certainly sometimes, and certainly even in the direct reports

10     that I gave to, let's say, a station like B92, I'm very well aware that

11     they were reported.

12        Q.   And how about other allegations of ethnic cleansing by the

13     Serbian forces in Bosnia?

14        A.   That is correct, they were.

15        Q.   Could I ask you to turn to tab 9, please, sir.

16        A.   Yes.

17             MS. BOLTON:  I'm sorry, that last document should be tendered as

18     an exhibit if it hasn't already been, Your Honour.

19             JUDGE MOLOTO:  It has not yet.  It's admitted.  May it please be

20     given an exhibit number.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, the document will become Exhibit

22     P2435.

23             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.

24             MS. BOLTON:

25        Q.   You should see before in tab 9 three documents, the first of

Page 7187

 1     which is 65 ter 3763.

 2        A.   Yes, I have that in front of me.

 3        Q.   This is a document titled "A Note by the President of the

 4     Security Council."  What is this document?

 5        A.   Sometimes the president of the Security Council would make a

 6     statement on behalf of the entire membership of the UN Security Council,

 7     that was in lieu of a resolution or more accurately reflected a consensus

 8     of the Security Council members.  It did not have the weight of a

 9     resolution, but in fact, it did have an indication of the thinking of the

10     Security Council as a whole.

11        Q.   Okay.  This text that this document refers at paragraph 3 to

12     continuing reports of widespread violations of international humanitarian

13     law, and in particular reports of the imprisonment and abuse of civilians

14     in camps.

15             What was -- what is this resolution or sorry, this statement

16     referring to?

17        A.   This is the time when we started to receive very clear evidence,

18     pictures, not just newspaper accounts, but even pictures and TV footage

19     of Bosnia-Herzegovinian citizens being held in detention in what I think

20     one can label as concentration camps or detention camps.  And there were,

21     of course, other reports of continued ethnic cleansing, removal of people

22     from their homes, and of course reports of individuals or actually groups

23     being murdered.  I say groups, because many of the reports that we

24     received were large scale and systemic killings.

25        Q.   When you talk about Bosnia-Herzegovina citizen, who was

Page 7188

 1     reportedly detained in these camps?

 2        A.   The non-Serb population, Bosniaks, that is Bosnian Muslim and

 3     Croats, but there were also sometimes Serbs who opposed the regime or

 4     opposed the efforts of division of Belgrade who were also in fact made to

 5     suffer.

 6        Q.   And when you talked about there being pictures and TV footage,

 7     how widely publicised were the images of the camps at that time?

 8        A.   At this point in time, this dominated the news, the global news.

 9             MS. BOLTON:  Could that document be marked as an exhibits please,

10     and could you turn to the next document in that tab.

11             JUDGE MOLOTO:  It is admitted into evidence.  May it please be

12     given an exhibit number.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  The document will become Exhibit P2436, Your

14     Honours.

15             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.

16             MS. BOLTON:

17        Q.   The next document, and there's two more documents in this tab.

18     One is 65 ter 2192, which is Resolution 770.

19        A.   Yes, I have that.

20        Q.   With respect to that resolution, I don't want to discuss it in

21     any detail, I'd just like you to take a look at the text and confirm for

22     me whether this appears to be a true copy of the actual resolution that

23     was passed?

24        A.   Yes, it is.

25             MS. BOLTON:  If that could be marked as an exhibit, please, Your

Page 7189

 1     Honour.

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  It is so marked.  May it please be given an

 3     exhibit number.

 4             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit P2437, Your Honours.

 5             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you so much.

 6             Yes, Madam Bolton.

 7             MS. BOLTON:  I think that would - actually, I see the time, Your

 8     Honour - be a convenient time to break and we'll deal with the other

 9     resolution tomorrow.

10             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you very much, Madam Bolton.

11             Just before we break, Mr. Sacirbey, while you are in the

12     witness-stand, just to remind you, you may not discuss the case with

13     anybody, not even with your counsel there in the US, until you are

14     excused from testifying.  Okay?

15             THE WITNESS:  That is recognised, Your Honour.  Thank you.

16             JUDGE MOLOTO:  And the Chamber stands adjourned to tomorrow at

17     quarter past 2.00 in the afternoon.  That's Netherlands time.  In the

18     same courtroom, I guess you will be in the same venue.  Court adjourned.

19                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.00 p.m.

20                           to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 16th day of June,

21                           2009, at 2.00 p.m.