Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 33312

 1                           Tuesday, 28 April 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The Accused Popovic not present]

 5                           [The witness takes the stand]

 6                           --- Upon commencing at 2.18 p.m.

 7             JUDGE AGIUS:  Good afternoon, Mr. Registrar.  Could you call the

 8     case, please.

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  Thank you, Your Honour.  Good morning, Your

10     Honours.  Good morning to everyone in and around the courtroom.  This is

11     case number IT-05-88-T, the Prosecutor versus Vujadin Popovic et al.,

12     thank you.

13             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  For the record today Mr. Beara's back,

14     but Mr. Popovic isn't.  I recall seeing the waiver, your client's waiver,

15     Mr. Zivanovic, for yesterday.  I don't recall seeing it for today.

16             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yes.  We will provide the waiver for today as

17     well.  Thank you.

18             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  And I don't recall at all having seen

19     any waiver from your client, Mr. Ostojic.

20             MR. OSTOJIC:  Good morning -- or good afternoon, Mr. President,

21     Your Honours.  He did execute it, but there was a little problem with it

22     and we will be filing a short motion addressing it and obviously giving

23     you his acquiescence to have proceeded yesterday in his absence.  So you

24     will get that in written form tomorrow.

25             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  Thank you.  Representation, Prosecution it's

Page 33313

 1     Mr. McCloskey, Mr. Thayer.  Defence teams are full force today.  I don't

 2     see any absences.  Witness Momir Nikolic is present, as is his counsel,

 3     Mr. Tansey.

 4             Yesterday, we left off with your -- you finishing your

 5     cross-examination.  I just want to make sure, since you were a little bit

 6     undecided, hesitant at the time, whether you have any additional

 7     questions you would like to put, Ms. Fauveau.

 8             MS. FAUVEAU:  Thank you, Mr. President.  No further questions.

 9             JUDGE AGIUS:  Merci, madam.

10             Mr. Josse, I confirm that you have no cross-examination for this

11     witness?

12             MR. JOSSE:  That's correct, Your Honours.  No cross-examination.

13             JUDGE AGIUS:  I thank you, Mr. Josse.

14             Mr. Haynes, he's all yours.

15             Good afternoon to you, Mr. Nikolic.

16                           WITNESS:  MOMIR NIKOLIC [Resumed]

17                           [Witnessed answered through interpreter]

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours.

19                           Cross-examination by Mr. Haynes:

20        Q.   And good afternoon from me, Mr. Nikolic.  You're on the last leg

21     now, and I'm going to try and be as quick as I can with you.

22             JUDGE AGIUS:  Before you start, Mr. Haynes, I'm just putting this

23     to you and then you let us know via the registrar:  We've just been

24     informed by the Prlic Trial Chamber that they will not be sitting

25     tomorrow morning, and therefore we have the courtroom available should

Page 33314

 1     you prefer to sit in the morning.  We are all in agreement here.  It

 2     would be fine with us to sit in the morning, but of course I know that

 3     you have a new witness coming in.  I don't know whether you need to proof

 4     him.  Mr. Thayer.

 5             MR. THAYER:  Good afternoon, Mr. Mr. President.  I believe he has

 6     been fully proofed.  We just need to send a quick e-mail just to make

 7     sure that he will be available tomorrow morning.  We will be -- as far as

 8     the team is concerned, we're ready to go, we just need to make sure he's

 9     ready to go.

10             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right.  And as far as the other Defence teams,

11     if you have any problem with sitting in the morning, please let us know

12     and we'll then sit in the afternoon.  Otherwise, we'll sit in the morning

13     thank you.

14             Mr. Haynes, my apologies for the interruption.  I should have

15     done it before.  Go ahead.

16             MR. HAYNES:  Not at all.

17        Q.   Before you came here, Mr. Nikolic, do you recall that together

18     with your lawyer you prepared a short document explaining what you now

19     accepted and did not accept in your original statement of facts?

20        A.   Yes, I do remember.

21        Q.   And during the course of preparing that document, you explained

22     that whilst you have been in prison in Finland you'd had the opportunity

23     to read and digest a book on the principles of command and control.

24        A.   I wouldn't say that I had an opportunity to study this book.  I

25     only focussed on one section in particular, and I can tell you which

Page 33315

 1     section of that book I familiarised myself with.  So to make things

 2     clear, I never read the whole book.  I read only one part, and I tried to

 3     comprehend it as much as I was able to.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  That's very helpful.  Was that not a document that

 5     was available to you in the preparation of your defence for your trial

 6     before 2003?

 7        A.   I really don't know, because I haven't seen this document.  It

 8     may have been the case that my lawyers had this rule and the books that

 9     you're referring to, but I myself did not have a chance to get myself

10     acquainted with the rule and the book all the way up until before my

11     transfer to Finland to serve my sentence there.

12        Q.   Thank you.  Again that's very helpful.  And when did you set

13     about studying this book and this rule?  Was it soon after your sentence

14     or more recently?

15        A.   I already told you that it was while I was in the detention unit

16     in Scheveningen.  That was when I first saw the book and had it in my

17     hands.  That was in the detention unit here in The Hague, maybe two or

18     three months prior to my transfer to Finland.  In that period, the final

19     judgement has been pronounced already in my case.  My trial had been

20     finalised.

21        Q.   Then I'm sorry for not listening to you more carefully.  So in

22     any event, you had read and considered that rule before either of the

23     occasions when you gave evidence in Sarajevo?

24        A.   I received translation that I gave testimony.  I would like to

25     make it clear that I gave evidence twice before the court in Sarajevo.

Page 33316

 1     For the first time I was a court witness, and the following time I

 2     appeared as the witness for the prosecution, but I didn't give any

 3     statements.  If you are referring to my testimony, then this is what

 4     happened.

 5        Q.   That is what I'm referring to, and all I'm interested to know is

 6     that when you gave evidence there, it was against the background of

 7     having read this book and this rule that you referred to in the

 8     qualification of your statement of facts.

 9        A.   Yes.  I already told you when I read the book.

10        Q.   Thank you.  Now, I would be right to understand, wouldn't I, that

11     you do not pretend to be any sort of expert on military law or

12     principles?

13        A.   Of course, you're right.  I'm no expert, but I nonetheless try to

14     grasp and fathom these matters as much as I can.

15        Q.   Yes.  And more to the point, you knew how the system worked in

16     1995, and you knew what your job was.

17        A.   Can you be more specific, please?  What system are you referring

18     in particular?

19        Q.   Well, I'll come to the point.  In practice, officers from

20     superior command organs could give orders directly to you, couldn't they?

21        A.   In principle I know perfectly well who can issue orders to whom

22     within the chain of command, and you put it well when you said that it's

23     a comprehensive system.  If you are interested in any particular feature

24     of the system, I can give you an answer, but I can only tell you that in

25     principle I know who is entitled to give orders to whom and how this

Page 33317

 1     whole process is practiced.

 2        Q.   Well, it might be simpler, therefore, if I remind you of

 3     something you've said earlier, and really for the benefit of the

 4     interpreters we'll put it in e-court so that they don't get annoyed with

 5     me speaking too quickly.  It's P4482, starting at page 15 in the English

 6     and page 7 in the B/C/S.

 7             And so that you understand this, Mr. Nikolic, this is the

 8     transcript of what you said when you gave evidence in the case of Milorad

 9     Trbic in Sarajevo.

10             Now, the section that I'm interested begins in English with the

11     question at line 14 in English:

12             "Is it fair to say that it's only the brigade commander who could

13     order you to a task?  Is that correct, sir?"

14             And you responded:

15             "Yes, in theory.  So the commander was my superior as well as the

16     superior of all the others in the brigade command.  However, in practice

17     there are certain deviations from this theory.  So in principle, yes,

18     that's correct, but in practical life there are some situations when the

19     commander is unable to issue orders, then somebody from the brigade

20     command will issue orders in the commanders's stead.  And still, you will

21     go with those rules, with those orders, and you will act upon them."

22             And the question is asked:

23             "Can you explain the circumstances of these deviations?"

24             And you said:

25             "Well, I can.  In the situation when the commander is absent from

Page 33318

 1     the place, when there are certain combat operations underway, and, for

 2     example, corps commander is present but brigade commander isn't, at the

 3     time the combat operations are under way in the AOR, area of

 4     responsibility, of your brigade.  Then, the most superior commander from

 5     the highest command can issue orders in your commander's stead.

 6     Following the completion of the task or the assignment in any case and in

 7     every case the commander is to inform his direct superior whom he was

 8     issued order from whom he received orders from, and it is his obligation

 9     without exception.  This is what he has to do following the execution or

10     action upon orders issued by higher authority."

11             And then you're asked:

12             "Let's just clarify that.  You stayed for the occasion when the

13     brigade commander is not present but he is on other duties but within the

14     area of responsibility of the brigade, that, for example, the corps

15     commander can then issue orders for a brigade; is that correct?"

16             And you said:

17             "Not for a brigade, but he can issue orders to me personally."

18             Is that still, in your view, a correct statement of how things

19     worked in practice?  And I apologise if you're squinting at the screen.

20     It needs to go one page on in the B/C/S, I understand.

21        A.   I understand your question, although I didn't read the whole

22     passage, and I know what you're asking me.

23             If I were to explain this again now, although I really don't want

24     to presume to be an expert in the area of command and control and

25     knowledgeable about the relations in the command structure, I myself was

Page 33319

 1     never a commander, and I cannot say with any degree of certainty that

 2     something is 100 per cent correct or not.  I would like, though, to

 3     confirm that what you have read just now is how I understood the question

 4     that was put to me, and I did my best to provide an explanation and an

 5     answer.

 6             I still believe that these questions relating to command and

 7     control and the commander is not from the area of responsibility or is

 8     and absent from the unit.  I would explain it, of course, without

 9     repeating the whole statement verbatim, but what I would tell you now

10     would in essence be identical.

11             So if the commander is absent, he designates someone who stands

12     in for him, and then this person issues orders in the name of the

13     commander.  I know that this is how it should function, and that is how

14     it functioned.

15             As for the area of responsibility of the brigade, I believe,

16     although I'm not sure, that if the corps commander wants to issue an

17     order to one of the brigade units, then it would be most appropriate and

18     proper in military terms that he should do that through the commander of

19     that unit.  However, if the situation is such that the brigade commander

20     is absent from the zone while the corps commander is present, I believe

21     that the corps commander can give orders personally if so required by the

22     current situation; although, as I said, this is not quite appropriate,

23     but if the circumstances are such that they cannot wait for the brigade

24     commander to return, then they resort to this procedure.

25             I'm not sure whether this is fully correct and in compliance with

Page 33320

 1     the military law to the full, but in principle I think it is.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  And just to tidy this one up, can you explain to us

 3     what you meant when you said in your answer in the Trbic case, "the most

 4     superior commander from the highest command"?

 5        A.   Yes, I can.  What I meant here was a special situation that did

 6     happen and can happen under such circumstances.  Namely, there are combat

 7     operations being carried out in a certain area, and it's not within the

 8     zone of responsibility of one brigade.  Let's take the Bratunac Brigade

 9     as an example.  If combat operations are being conducted in the area of

10     responsibility of the Bratunac Brigade and the brigade commander is not

11     accessible and reachable in that area and the situation demands that the

12     task at hand must be amended and issued to the unit engaged in the

13     operation, and you don't have the most senior officer in the brigade who

14     is entitled to amend his previously made decision, then, hypothetically

15     speaking, depending on the specific situation, it is only natural, and I

16     think it is in line with the military rules for the decisions in such

17     situations to be made by the most senior officer, both in terms of his

18     position and his rank, who is currently present in the area where the

19     combat operations are being carried out.

20             So it's only logical that if in the area of responsibility of the

21     Bratunac Brigade there is an officer from the brigade and an officer from

22     the corps command and another officer from the Main Staff and the officer

23     from the Main Staff or that from the Drina Corps, according to their

24     position and their ranks, are most senior there, then it's only logical

25     for them to issue specific orders to deal with the specific combat

Page 33321

 1     situation.

 2             This is how I understand it.  And I think I read it somewhere

 3     that this is fully in accordance with military rules.  However, I always

 4     want to -- to emphasise that I have reservations when I'm talking about

 5     command and control, because I don't have command and control experience

 6     and I'm not an expert in this field.  I always have reservations when I

 7     am talking about these issues.

 8        Q.   I'm very grateful, Mr. Nikolic.  And just to conclude this topic,

 9     as you told us the other day, irrespective of the lines of command and

10     control, never in an armed force do you question an order or a request

11     from an officer of your superior command.  That's what you told us on the

12     21st of April.  That's correct, isn't it?

13        A.   I cannot give you a blanket confirmation of your thesis or claim.

14  I can only speak for myself.  I am almost convinced that I had never refused

15  to carry out an order from a superior command, although at certain points --

16  or even, sometimes these orders did not personally suit me.  But, I did not

17  refuse to carry out orders, because I thought that such things had been

18  agreed at higher levels, so I never presumed to double-check or comment the

19  orders that were coming from superior commands.  So generally speaking, I

20  did carry out my orders.

21        Q.   Well, let's see if we can apply what you've told us to a

22     practical situation.  You told us during the course of your evidence

23     about some military policemen from the Bratunac Brigade who ended up in

24     Pilica.  Do you recall that?

25        A.   I do, but that's not the way I put it.  I said that I came to

Page 33322

 1     know and see at a later date from a military police log-book that a

 2     military police patrol between the 16th and the 17th of July had been

 3     kept in Pilica.  That's what I said, had been left behind.

 4        Q.   And Pilica is not within the brigade area of the Bratunac

 5     Brigade, is it?

 6        A.   That's right.

 7        Q.   Applying what you've told us, if a colonel from the Drina Corps

 8     or the Main Staff had issued orders to that patrol of military policemen,

 9     it would have been obliged to obey them, wouldn't it?

10        A.   I hope so -- or, rather, I assume so, of course.

11        Q.   Thank you.  We'll move on from there.  I'd like you just quickly

12     to look quickly at another document, please.  It's our P107, and you

13     better have a look at the front page first so we can identify it.

14        A.   Yes.  I have seen the document.  This is an order for active

15     combat activity issued by the Drina Corps command.

16        Q.   And if I understand the accounts you've given previously, you did

17     not see that order in July of 1995; is that correct?

18        A.   I testified about that and said that I had not seen it.

19        Q.   Thank you.  I'd just like us now, please, to go to page 5 in the

20     B/C/S, page 7 in the English.

21        A.   Yes, I've seen it.  I wouldn't want to read the entire page.

22     Tell me the passage I'm supposed to direct my attention to.  Probably the

23     one related to the security organ.

24        Q.   Correct.  And I'm very sorry, that's a reasonable request.  The

25     section I want to direct your attention to is just four lines from the

Page 33323

 1     top in your language, and it reads:

 2              "Security organs and military police will indicate the areas for

 3     gathering and securing prisoners of war and war booty."

 4             Can you see that?

 5        A.   If I heard you correctly, you said the security organs and the

 6     police.  What I can see here is the security organs will send out

 7     instructions to the subordinate units concerning the application of the

 8     regimen in the combat activity.  So the military police is not mentioned

 9     here.  I apologise if what I heard was wrong.

10             JUDGE AGIUS:  One moment.  If -- are you referring him -- I think

11     you should be referring him to the second paragraph on page 5 in the

12     Serbo-Croat language.  Is that correct, Mr. Haynes or not?

13             MR. HAYNES:  It's the fourth line that begins [B/C/S spoken]

14             JUDGE AGIUS:  In the section -- yes, okay.  Which, to my

15     knowledge --

16             MR. HAYNES:  I think we can all work out is the security organ

17     and the military police.

18             JUDGE AGIUS:  Exactly.  And this is why I'm intervening because I

19     see Vojna Policije, and I think he may have been reading some other

20     paragraph.

21             MR. HAYNES:

22        Q.   Can you count four lines town from the top, Mr. Nikolic?

23        A.   My apologies.  I was reading the paragraph below that one.  Of

24     course I'll read relevant paragraph.

25             Yes.  You're right, sir.  My apologies.

Page 33324

 1        Q.   Now, irrespective of whether you actually saw this document, did

 2     you become aware as a security organ that it was your responsibility, in

 3     relation to the operation towards Srebrenica, to indicate areas for

 4     gathering and securing prisoners of war and war booty?

 5        A.   What I understanding was and how I worked both in times of peace

 6     and war, and since I took part in countless military exercises in

 7     relation to this particular duty of the security organ is as follows:  At

 8     the stage when the security organ takes decisions and issues orders, et

 9     cetera, the security organ plays a role of a proposing party where the

10     organ will propose to the commander where the military police should be

11  deployed, et cetera, and that's the only thing that the security organ, or

12  the intelligence and security organ, does in relation to this type of order.

13             The commander, for his part, can accept or fully reject the

14     proposal, or simply accept it in part.  Once the commander has heard all

15     the proposals, including the one about the status of the prisoners of

16     war, the commander will take a decision which will be a definitive

17     decision and binding upon all those who contributed with their proposals

18     and all the various matters concerning the provision of combat security,

19     which includes the matters you refer to.

20             I was aware of that, and that's the way I worked.  Whenever I was

21     supposed to I proposed matters to the commander that lay within my

22     competence.  However, I have to give you an additional clarification.  If

23     you do not take part in the formulation of the written order or in the

24     process of giving proposals, and the commander can decide not to accept

25     proposals.  If you don't know what the commander's decision was and if

Page 33325

 1     you don't receive the order the commander has written, including -- so if

 2     you're not in the -- among the addressees or among those who are supposed

 3     to be copied the order to, you will not know what the commander has

 4     decided, and it is his discretionary right to decide not to inform you

 5     thereof.  In such cases, the commander will have taken the decision on

 6     his own.  And since in accordance with the rules of engagement the

 7     commander is entitled to take decisions on his own, independently, he

 8     will likewise be taking full responsibility upon himself for the decision

 9     taken.  That's formulated in the rules of engagement as the commander's

10     discretionary right.  That's what I know about it.

11        Q.   Well, perhaps we'll approach it a different way.  Did you in fact

12     indicate areas where prisoners from Srebrenica could be gathered and

13     secured?

14        A.   If your question is whether I proposed the specific areas to my

15     commander, I did not, because my commander did not hold that sort of a

16     working meeting and did not ask my opinion.  I testified about this in

17     the previous trials.

18             If you look at my commander's order, you will see that he did not

19     write in the order that I should be delivered the order.  He said that

20     the commanders of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Battalions should be sent the

21     order, the Chief of Staff, the filing service, and that's all, I think.

22     The regular procedure would have been where I would have proposed to the

23     commander the various areas where the prisoners should be gathered and

24     kept.  That was the regular procedure.

25        Q.   So in -- in what context was it that you mentioned the Ciglana

Page 33326

 1     brickworks and the Sase mine that you told us about the other day?

 2        A.   I mentioned the Sase mine and the Ciglana brickworks in the

 3     context of the locations that were discussed as possible locations for

 4     the execution of the prisoners in Potocari who were detained in Bratunac.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  And the rings and necklaces --

 6        A.   Allow me this -- allow me to add something that I have not

 7     testified about so far.  At a later date, once the entire operation was

 8     over, I learned that certain individuals were indeed touring the area of

 9     the brickworks.  As for the area of the Sase mines, none the officers

10     toured the area.  For the sake of the truth, I also wish to say that

11     these locations were discussed, but not a single killing or execution was

12     ever committed in any of these locations.

13        Q.   Thank you.  When you were being asked questions the other day by

14     Mr. Ostojic, you discussed at some length some rings and necklaces and

15     cash that was in your safe.  Would those items properly be described as

16     war booty?

17        A.   Everything I had to say, and you'll be able to look at it from

18     the record, I did say in answer to Mr. Ostojic's questions.  There is

19     nothing to take away or add.  I can provide additional explanation if you

20     wish.

21        Q.    It's a simple question.  Were those items war booty from

22     Srebrenica?

23        A.   Yes.  That follows from the hand-over record.  You can see that

24     it was war booty, and you can also see it from the minutes of the

25     briefing of the 16th of July where I briefed the commander on this and

Page 33327

 1     asked him what was to become of the war booty.

 2             In that same document, you have an earlier item, an earlier

 3     paragraph, containing the order of -- of the commander where he had

 4     already decided about the fate of the pecuniary funds.  It is not quite

 5     clear from the document that they were referring to funds, to money, but

 6     I'm telling you this.

 7        Q.   Well, let's forget about what you told your commander allegedly

 8     on the 16th of July.  How did those items come to be in your safe in the

 9     first place?

10        A.   I told you what their provenance was.  I think I explained that

11     to one of the lawyers here.  And they came to be in my safe because the

12     military police didn't have a safe.  Zlatan Celanovic, who was in charge

13     of the entire procedure surrounding this, did not have a safe that would

14     have been intended for keeping such items.  For this reason, the items

15     were left in my safe based on a document until such time as the commander

16     issued his order.

17             THE INTERPRETER:  "Issued his decision," interpreter's

18     correction.

19             MR. HAYNES:

20        Q.   In simple terms, rings and necklaces and cash that was taken off

21     people found its way to you through the military police; is that correct?

22        A.   They came to the Bratunac Brigade through the border police which

23     had received the items from the security organs from Serbia.  I don't

24     know if it was the police or who, because the individuals on whom these

25     items were found were captured in Serbia.  The war booty was seized from

Page 33328

 1     them.  A record was made thereof.  The items were handed over to the

 2     board are police, which in turn handed it over to the Bratunac Brigade

 3     police.  The items I'm referring to include the money, gold, jewellery,

 4     everything that was present in my safe.

 5        Q.   Who was the first person who told you that any of the former

 6     inhabitants of Srebrenica were to be murdered?

 7        A.   In my evidence so far, I stated quite clearly when it was that I

 8     heard of this for the first time.  I've already testified about this.  To

 9     my questions as to what was to become the fate of those who were

10     captured, I was told that all the balijas had to be killed.  I don't know

11     what sort of inference you would make upon hearing something of the sort.

12     What sort of a conclusion would you have arrived at, and what would you

13     have thought had you been in my shoes and had you seen people being

14     separated who were not military-aged men, who had nothing to do with the

15     army whatsoever.  And I'm stating this again.  People were separated who

16     had nothing to do with the army, with combat, with crime, had nothing

17     whatsoever to do with individuals who could in any way have been held

18     responsible for crimes or war.

19             Had you been in my shoes and seen the treatment they were

20     accorded in Potocari, I put it to you that you would have arrived at the

21     same conclusion that I had upon seeing all that.

22             I had heard quite enough.  I did not need to hear somebody utter

23     the words, "They will be killed," but the reaction where it was said that

24     the balijas had to be killed was quite sufficient for me to come to that

25     conclusion based on my common sense.

Page 33329

 1             Let me underline again that I would be the happiest man had all

 2     this not happened.  You can tell me whatever you want.  You can try and

 3  persuade me that this had not indeed happened.  However, my assessments and

 4  the conclusions I drew, were confirmed.  They were confirmed as true.  You

 5  will not succeed in discrediting me, because I speak the truth and the truth

 6  is on my side.  I have the courage to tell the truth, and believe me when I

 7  say that I feel lighter, I feel better when I tell the truth and admit that

 8  a horrific crime had indeed happened there.

 9        Q.   It may have been lost in translation or -- or perhaps you didn't

10     listen to my question carefully enough.  All I asked you was who told you

11     that.  It only requires a name, Mr. Nikolic.

12        A.   I think I've already answered that question ten times in this

13     courtroom.  The first time I had my doubts, when I felt that these were

14     things that were portending evil, that was outside Hotel Fontana when I

15     spoke to Popovic, Kosoric, and Petar Uscumlic was there as well on the

16     12th of July, 1995.  That was the first time I realised that evil will

17     take place.

18             That may have been a bit earlier, even, on the evening of the

19     11th when the second meeting was being held.  At that point some

20     requests, demands were put forth where the Muslim units were asked to

21     come to Potocari, to lay down their weapons.  They were told that no harm

22     would come their way, that they should surrender.  I know that that would

23     have only been logical and soldierly and that that's the way things

24     should have happened.  However, I likewise knew having spent four years

25     there previously, I knew the extent of the hatred between the Serbs from

Page 33330

 1     Bratunac and the Muslims in Srebrenica.  I knew how much blood had been

 2     spilt in the meantime and I was almost certain that things could not have

 3     ended in a good way, that they had to end in a bad way.

 4             I repeat, I didn't need to be said that to my face.  Everyone, of

 5     course, avoided saying something of the sort, but evil things have

 6     happened, sir, and I find it hard to speak about it even now, but I must.

 7             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right.  Mr. Nikolic, just to clarify the

 8     transcript, page 18, line 10, we have the name that you mentioned

 9     conspicuously absent in the transcript, and I'm going to read out a small

10     part of the transcript and then you repeat the name, please.

11              "The first time I had my doubts when I felt that these were

12     things that were portending evil.  That was outside Hotel Fontana," I

13     suppose, not phone, "and it was when I spoke to," and here we have a name

14     missing.  Who did you speak to?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will repeat that for the record.

16     I spoke there with Colonel -- or sorry Lieutenant-Colonel Popovic and

17     Lieutenant-Colonel Kosoric.

18             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.

19             JUDGE KWON:  And you named one more individual, Mr. Nikolic.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  I said that on that plateau

21     just before the start of the meeting Petar Uscumlic, the interpreter, was

22     also present there.

23             MR. HAYNES:  Yes.  I think we can move on.

24        Q.   And just moving on in the piece, who was the first person that

25     told you that the prisoners held in Bratunac were to be moved to Zvornik

Page 33331

 1     for execution?

 2        A.   I testified about that, too.  The first person I heard from that

 3     the prisoners would have to go -- would have to be moved to Zvornik was

 4     Mr. Beara [as interpreted].

 5        Q.   Thank you.  And as I understand the position, not long after that

 6     you received an order from Colonel Beara to go to Zvornik and speak to

 7     Drago Nikolic, did you not?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   Did you inform your commander before going to Zvornik that

10     Colonel Beara had given you that order?

11        A.   No, I didn't.

12        Q.   Even though the order involved you being out of the brigade area

13     for four or more hours?

14        A.   At the time I did not inform my commander, Colonel Blagojevic,

15     that I was supposed to go to Zvornik.

16        Q.   Thank you.  I'm going to move on from there.  Again, I'm going to

17     read something you have told us the other day when you were being asked

18     questions by Mr. Thayer.  It was on the 21st of April, and if anybody

19     wants to check the transcript, it's page 32916.

20             He asked you:

21             "Again, focusing on the intelligence picture that you had going

22     into the morning of the 12th of July, had you received more information

23     about the whereabouts of the Muslim men from Srebrenica that morning?"

24             And your answer was:

25              "Yes.  Already in the morning of the 12th and later on even more

Page 33332

 1     intensely information started pouring in that elements of the Muslim

 2     forces who were pulling out towards Muslim-controlled or free territories

 3     were in the Jaglici and Susnjari sectors and that they are using this

 4     axis for pulling out of Srebrenica."

 5             Now, is that correct that during the 12th of July information as

 6     to the whereabouts of the column and its intentions was pouring in?

 7        A.   Yes.  We had information about the approximate area that they

 8     were gathering as well as the direction which they were trying to move.

 9        Q.   And I apologise if this seems like the same question, but there's

10     a reason why I ask it.  By the evening of the 12th of July you had good

11     and reliable information about where they had assembled and the direction

12     in which they were heading, didn't you?

13        A.   Well, you know, sir, information is information.  How reliable

14     the piece of information is is something you can't know.  If on the 12th

15     you received a piece of information, you first need to follow up on it

16     and check it.

17             What we had was not information, only reports.  Let me make it

18     quite clear.  The extent to which the information was reliable or

19     accurate was unknown.  We received information from the units that were

20     in the immediate area and in contact.

21             You will know yourself that when it comes to information, you

22     have to verify certain things.  You have to investigate if they are true

23     or not.

24             What we had was just the first reports about the position of the

25     Muslim column which was present in the area.  Similarly, you have to

Page 33333

 1     understand that there were around 16.000 people there.  That's the

 2     information that I had.  There were approximately 16.000 people present

 3     in the area.  You can only imagine what sort of a location can receive

 4     16.000 people.  They must have covered a considerable area.

 5             These matters are neither precise, nor can one take any decisive

 6     or important decisions on their basis.

 7        Q.   But during the 12th of July you were receiving intelligence --

 8     [French on English channel]

 9             JUDGE AGIUS:  One moment, Mr. Nikolic, because we are receiving

10     interpretation in French, and I know Mr. Bourgon doesn't like it.  Yes.

11     I hope it's all sorted out.

12             MR. HAYNES:

13        Q.   Just to, as it were, just list the sources of the information.

14     You were receiving intelligence from your own units pouring in on the

15     12th of July; is that right?

16        A.   I can only confirm that intelligence was arriving from the units

17     that were able to acquire such information.  Those were mainly units

18     deployed in that sector, although it seems to me, but don't hold it to

19     me -- don't hold me to it, already on the 12th there was an exchange of

20     information with the Milici Brigade, which was the adjacent brigade.  I'm

21     not sure, but I think that even then they conveyed information to us

22     about the movement and information about the assessment of the intentions

23     of the Muslim forces that were there.  When I say the Muslim forces and

24     the Muslim column, I say "forces" because there were lots of men, members

25     of the 28th Division, who were armed and who had set up a standard

Page 33334

 1     formation for movement and for breakthrough in military terms.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  You've helped me with my next question, which was

 3     that you were also receiving reports from neighbouring units as to the

 4     situation and movement of the column, weren't you?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   And during the 12th of July, prisoners were being captured from

 7     the column who were being interviewed and giving you information.

 8        A.   As far as I can remember, I didn't have any prisoners on the

 9     12th.  If you are referring to the people taken prisoner from the column.

10        Q.   And as you told us the other day, the information was all

11     supporting other information that the column had gathered in Jaglici and

12     Susnjari and was pulling out on a certain axis towards the free

13     territories.

14        A.   What I said in my previous testimony is quite sufficient.  I have

15     nothing to add to it.  Just as I responded to the questions of other

16     counsel, I am responding in the same way to you.  That is to say, we had

17     information coming from different sources.  There was exchange of

18     information between Bratunac and Milici Brigades, and I think that on the

19     12th the Bratunac Brigade had no prisoners from the column, if that is

20     what your question was about.

21        Q.   Very well.  On the 12th of July, you were the duty officer at the

22     Bratunac Brigade, weren't you?

23        A.   Yes, that's correct.

24        Q.   Your deputy or assistant duty officer was Jankovic, and you

25     called him to relieve you at 3.00 in the morning when you went to go and

Page 33335

 1     sleep in your apartment in Bratunac.  That's right, isn't it?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Other than that -- sorry, Mr. Thayer --

 4             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. Thayer.

 5             MR. THAYER:  And I think we're all agreed, just so there's no

 6     confusion on the record, the Jankovic to whom the witness is referring is

 7     Sergeant Mirko Jankovic, the komandir of the Military Police Platoon.

 8             MR. HAYNES:  That's quite right, and I forgot there were two of

 9     them.

10             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  Thank you both.  Let's proceed.

11             MR. HAYNES:

12        Q.   Other than that, as duty officer you would have had to be present

13     in the duty operations officers' office throughout the evening, wouldn't

14     you?

15        A.   Yes, I was there in the evening.  I may have taken a break and

16     went out to the kitchen, but generally speaking, I spent all the time in

17     the operations room where the operations duty officer performs his

18     duties.

19        Q.   Thank you very much.  Thank you very much.  And any information

20     that was pouring in, you would have passed on to those who needed to know

21     about it, wouldn't you?

22        A.   Yes.  I testified to that.  Generally speaking, I abided by the

23     procedure of writing reports, passing on information to those who might

24     find them interesting.

25        Q.   Again, thank you.  Can we go back one evening to the 11th of

Page 33336

 1     July.  On the 11th of July you went to the Hotel Fontana twice, didn't

 2     you?

 3        A.   Yes, that's right.

 4        Q.   And after the second visit you even took the Muslim

 5     representative back to Potocari.  Do you agree with that?

 6        A.   I don't think I took him as far as Potocari.  I think I took him

 7     as far as Zuti Most, but then again I may have taken him to Potocari.

 8     Anyway, my task was actually to escort them to the territory under their

 9     control.

10        Q.   So let's be clear about this.  Your evidence is on the 11th of

11     July, as a Serbian officer you drove through Potocari.

12        A.   Not through Potocari.  I may have driven up to Potocari.  The UN

13     base and where Mandzic was is a little bit away from the centre of

14     Potocari, which is densely populated area and where the civilians and

15     everybody else was already there.

16        Q.   But in any event, nobody stopped you on the road?

17        A.   I don't remember being stopped by anyone.

18        Q.   Thank you.

19        A.   Excuse me.  Maybe we stopped on Zuti Most, but I don't see Zuti

20     Most as a place where somebody should stop me.  If we stopped, it was

21     just pro forma to -- to greet the people or to say something about those

22     who went to the meeting in Bratunac.

23             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreters note:  We had not quite

24     understood the witness.

25             JUDGE AGIUS:  One moment, Mr. Haynes --

Page 33337

 1             MR. HAYNES:  Thank you.

 2             JUDGE AGIUS:  Because the interpreters have doubts as to whether

 3     they have understood the witness.

 4             Mr. Nikolic, you said -- excuse me, I'm reading out from the

 5     transcript.  Perhaps you could tell us if this is correct or whether you

 6     would like to clarify anything.

 7              "Excuse me.  Maybe we stopped on Zuti Most, but I don't see Zuti

 8     Most as a place where somebody would stop me.  If we stopped, it was just

 9     pro forma to --" there is something missing here, "to great the people or

10     to say something about those who went to the meeting in Bratunac."

11             Is this what you basically said or did you say something

12     different?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that that's the essence of

14     what I said.  Maybe I didn't phrase it properly, therefore I was

15     misunderstood.  The check-point at Zuti Most was manned by a man from my

16     brigade, and of course they knew me.  I just wanted to say that I was not

17     officially stopped and checked.  If we did stop, that was for those

18     reasons, just to tell them that these were men who were with me are

19     coming back from the meeting.  That was actually the essence of what I

20     wanted to say.

21             MR. HAYNES:  Thank you.  If that's satisfactory, I'll move on.

22        Q.   One of the other events of the 11th of July, which you've

23     recalled to us, was that you wrote a report concerning the existence of

24     able-bodied men amongst the people at Potocari.  That's right, isn't it?

25        A.   Once again I want to be precise.  I drafted a report in which I

Page 33338

 1     included my assessment, and I'm constantly underlying.  What pertained to

 2     the number of men, to the intentions, to the composition of refugees in

 3     Potocari.  These were all assessments.  And it is true that in this

 4     information containing these assessments which I passed on to the

 5     security and intelligence department of the Drina Corps, and I also

 6     informed my command about my assessment, the truth is that this

 7     assessment contains information that among the civilians in Potocari

 8     there were able-bodied men.

 9        Q.   Thanks very much.  I just want to clarify something you told us

10     the other day, the 21st of April.  Not for your benefit, for everybody

11     else it's page 32914.  You're talking about the 11th of July, and you

12     said:

13             "That evening I informed members of the command who were present

14     in the Bratunac Brigade headquarters.  These are staff officers who were

15     part of the corps command, and of course all this information and

16     intelligence was relayed to my commander as well, which is absolutely a

17     regular procedure, and I'm talking about my commander Vidoje Blagojevic."

18             When you said that to us the other day, what information were you

19     referring to and what officers?

20        A.   You have quoted something which was either mistranslated or was a

21     slip of the tongue, or maybe I misspoke.  You mentioned staff officers,

22     and then later on, according to the translation that I received, there

23     was talk and mention of corps officers.  So something doesn't tally

24     there.

25             I will try to give you a precise answer to your question.

Page 33339

 1     Written information containing all the intelligence that I had on the

 2     11th of July in the evening I conveyed to the security and intelligence

 3     department of the Drina Corps.  The information contained in the written

 4     report was forwarded, or I acquainted members of the Bratunac Brigade

 5     command; that is to say, the people who were with me all the time.

 6     However -- actually, I -- I informed them about all the information that

 7     were -- was available to me at the time.  I remember office -- officer

 8     Micic being there, I also remember another officer by the name of Stevic.

 9     I think that Dragan Trisic was also there, but I can't guarantee that

10     these were exactly men who were present at that moment.  Anyway, those

11     were men from the Bratunac Brigade command.

12             In addition to that, the information relating to Potocari and

13     everything else learned about -- or actually was found out by the

14     officers from my brigade.  They knew everything, and each new piece of

15     information was discussed in the operations room.  They were on duty to

16     do their job just like I was as part of the overall operation, and I can

17     say for sure that they knew everything that I, as an intelligence

18     security organ knew, or had as assessment or has had as information that

19     I was absolutely sure were -- was true.

20        Q.   Well, thank you.  We can -- we can check the tape to see whether

21     it was mistranslated, but we'll move on from there.

22             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. Thayer.

23             MR. THAYER:  I don't want to really dwell on the issue, but I

24     think, and my friend may agree with me, I think what we have is two words

25     in English which sound the same.  It's been translated in the transcript

Page 33340

 1     as corps.  I think based on -- on the witness's answer that what he may

 2     have said was translated into whatever the word for core, meaning the

 3     central brigade command, and then it was translated as corps because

 4     we're so used to hearing corps as in Drina Corps, and that explains why

 5     there is this reference to the Drina -- or just to the core officers

 6     being present.  We can try to resolve it now with a question to the

 7     witness or pull the tape.  I just threw out that suggestion.  I think

 8     it --

 9             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.  Your comments, Mr. Haynes?

10             MR. HAYNES:  We'll look into it.

11             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.

12             MR. HAYNES:  I would have thought that sort of comment should not

13     have been made in front of the witness with his headphones on, but we'll

14     move on.

15             JUDGE AGIUS:  Well, he could offer us his comments if he so

16     wishes --

17             MR. HAYNES:  I think I'd prefer to look into the tape first.

18             JUDGE AGIUS:  I think it's advantageous to have had him hear what

19     Mr. Thayer had to say, but anyway, let's proceed.

20             MR. HAYNES:  I wonder whether we could now have in e-court,

21     please, P4472, pages -- or page 29 in the English and 30 -- I'm sorry,

22     page 31 in the English and page 30 in the B/C/S.

23        Q.   And what you need to read to yourself, Mr. Nikolic, begins at

24     line 8.  It's the rather long answer you gave there, and I shall read the

25     English into the record.

Page 33341

 1             What you said is:

 2             "After the meeting, which didn't last that long, the commanding

 3     officers came out and they discussed about the new task.  What I learned

 4     is that the task, it was about the forces which participated in

 5     Srebrenica were to be transferred to Zepa.  That was one thing that

 6     presumably I learned.  The following was that they did not manage to

 7     reach an agreement about that, and the reason was simply that there were

 8     no intelligence.  There was no reliable information regarding the

 9     location of the column, I'm referring to the Muslim column, about the

10     movement, about the further targets, and that because of that, one of the

11     participants, and this is, this part I learned later, complained and that

12     they did not accept Mladic's idea to move to Zepa."

13             Now, does that remain your recollection of what you learned had

14     been the discussion at that meeting?

15        A.   Yes.  I still stand by what I said before, and what I stated here

16     relates to what I learned after the meeting.  I was very precise there

17     when I said that there was no reliable information or intelligence about

18     the location of the column, and I still maintain that.

19             At that time, there was no reliable information about the

20     whereabouts of the column, because it changed its position by the hour,

21     and it was on the move.  We also didn't have any reliable information

22     about their intentions.  You have to admit that that was a huge number of

23     armed men, and in absence of accurate and reliable information, one could

24     not reach any speedy decisions about anything else.  Therefore, I stand

25     by what I already said, and if you want me to elaborate on this further,

Page 33342

 1     I can do that.

 2        Q.   Well, no, on the 12th, as you told us in this trial, intensely

 3     information had been pouring in that the Muslim forces who were pulling

 4     out towards Muslim-controlled or free territories were in the Jaglici and

 5     Susnjari sectors and that they were using this axis for pulling out of

 6     Srebrenica.

 7             So this meeting that you recalled in this interview, couldn't

 8     have happened on the evening of the 12th, could it, because there was

 9     tons of information about where the column was and where it was going.

10        A.   I spoke about this meeting, if we are referring to the same

11     meeting, that is, and I would like to confirm today that I'm not sure

12     when this meeting took place, but on the other hand, I'm absolutely sure

13     that it did take place, and in addition to the question mentioned here,

14     other things happened as well that I learned about, of course, but not

15     through being present in the meeting.

16             In my view, it is of lesser importance whether it was on the 11th

17     or the 12th.  The important thing is what was discussed at the meeting

18     and the fact that it actually happened.

19             Now, 14 years later -- well, not only 14 years later but even

20     back then, to which I cannot put any time-frame and I believe that to be

21     absolutely normal.

22        Q.   Thank you.  Now, the passage I just read you came from an

23     interview you had with Mr. McCloskey at the end of May of 2003.  You

24     recall, don't you, speaking to Bruce Bursik about a month before that

25     over the course of about three days?

Page 33343

 1        A.   Yes.  I expressed my opinion about this issue, and I would really

 2     like to repeat once again that I stand by what is recorded in this

 3     interview, which was audio recorded, which was an official interview

 4     shall, and believe me, I didn't embark on any analysis of this document

 5     because those were his notes, and probably had we gone through his notes

 6     and had some question been put to me, I would have tried to explain

 7     things and that would be actually what I would have said.  But these were

 8     Mr. Bursik's notes.  He noted the things as he understood -- stood them,

 9     and I standby by what I said in this official interview, and it is

10     regarding both -- recorded both on tape and in -- and on paper.

11             I'm not talking about the notes, but I believe that they would be

12     of better quality and that there would have reflected -- had we gone

13     through them, they would have reflected my comments and my formulation.

14     But as it is, I do not have any objection to the context of the notes as

15     it is.

16        Q.   Thank you.  And we can agree, can't we, that both in April of

17     2003, when Mr. Bursik made a note, and in May of 2003, at the end of May

18     when the interview was tape recorded, you told officers from the

19     Prosecution that the meeting that we've just been talking about took

20     place on the 11th of July.

21        A.   I already replied to this question.  I spoke about my best

22     recollection.  I allow for the possibility, and I'm not an obstinate

23     person who someone who thinks that cannot make mistakes.  I agree that

24     it's possible.  I'm not sure only about the timing of the meeting.

25     However, as for everything else, I confirm that the meeting to place, and

Page 33344

 1     I confirm the substance of the meeting.  The only thing that I'm not sure

 2     about is the time when the meeting took place.  And I think that you can

 3     understand when one makes such mistake, because in those days there were

 4     numerous visits and meetings in the Bratunac Brigade.  Officers from the

 5     command, from the corps -- corps units were coming, as well as those from

 6     the Main Staff, and there was constant going in and out, and there were

 7     endless meetings being held, and believe me, under such circumstances it

 8     is possible that I made a mistake.  But then I don't think it's relevant

 9     compared to what actually happened and what was the crux of the matter.

10             What I am saying, I always try to be the reflection of what

11     happened, what I saw with my eyes, or of which I am convinced that had

12     actually happened.

13        Q.   And is that you did in both of those interviews?

14             MR. HAYNES:  I'd like that question answered, then we can take a

15     break.

16             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.  Go ahead and answer the question, please.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  As I said, at the time of the

18     interview, I said what I could remember.

19        Q.   Thank you very much.

20             MR. HAYNES:  And thank you, Your Honour, for allowing me to ask

21     the question.

22             JUDGE AGIUS:  How much more time do you require?

23             MR. HAYNES:  I'll try and wrap it up in 20 or 30 minutes.

24             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  We'll have a 25-minute break.  Thank you.

25                           --- Recess taken at 3.47 p.m.

Page 33345

 1                           --- On resuming at 4.14 p.m.

 2             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. Haynes.

 3             MR. HAYNES:

 4        Q.   Just so that you understand my position, Mr. Nikolic, I think you

 5     got it right in May 2003 when you said this meeting took place on the

 6     11th of July and that you've got no reason to have any dilemma about it.

 7             Did I understand your last answer before the break to be to the

 8     effect that it is only the date about which you have a dilemma?

 9        A.   I said that I had my doubts about the date of the meeting that I

10     believe had been held.  There were many meetings held in the Bratunac

11     Brigade.  I was referring to that one which discussed matters contained

12     in my evidence here.

13        Q.   But what I mean is you have no doubt, do you, about, as it were,

14     the circumstances of that meeting and how it fits into the chronology of

15     what you were doing around the meeting?

16        A.   I don't understand the question.  What does it mean how it fitted

17     the chronology of what I was doing?

18        Q.   I'll show you what you said during the course of that very long

19     interview with Mr. McCloskey at the end of May 2003.

20             MR. HAYNES:  Can we have a look again, please, at P4472, page 28

21     and 29 in the English, page 27 in the B/C/S.

22        A.   Yes.  I've read this once before, so it seems to me.

23        Q.   Well, I'm going to read it again to you --

24             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please.

25             MR. HAYNES:  Sorry.

Page 33346

 1        Q.   Mr. McCloskey said:

 2             "We left off yesterday with filling in some details about the

 3     Hotel Fontan meetings, and if you could just briefly outline for us what

 4     you did after the first meeting at the Hotel Fontana ended?"

 5             And you said:

 6             "Yes, I believe we started with that part.  Actually, we finished

 7     with that part.  After the meeting at the Hotel Fontana, I went to the

 8     command of the Bratunac Brigade, and during that time after the meeting I

 9     wrote a report for the superior command, a report regarding the

10     activities that took place that day."

11             And Mr. McCloskey asked you:

12             "And did that report include an estimate of the able-bodied men

13     in Potocari or had that report been done before that?"

14             "A. That, yes.

15             "Q. And did you see any commanders or officers at the Bratunac

16     command when you went there that evening?

17             "A. Yes, I saw a group of officers who came to the brigade

18     command, and according to the information I learned later that group of

19     officers was a group of commanders of the compact group which

20     participated in the operation."

21             Mr. McCloskey asked:

22             "Are you sure you saw those commanders there that night of the

23     11th and not the next night, the night of the 12th?

24             "A. As far as I can remember, it was on the 11th in the evening."

25             Does it remain your recollection that the meeting you have

Page 33347

 1     described about going on to Zepa took place the same night you went to

 2     the Hotel Fontana?

 3        A.   Sir, I explained and stated what I had to say.  Naturally, I

 4     stand by everything I said.  The events and the chronology contained here

 5     reflect my recollection of the events.  All of this I've stated on

 6     several occasions.  I stand by what I said in the statement.  I expressed

 7     my doubts with regard to the dates and their accuracy.  I repeat that

 8     this is the best of my recollection.

 9        Q.   So I just want to be clear about this.  Is it the best of your

10     recollection that the meeting you have described occurred the same night

11     that you went to the Hotel Fontana?

12        A.   Everything I said and everything that is contained herein is, I

13     claim again, the best of my recollection.

14        Q.   And is it your recollection that the meeting you have described

15     occurred the same night that you wrote the report about the able-bodied

16     men at Potocari?

17        A.   I've already answered the question.

18        Q.   Please indulge me and answer it again.

19        A.   I stand by the statement I gave to Mr. McCloskey and I stand by

20     what I said at the time.  I do not rule out the possibility that I made a

21     mistake by stating that the meeting was held on the 12th.  I have said

22     this, I think, a dozen times now.

23        Q.   What was it that caused you to develop a dilemma about this date

24     between June and September of 2003 when you gave evidence in the

25     Blagojevic case?

Page 33348

 1        A.   Not that I came to doubt it.  It's just that I am not -- it's not

 2     that I am stubborn that way.  There is a number of documents that I read,

 3     roughly grasp what they stated, and made some sort of a chronology of the

 4     events.  To the best of my recollection, what I believed to be true was

 5     that it was on the 11th.  Now, why should I be stating something for a

 6     fact that I am not sure of?  I don't want to state that something is a

 7     certainty.  If there is 1 per cent of doubt.  I can't say with precision

 8     that it was on the 11th since there were a number of meetings.  I can't

 9     be more precise than that.  Despite your insistence, I will not state

10     something of the sort, simply because I am not sure of it.

11        Q.   We'll move on.  You have referred sometimes in your evidence to a

12     man called Trisic.  Who was he in the Bratunac Brigade, and what was his

13     function?

14        A.   Dragoslav Trisic was Assistant Commander for Logistics in the

15     Bratunac Brigade.

16        Q.   And would his responsibilities have included making sure that the

17     brigade had enough fuel?

18        A.   Yes.  That was within the competence of a logistics organ.

19        Q.   And forgive me again if this sounds a very similar question.  Did

20     he as part of that function have to monitor fuel usage and ensure that

21     fuel was properly accounted for?

22        A.   I'm not sure that I fully understand the question.

23        Q.   Well, did he have to keep check of how much fuel the brigade was

24     using, how much it needed, and to keep records of how fuel was being

25     used?

Page 33349

 1        A.   I can only give you an answer on the basis of logic.  One of the

 2     obligations is to monitor the consumption of fuel, to keep track of that,

 3     and to report on the matters to his commander.  Whether he actually did

 4     that is something I don't know.  I suppose he did.

 5        Q.   But that wasn't your job, was it?

 6        A.   Regular provision of fuel, consumption of fuel, distribution of

 7     fuel and everything else was within the competence of the logistics

 8     organ.  Part of that was the traffic service, which took care of it.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Now -- now, please don't be angered by this question

10     because it's similar to a couple I've asked you before, but who was who

11     first told you about the plan to dig up and rebury dead bodies in the

12     autumn of 1995?

13        A.   The first time official, and I emphasise official, discussions

14     took place were in the Bratunac Brigade on the part of Lieutenant-Colonel

15     Popovic.  As for what I know of the initiative, what I heard about it,

16     the initiative to carry out the reburial came from the civilian

17     authorities.  That's the extent of what I know.  Of course, I can't

18     either confirm or prove that that was indeed the case.  My information

19     was that it was their initiative.

20        Q.   And your function in all that, amongst other things, was to

21     monitor, preserve, and control the use of fuel, wasn't it?

22        A.   I think that I explained to one of the counsel everything that I

23     knew in relation to the operation.  One of the my tasks since the

24     military police was involved there, too, and my involvement on the basis

25     of the order of the brigade commander as a result of one of the requests

Page 33350

 1     that was put to me was that the fuel which was supposed to arrive and to

 2     be used for that operation, that the security organ should monitor and

 3     account for the use of the fuel.

 4        Q.   Did anybody tell you why the security organ had to monitor an

 5     account for fuel in relation to the reburial of bodies?

 6        A.   I think that I answered that question too.  It was put by one of

 7     the counsel, but let me state this once more.  I can only assume what the

 8     reason was, and that was most probably the case, which was that this

 9     operation was supposed to be a secret operation.  The reburial was

10     supposed to have been carried out in secret.  Hence, the fuel which had

11     to be at their disposal, the distribution, and the consumption thereof,

12     all of it had to be taken care of by the security organ.

13             I explained all this to the counsel who put the question.  This

14     was neither a secret operation nor did it resemble anything secret.  Had

15     the intention been to keep it secret, that could not be carried out

16     because there were too many resources and individuals involved, the

17     military and political leadership, the brigade.  Certain companies were

18     involved from the areas of Bratunac and Srebrenica.  Under no

19     circumstances could the operation have been secret.

20             One of the reasons why it was decided that the security organs

21     should monitor the consumption of fuel was precisely that.

22        Q.   Mr. Nikolic, thank you very much.  I have no further questions

23     for you.

24             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right.  Thank you, Mr. Haynes.

25                           Further Questioned by the Court:

Page 33351

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Nikolic, I understand you must be very tired by

 2     now, it's more than a week, but please bear with me for a few minutes.  I

 3     have three questions which transpired during the course of your

 4     testimony, so I will start from -- start with minor thing.

 5             During the course of your testimony you referred to Resid

 6     Sinanovic as having swum across the Drina and having ended up as a

 7     patient in Serbia, and I'm not sure, but I don't think the Chamber had

 8     heard the -- such a story before, so could you elaborate?

 9        A.   Absolutely.  Resid Sinanovic used to live in Bratunac before the

10     war.  He was the chief of the public security station in Bratunac.  When

11     the hostilities broke out, he moved into the territory of Srebrenica, of

12     the Srebrenica municipality.  Once the enclave of Srebrenica fell, he was

13     probably part of the column moving in the direction of Kladanj and Tuzla.

14     He was captured in the area of Konjevic Polje.

15             On the occasion of my first visit to Konjevic Polje on the 13th

16     of July, 1995, members of the Bratunac Public Security Station who had a

17     check-point in Konjevic Polje informed me that they held a very important

18     prisoner who, based on the information at the disposal of both the MUP

19     and the army, had been qualified as a war criminal.

20             After my stay in Konjevic Polje, I took over Resid Sinanovic with

21     another policeman, went to the Bratunac, and I handed him over to

22     Jankovic Mirko, the chief of the military police, and --

23             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter didn't catch the other name.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- who was a lawyer, who, in other

25     words, was an interrogator, one who would investigate into -- investigate

Page 33352

 1     facts and events.

 2             Once he was taken to the police, Dragan Ivanovic and other

 3     individuals who used to be close to him before the war within the police.

 4     They brought him cigarettes, food, gifts.  I don't mean gifts exactly,

 5     but whatever foodstuffs he requested.

 6             Once Zlatan Celanovic interrogated him and took his statement,

 7     and I don't know on the basis of whose decision this happened, because I

 8     couldn't decide on these matters, I learned from my conversations with

 9     him that subsequently he decided independently that he should transfer

10     him to the school together with the other prisoners because he felt that

11     there were no grounds for keeping him in custody and interrogating him

12     any further.  He transferred him to the school, and whatever I'm telling

13     you now is what I heard from Zlatan Celanovic, he moved him to the Vuk

14     Karadzic elementary school, whereupon he was transferred to the area of

15     Zvornik in -- as part of the convoy that departed on the morning of the

16     14th of July.

17             To my knowledge and to the knowledge of my lawyers who

18     investigated the matter, he was probably taken out, as were all the rest.

19     He was shot at and wounded.  I don't know where this took place, where

20     these people were executed.

21             He then, in an area just below Zvornik in Banja Koviljaca, just

22     next to the area of Serbia, there he swam to that area and there he went

23     to a cafe where he met some acquaintances of his who transported him from

24     the area where the cafe was to the Banja Koviljaca hospital.

25     Subsequently, according to what my lawyers learnt and told me, he was

Page 33353

 1     transferred to Loznica or not.  Don't hold me to that, but there is a

 2     report produced by my lawyers to that effect.

 3             He was then recognised by a doctor, a lady doctor, who used to

 4     work in Bratunac but who, upon the outbreak of hostilities, moved to work

 5     in that hospital, and she informed the police in Bratunac that Sinanovic

 6     was in the Banja Koviljaca hospital.  They then proceeded to inform their

 7     services thereof.

 8             Now, the subsequent information about when he was taken over from

 9     the hospital, the research conducted by my lawyers indicated that he was

10     taken over by the police of the Republika Srpska and that he was

11     liquidated on the bridge at the border crossing between Serbia and

12     Republika Srpska, that's to say Bosnia and Herzegovina.

13             That's the extent of what I know.  The documents, the proof that

14     he was given treatment in the hospital was something that my lawyers

15     handed over to Mr. McCloskey during one of the meetings that they had.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Mr. Nikolic.  I wonder whether you could

17     give us the time-frame of his death.

18        A.   I really can't.  I think that all the relevant details are

19     contained in the document produced as a result of the investigation

20     carried out by my lawyers.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  For my next question can we bring up

22     P4480, page 3 in English, and I take it it's on page 4 in B/C/S.

23             Mr. Nikolic, this is a report or the information sheet the

24     Prosecution produced after having had a conversation with you in 2007 at

25     the place where you are serving your sentence.  You remember that?

Page 33354

 1        A.   Yes.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Page 4 in B/C/S, and page 3.

 3             You were asked by Mr. Ostojic, representing Mr. Beara, about this

 4     passage, I will quote -- probably it's at the top of page 4:

 5              "The witness also -- excuse me -- the witness also stated that

 6     Beara had nothing to do with the burial of the bodies at Glogova and that

 7     Dragan Mirkovic had lied about this because of his friendship with

 8     Borovcanin."

 9             As to the source of your information, you were asked by

10     Mr. Ostojic whether it was Mr. Mirkovic that told you about this, but you

11     denied, but subsequent intervention made your answer unclear.  So my

12     question is what your source of knowledge, that Beara had nothing to do

13     with the burial of the bodies at Glogova, was?  How did you know that?

14        A.   Yes.  I said what is contained in the text here.  Based on

15     everything I learned in the period between the operation and today, I am

16     completely convinced that I must not claim anything with certainty, but I

17     am convinced that Colonel Beara had nothing to do with the burial at

18     Glogova.

19             JUDGE KWON:  I wonder whether you could be a bit more specific as

20     to the source of your information.

21        A.   I cannot tell you that I saw anything.  There is information

22     to -- speaking of the activities that happened after the crime, that

23     happened on the 13th at Oka and along that line.  There were also

24     activities which took place on the 13th of July in Bratunac in the public

25     security station where a meeting was held chaired by Mr. Dragomir Vasic.

Page 33355

 1     The machinery that came from Zvornik was something that Mr. Beara, to my

 2     knowledge, had nothing to do with.  He had no ability to secure them, nor

 3     did he secure the machinery.  Based on what I know, it was Mr. Vasic who

 4     provided for the machinery that was brought over to Glogova and which was

 5     used to bury the bodies.

 6             What I found out was that I have my doubts about the

 7     participation of a member of the Bratunac Brigade.  He took over

 8     allegedly the machine, and I do have my doubts about him taking part in

 9     the burial on that date, because the information I have, all of it points

10     to the fact that he participated in the burial at a later date, not on

11     that day.

12             Another thing that I deem very important is that Mr. -- or,

13     rather, Colonel Beara had no reason whatsoever to be occupied with the

14     burial of those killed in that area.  I don't see that there's a single

15     reason why he would be doing that.

16             This is what I was guided by.  I don't know what the actual truth

17     is, and I don't want to speculate.  This is what I can tell you based on

18     the information I have.

19             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Mr. Nikolic.  My last question is related

20     to your answer given to Mr. Thayer in the course of answering the

21     question as to the chain of command of various units that were operating

22     in Potocari on 12th and 13th.

23             For the benefit of counsel, it's page 32928, from line 8.

24             I quote:

25             "All forces that were engaged in Srebrenica operation and the

Page 33356

 1     operation of forcible transfer from Potocari were commanded and

 2     controlled by the Chief of Staff, General Krstic, and the commander of

 3     the Drina Corps.  Of course, once General Mladic was in the field in the

 4     area of Bratunac, then of course it was well known that it was

 5     General Mladic who made decisions ordered through his subordinate

 6     officers, those being commanders of the corps, brigades, and all other

 7     units that took part in Operation Srebrenica."

 8             Do you remember having said that?

 9        A.   Yes, I do.

10             JUDGE KWON:  What interested me is the term you used, that is,

11     the "operation of forcible transfer," or just simply "forcible transfer."

12     What did you mean by saying "forcible transfer"?  If you could explain it

13     to me.

14        A.   Yes, I can, of course.  I have to say that this is my personal

15     view and opinion.  I was using the term "forcible transfer" of population

16     because I think that no one insane, and I'm talking primarily --

17             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction:  No one who is sane.

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And I'm talking about the Muslims

19     who were in Potocari and Srebrenica, in that area, would accept

20     voluntarily or with delight or with desire to leave their homes and

21     everything that they had.

22             The situation as it was and the hatred that existed meant that

23     after everything that had had happened there was no way they would be

24     able to live together or next to each other.  Therefore, each instance of

25     transfer of that kind, in my view, contains an element of force, and

Page 33357

 1     that's my opinion.  Of course, I think the same about any ethnic

 2     community or groups who are forced to leave their homes and their

 3     property.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  As regards the -- your original statement of facts,

 5     you once told us that the -- the formulation in the statements were those

 6     of your counsel, not by your personal formulation.  Am I correct in so

 7     understanding?

 8             Can I be more clear -- clearer?  You said it is a formulation

 9     done by your lawyer and you accepted it.  That's what you said.

10        A.   If you are referring to the statement of facts, then I can answer

11     your question.

12             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, please.

13        A.   Talking about the statement of facts, I can tell you that in my

14     view there was very little time for everything to be reviewed and

15     analysed.  If I told you the chronology of events and how it came about

16     for the statement to be signed eventually, then you would see for

17     yourself that at the time I didn't have an opportunity to fully analyse

18     everything that was written there.  Well, after all, I didn't have time

19     to understand everything that was written there.  For that reason that's

20     what I said, but of course I unreservedly believed my lawyers at that

21     time, and I presumed that since they were lawyers, they were

22     well-familiar with those affairs.

23             There are some phrases contained in the statement of facts that I

24     do not agree with, because as such they do not reflect what I had been

25     doing, and in that context is why I said that they participated in

Page 33358

 1     drafting the statement.  Of course, I accepted their suggestions, and I

 2     hope that you know that I was supposed to enter a plea on the 6th of May,

 3     but that I had an opportunity and a very short time to discuss all these

 4     documents and the statement of facts on the very same day, and if I would

 5     be given an opportunity to do all -- everything all over again, I

 6     wouldn't give them such an opportunity to make decisions on my behalf.

 7     But we are where we are.  I made a mistake.  And I would just like to say

 8     that when it comes to the usage of certain phrases, I didn't attach any

 9     importance to them, because I thought that it was clear that I, who was

10     not accused on the basis of command responsibility, I cannot be punished

11     for something like that.  That is how I understood things at the time.

12     Unfortunately, I wasn't right.  And I would have done otherwise now if I

13     had had an opportunity.  In other words, I would insist on everything

14     that I said to be precisely and accurately recorded in -- in the words

15     and phrases that I used.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Mr. Nikolic.  I understood fully, but

17     different from the original statement of facts, the -- your further

18     statement or supplementary statement you produced before this Chamber is

19     your own words.  You wrote them in person yourself.

20        A.   If you are referring to the supplemental statement, that is where

21     I made an attempt to clarify everything contained in the original

22     statement and to make it more precise.  I also wanted to explain and

23     describe what really took place and the events in which I was involved,

24     but I wanted this to be the reflection of what I was actually involved

25     in.

Page 33359

 1             Your Honours, there is one more thing.  There is a slight

 2     difference between the statement and the written statement that was

 3     compiled together with Mr. McCloskey's team concerning certain facts such

 4     as meetings, because at the time before giving any evidence, in the

 5     statement I did my best to say that when it comes to meetings I really

 6     never participated in those meetings.  However, in the statement of facts

 7     and plea agreement read that I did take part in two meetings and nothing

 8     more than that.  That is what I wanted to clarify as regards my

 9     participation in these affairs.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Mr. Nikolic.  I will put my question

11     directly.  In the original statement of facts, you referred to as -- it's

12     related to forcible transfer again, and it's paragraph 1 of the statement

13     of facts.  You said:

14             "During the attack and take-over of the Srebrenica enclave by VRS

15     forces in July 1995, it was the intention of the VRS forces to cause the

16     forcible removal of the entire Muslim population from Srebrenica to

17     Muslim-held territory."

18             And in your further statement, you qualify this as this:

19             "The intention of the VRS forces to cause the forcible removal of

20     the entire Muslim population from Srebrenica."  You qualified this like

21     this:

22             "The first intention of the VRS was to physically separate two

23     enclaves, the enclaves of Zepa and Srebrenica, to liberate the Zeleni

24     Jadar, Jasenova, Milici road, and in phase 2 to reduce the Srebrenica

25     enclave to the town area."

Page 33360

 1             And you said:

 2             "The forcible removal of that entire Muslim population from

 3     Srebrenica was the result of the fall of this enclave and subsequent

 4     decisions."

 5             So if you could elaborate on your statement which says the

 6     forcible removal was the result of the fall of the enclave and subsequent

 7     decisions, and how is it different from your first statement?

 8        A.   Yes, of course, Your Honours.  According to what I know about

 9     what was happening about the fall and the capture of the enclave, I know

10     precisely that the primary task was to separate, physically, these two

11     enclaves, Zepa and Srebrenica.

12             After the separation, and the separation was effected once the

13     check-point in Zeleni Jadar was captured, which is in the southern part

14     of the enclave, these two enclaves were separated and the road, Zeleni

15     Jadar-Jasenova-Milici was rendered passable.  The next task, as far as I

16     know, was for the Srebrenica enclave to be reduced to the urban area or

17     the town area.  And of course, during the attack and during the

18     operation, having seen that there was weak resistance instead of reducing

19     it to the urban area, the whole enclave of Srebrenica was captured.

20             What I know and what I believe, although I may be wrong, is that

21     this was one part of the operation, so to speak a combat segment of the

22     operation.  Everything else that followed the capture of Srebrenica falls

23     into the second stage of this operation which is the forcible transfer

24     and departure of the population from Potocari to the Muslim-controlled

25     territory.

Page 33361

 1             My intention was to describe precisely what took place, what was

 2     the primary goal, what was the next intention in combat segment of the

 3     operation, and of course what was the intention in the second stage of

 4     the operation.  Of course, after the fall of Srebrenica a whole series of

 5     decisions were made, and there were meetings and agreements with the

 6     gentlemen from the international community, and finally a decision was

 7     made to forcibly relocate all the Muslims from Potocari; although,

 8     theoretically it was possible for them to remain there.  But these were

 9     subsequent decisions, and they were not part of the combat operation.

10             This is how I understand it.  I only wanted to clarify this

11     specific segment and to explain what actually happened.

12             As for the attack on the enclave and the separation of the two

13     enclaves started in June when UNPROFOR forces were moved from that road

14     and when this road was freed.  From the military point of view, that

15     meant liberation of that area and making it accessible to become engaged

16     in the combat around and over the enclave.

17             This is how I understood it, and I tried to be as clear as

18     possible.  Whether I succeeded in that or not, I don't know.  That was my

19     intention.  It was never my intention to dispute or deny that all the --

20     those who were in Potocari were forcibly removed from Srebrenica.

21             JUDGE KWON:  I take it that you do not mean that at the phase 2,

22     as you put it, the Muslim population were forcibly evacuated despite

23     their wishes to stay in that area?

24        A.   Your Honours, I really want to be quite clear.  It was

25     theoretically possible, and there were verbal declarations, in the sense

Page 33362

 1     that whoever wished to stay was allowed to stay, but now we come into the

 2     field of theory.

 3             As for practice, there was no possibility for them to remain

 4     there because there was so much hatred, there was so much blood spilled,

 5     and it made it impossible for anyone to stay there any longer.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  In your further statement, you explained

 7     your role at Potocari as something of assistance or helping rather than

 8     coordination or command.

 9             While performing your duties, did you have the intention to

10     forcibly remove this population yourself?

11        A.   First of all, I have to say I absolutely made no decisions

12     regarding this issue, and nobody asked me anything about it.  If you want

13     me to be candid, all those who are still -- who are living in Bratunac

14     secretly wanted the enclave to be evacuated because of the situation that

15     was prevailing there.

16             I personally didn't suffer any casualties in my family, nor was

17     any of my property destroyed or burnt.  Therefore, I personally didn't

18     feel any aversion towards those people, but nobody asked me anything or

19     given me an opportunity to state my opinion.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you very much.

21             JUDGE AGIUS:  Before I ask Judge Prost or Judge Stole whether

22     they have any, just a question for clarification purposes.  You mentioned

23     the second phase, namely when decision was taken to proceed with the

24     taking over of Srebrenica, which ended up in the forcible transfer of the

25     Muslim population thereof.  Was this decision taken at the political

Page 33363

 1     level, political authorities level, or at military level or authority, or

 2     both, to your knowledge?

 3        A.   Your Honours, I have no knowledge about how this decision was

 4     taken.  I can only tell you what I think and what information reached me.

 5             The decision about what was to follow and how it was going to be

 6     effected was made by General Krstic until the arrival of General Mladic.

 7     Once General Mladic arrived in Bratunac -- or, rather, Srebrenica, and

 8     became involved in the combat operation, he was the sole decision-maker.

 9     Whether these decisions were in compliance and in accordance with the

10     decision taken by the political leadership, I am sure that the

11     politicians from Bratunac were in agreement for the Srebrenica enclave to

12     be obliterated, but what the top political leadership thought, I really

13     don't know.

14             However, in the light of everything that I know, I think that

15     that was the objective, and the decision by the top political echelons to

16     eliminate or to annihilate Srebrenica as an enclave, that was their

17     decision as well.

18             Thank you, Mr. Nikolic.

19             Judge Prost?  Judge Stole?

20             Okay.  Mr. Nikolic, your testimony ends here.  You've been with

21     us for some time.  I wish to thank you on behalf of the Trial Chamber for

22     having accepted to come over and give testimony.  On behalf of everyone,

23     I wish you a safe journey back to where you came from.  Thank you.

24             Yes, Mr. Tansey.  I thank you also for your presence here in the

25     courtroom.

Page 33364

 1             MR. TANSEY:  Your Honour, it's been a very silent role, but

 2     that's maybe a blessing.

 3             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, but silence is golden, as you know.  Thank

 4     you.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

 6             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  Mr. Nikolic can withdraw.

 7                           [The witness withdrew]

 8             JUDGE AGIUS:  Let's do documents.  We've got several.  Thank you.

 9             So, Prosecution.  Mr. Thayer, you had, what, six documents you

10     wish to tender?

11             MR. THAYER:  That's correct, Mr. President.  And if I just may

12     note one thing for the record.  65 ter number 4407, as we have noted here

13     is the same as P02930, which is the joinder indictment to which another

14     (redacted)

15     (redacted)

16     (redacted)

17             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right.  Let's go into private session, please.

18                           [Private session]

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 33365

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22                           [Open session]

23             JUDGE AGIUS:  We are back in open session.  Any objections to the

24     admission of the Prosecution documents into evidence?  We hear none, so

25     these are all admitted.

Page 33366

 1             Popovic Defence team, you've got three documents.  Any objections

 2     from anyone?  The list has been circulated.  No objections.  They are

 3     admitted.

 4             Beara Defence team, you don't have any documents that you wish to

 5     tender, do you?

 6             MR. OSTOJIC:  That's correct, Mr. President.  We think it's

 7     adequately covered in the record, so there's no need for it.

 8             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  Thank you.  The Nikolic Defence team, five

 9     documents.  I don't see any difficulties here.  No objections.

10             MS. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours.  These were the

11     documents identified by the witness.  And one more thing relating to the

12     documents, we would like to say after the evidence given by this witness,

13     our Defence team is considering to recall Witnesses Nebojsa Galic

14     [as interpreted] and Jeremic --

15             THE INTERPRETER:  If the interpreters heard correctly.

16             MS. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] -- but we shall give it some

17     additional thought and let you know in due course.

18             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  Please do.  Borovcanin Defence team,

19     documents?  You have three, six -- seven documents.  Any objections?  No

20     objections.  Admitted.

21             MR. GOSNELL:  Thank you, Mr. President.

22             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you, Mr. Gosnell.

23             Miletic Defence team, three documents, and two of which have not

24     yet been translated.

25             Any objections?  No objections from anyone.  Admitted.  Last two

Page 33367

 1     will be MFI'd pending translation thereof, Ms. Fauveau.

 2                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 3             JUDGE PROST:  If I could just get any feedback from counsel on

 4     this P44 -- P4480, which is the report of the proofing session with Momir

 5     Nikolic, and you used it in the course of your cross-examination,

 6     Mr. Ostojic, but I take it from your position that you're satisfied what

 7     you read in was sufficient for your purposes and you don't wish to have

 8     it tendered?

 9             MR. OSTOJIC:  That is correct.

10             JUDGE PROST:  And no other submission for it to be tendered by

11     any -- any of the parties?  Okay.  Thank you.

12             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  Just to make sure, Mr. Haynes, you

13     don't have any -- you're not tendering any documents, are you?

14             MR. HAYNES:  No, thank you very much.

15             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  That concludes the Momir Nikolic chapter.

16             Now, a few housekeeping matters and also some decisions, some

17     oral decisions.

18             Mr. Thayer or Mr. -- Mr. McCloskey has disappeared.  Any news

19     about tomorrow morning?

20             MR. THAYER:  Mr. President, I'm afraid we haven't been able to

21     contact Mr. Parsons.  He is in Amsterdam.  As I understand it, he's

22     making presentations at some kind of a conference or gathering and they

23     go into late this evening, and we've not been able to get ahold of him,

24     and I think he may be actually staying in Amsterdam, although I'm not

25     sure about that.  What -- the best solution I can suggest right now is if

Page 33368

 1     there's anyway to remain flexible, we can hopefully reach out to him,

 2     make contact sometime this evening.  We may be in a position to start

 3     earlier tomorrow, perhaps not 0900 but -- but perhaps later in the

 4     morning or -- or midday, at least save a couple hours of evening time if

 5     he's available to start at that time.  We just don't know, but we can

 6     keep trying to see if we can keep as much in the daylight as possible.

 7             JUDGE AGIUS:  The thing is that it's not a matter that is of

 8     interest only to us and to you and your colleagues on the opposite side.

 9     The trial -- the Tribunal needs proper --

10             MR. THAYER:  I understand we've got the security and all kinds of

11     other --

12             JUDGE AGIUS:  There's security, transport, and technical

13     availability, et cetera.

14             What I would like to know is up to what time does the Tribunal --

15     up to what time can the Tribunal wait before basically a decision is

16     taken whether we are sitting in the morning or not?

17                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

18             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right.  Okay.  Okay.  We'll sit in the

19     afternoon.  Because we're -- as you can imagine on a day like tomorrow

20     where we planned to sit in the afternoon, we do exactly as we did this

21     morning.  We meet early at 9.00 in the morning and we sit together in my

22     Chamber and discuss various issues like we are going to do now.

23             I think it's too late in the day now to shift to the morning

24     session because of logistic purposes, so we are sitting in the afternoon

25     tomorrow.  I don't think we can leave everyone in -- hanging like that,

Page 33369

 1     not knowing -- if instead you find a solution, but you have to have

 2     everyone, including -- then let us know, but I think it's too late in the

 3     day now.

 4             So we are adjourning till tomorrow afternoon, but before we do

 5     that, there are a few other matters.  Let me just consult with my

 6     colleagues on something first.

 7                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 8             JUDGE AGIUS:  Wait.  Wait a moment, because I don't like

 9     surprises at half past 5.00 in the afternoon.

10             Mr. Registrar has just informed us that there is another witness

11     waiting, Mr. Janc.  I hope he has been told that Mr. Parsons is going to

12     testify before him.

13             MR. THAYER:  Well, Mr. President, we -- some of us are feeling

14     like we were just inches from a clean getaway.  We have actually made

15     efforts to fill as much court time as possible.  We've engaged in

16     discussions with our friends.  Mr. Janc is available to present his

17     direct, I think, probably put on his direct testimony this afternoon in

18     the balance of the time.

19             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  That's fine.

20             MR. THAYER:  We have agreed with what we believe is a reasonable

21     request from our friends that his cross not begin until Friday after

22     Mr. Parsons has begun and completed his testimony.  And that's -- that's

23     the agreement we reached.

24             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  That's fine with us.

25                           [Trial Chamber confers]

Page 33370

 1             JUDGE AGIUS:  That's -- and in fact, we thank you for trying to

 2     utilise the court time to the best possible.

 3             Now let's go into private session for a communication basically.

 4                           [Private session]

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 33371











11 Page 33371 redacted. Private session.















Page 33372

 1                           [Open session]

 2             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  We are in open session now.

 3             We are deciding orally two motions.  The first one -- I'll give

 4     more details soon, but the first one is Popovic's motion to recall

 5     Professor Dunjic and Professor Stojkovic, and also Popovic motion for

 6     clarification of one of the decisions that we gave recently on the

 7     Prosecution's motion to admit evidence in rebuttal and to reopen its

 8     case.

 9             Now, to start with, we are advising the Prosecution that we do

10     not require a response from you to the Popovic motion for clarification,

11     which I just referred to, and we start from here.

12             The Trial Chamber is seized of Accused Popovic's request to

13     recall Professors Dunjic and Stojkovic.  This motion was filed

14     confidentially on the 8th of April of this year.  And we are also seized

15     of his supplemental request concerning the proposed testimony of

16     Professor Dunjic, with an annex, and this was filed on the 22nd of April.

17     In it, Popovic indicates Professor Dunjic's availability to testify.

18             And then we are also seized of Popovic's request for

19     clarification of the further decision -- a decision on the Prosecution's

20     motion to admit evidence in rebuttal and to reopen its case.  This motion

21     was filed, as you are all aware, yesterday.

22             Now, the Prosecution filed a confidential response on 21st April

23     to the first of the motions I mentioned, stating that they do not object

24     to Popovic's application to recall Professor Dunjic and Stojkovic, and

25     that it would not object to the admission of their evidence pursuant to

Page 33373

 1     Rule 92 bis without close cross-examination.

 2             Yesterday, Popovic filed a confidential reply agreeing to tender

 3     evidence from Dunjic and Stojkovic pursuant to Rule 92 bis.  Since

 4     Professor Stojkovic is being called in relation to the testimony of

 5     Prosecution witness Parsons, Popovic requests permission to file the

 6     Stojkovic statement at least seven days after the testimony of

 7     Prosecution expert Parsons.  Also, yesterday Accused Popovic filed a

 8     confidential notice concerning Stojkovic's availability to testify.

 9             We have deliberated on this, and considering that the Prosecution

10     does not object to recalling Professor Dunjic and Stojkovic, and bearing

11     in mind the relevant part of this Chamber's further decision on

12     Prosecution motion to admit evidence in rebuttal and to reopen its case

13     which we rendered on the 27th of March, we grant Popovic's leave to

14     reply.  We grant Popovic leave to file the proposed statements from

15     Professor Dunjic and Professor Stojkovic to be considered for admission

16     under Rule 92 bis, and allows Accused Popovic no later than seven days

17     after the conclusion of the testimony of Parsons to file the Stojkovic

18     statement.

19             The Prosecution will have two days from the date of the filing of

20     each statement to raise any objection to their admission pursuant to

21     Rule 92 bis.

22             Given that both statements will be filed for consideration for

23     admission pursuant to Rule 92 bis, there is no need for the Trial Chamber

24     to consider Popovic's supplemental motion or comment upon the notice at

25     this stage.

Page 33374

 1             Accused Popovic further requests that the Trial Chamber instruct

 2     the Prosecution to obtain and disclose a sample of cases from ICMP which

 3     have not been selected by the latter.

 4             The Trial Chamber sees no merit to the argument made by Accused

 5     Popovic that the ICMP selecting the samples of new identifications affect

 6     the quality of the data.  At the same time, the Trial Chamber reiterates

 7     its instruction that the Prosecution diligently pursue disclosure of

 8     samples with the ICMP and notes again that any inaccuracies or

 9     inconsistencies in the ICMP evidence will affect the weight to be

10     attributed to it in light of the entire trial record and not its

11     admissibility.

12             Furthermore, the Trial Chamber holds that in light of this

13     finding, the further decision on Prosecution motion to admit evidence in

14     rebuttal and to reopen its case, which as I said earlier we rendered on

15     the 27th of March, is sufficiently clear and requires no further

16     clarification.  For these reasons, we dismiss the second request made by

17     Popovic and the request to recall Professor Dunjic and Professor

18     Stojkovic and deny the request for clarification of the further decision

19     on Prosecution motion to admit evidence in rebuttal and to reopen its

20     case.

21             That's it.  So now we can call --

22                           [Trial Chamber confers]

23             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.  All right.  It's being suggested by my

24     colleagues, and I willingly agree, that we take the break now.  It will

25     be of 25 minutes' duration.  In the meantime, Professor Janc --

Page 33375

 1     Investigator Janc, okay, will be informed that he will start testifying

 2     soon after.  Half an hour break.  Half an hour break.

 3                           --- Recess taken at 5.34 p.m.

 4                           --- On resuming at 6.06 p.m.

 5                           [The witness entered court]

 6             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right.  Mr. Janc, good evening to you and

 7     welcome.  You are about to start giving evidence as a Prosecution witness

 8     pursuant to a decision that we have taken.  Before you do so, you're

 9     familiar with the procedure, you need to make the solemn declaration.

10     Please read it out aloud, and that will be your commitment with us.

11             THE WITNESS:  I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the

12     whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

13             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.

14                           WITNESS:  DUSAN JANC

15             JUDGE AGIUS:  Ms. Soljan.

16             MS. SOLJAN:  Thank you and good evening, Your Honours and

17     colleagues.

18             JUDGE AGIUS:  Good evening.

19             MS. SOLJAN:  Good evening to my colleagues.

20                           Examination by Ms. Soljan:

21        Q.   Good evening, Mr. Janc.

22        A.   Good evening.

23        Q.   Would you state your full name for the record?

24        A.   My name is Dusan Janc.

25        Q.   And are you currently employed with the OTP?

Page 33376

 1        A.   Yes, indeed.

 2        Q.   What is your title?

 3        A.   My title is investigator.

 4        Q.   And what are your duties and responsibilities as an investigator

 5     for the OTP?

 6        A.   As investigator for the OTP, my responsibilities are -- and

 7     duties are normal investigative activities such as obtaining and

 8     collecting evidence.  For example, interviewing witnesses, victims, and

 9     suspects; reviewing, analysing documents; preparing and carrying out the

10     missions.  There are also activities related to the ongoing trial, then

11     preparing the reports and witness statements.  Yeah, this would be the

12     activities.

13        Q.   When did you begin your employment with the OTP?

14        A.   It was on the 1st of June, 2006.  So it will be three years now.

15        Q.   And could you very briefly describe for us your career in law

16     enforcement up to your employment in the OTP?

17        A.   Yes.  I joined the Slovenian police in July 1993 when I finished

18     my secondary police school in Ljubljana.  First I was a regular police

19     officer in police station Kranj for one year.  Then in September 2000 --

20     in 1994 I became criminal investigator at the same police station,

21     dealing mostly with minor criminal offences.  In September 2000, I was

22     promoted to criminal investigator at the police directorate within the

23     same area, so -- and I was attached to the organised crime department.

24     So from then on I was dealing with the organised crime mostly.  Most of

25     my cases were related to smuggling of elicit drugs.

Page 33377

 1             Between 2003 and 2004, that was between June 2003 and 2004, I was

 2     in Bosnia in European police mission, when I was advisor to the criminal

 3     investigation department of the Republika Srpska in Banja Luka.  Then I

 4     returned back to Slovenian police, so to the same department, same office

 5     as before, dealing with organised crime.

 6        Q.   And during the period of time you were serving in Republika

 7     Srpska, what were you duties?

 8        A.   The mission, European police mission, was monitoring and advising

 9     mission, so we were -- we were advising and monitoring criminal

10     investigation department within the Republika Srpska entity.  So these

11     were our -- our duties.

12        Q.   And, Mr. Janc, during your law enforcement experience in the past

13     did you ever testify?

14        A.   Yes, indeed, several times so far.  I cannot -- I don't know how

15     many times so far, but several times as investigator.

16        Q.   Thank you.

17        A.   Very often.

18        Q.   Now, turning to the reason you're here today, what -- what is the

19     reason you're here today?

20        A.   Yes.  For this trial, I prepared the report regarding the

21     exhumations and identifications of individuals which were -- which are

22     related to the fall of Srebrenica.  So I have prepared the report which

23     is why I am about to testify today.

24        Q.   And I take it that this -- the document you're holding in front

25     of you is your -- a copy of your report?

Page 33378

 1        A.   Yes, indeed.  I have a copy of my report together with all the

 2     attachments which are part of the report itself.  That's all I have here

 3     with me today.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  Now, Mr. Janc, what was the purpose of this report?

 5     What were the main objectives of this report?

 6        A.   There were several objectives of this report.  First one was to

 7     present the most updated number of identified individuals related to the

 8     fall of Srebrenica or related to the -- or to present the number of the

 9     individuals which are coming out of the exhumed graves.

10             The second objective was to present the surface remains which

11     were collected during the -- this period in different areas within Bosnia

12     and Herzegovina and are related again to the Srebrenica events.

13             Within my report there, you will find also the section where I am

14     talking about the DNA connections between the different graves.  So that

15     was the third objective to present to the Trial Chamber, what you can

16     find in the different data regarding these connections.

17             So -- and the last objective was also to present all the new

18     exhumations which were done between Dean Manning 's testimony here and

19     today, and these are also reflected in my report.

20        Q.   Thank you.  What were your main sources in preparing this report?

21        A.   Our main -- my main source was indeed the ICMP March 2009 update,

22     which was provided to us at the beginning of March this year and includes

23     the identified individuals as of 31st of January, 2009.  Besides that, I

24     also used -- yeah, I was also using different sources which I obtained

25     from the BiH authorities mainly, so -- and these were documents provided

Page 33379

 1     to us by the Tuzla prosecutor and Tuzla court.  Second portion would be

 2     BiH state court prosecutor, prosecution office; and the third would be

 3     BiH Commission on Missing Persons.  Actually, no, it's BiH Institute on

 4     Missing Person.  So these were main -- main sources where we obtained --

 5     where I obtained the documentation.

 6        Q.   Okay.  And have you personally visited or observed any of the

 7     grave-sites cited to in your report?

 8        A.   Yes.  That was mission conducted in -- I think by the end of

 9     October 2007, when we visited all the primary and secondary mass graves

10     together with the members of the BiH commission on missing persons.

11             MS. SOLJAN:  Now, could we please have an e-court exhibit, 4490.

12        Q.   Mr. Janc, do you recognise this document?

13        A.   Yes.  This is my report.

14        Q.   And can you briefly lay out for the Trial Chamber what the basic

15     layout is of your report?

16        A.   Yes, my report consists of first part which is actual report on

17     four pages, and then we have four attachments in annexes.  So Annex A is

18     actual update of Dean Manning's report, and everything you can see there

19     in red text, that's in addition to Dean Manning's report.

20             Then Annex B is related to surface remains section where I

21     explained the findings regarding the surface remains section.

22             And then we have Annex C, which is related to the connections

23     between the graves.  There is -- there are many tables attached to this

24     annex and also a chart.

25             And the last one is Confidential Annex D where you can find

Page 33380

 1     individuals by name which are part of the total number which are

 2     currently identified in and are in fact my report.  So here you have a

 3     list of all the individuals by name.

 4        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.

 5             MS. SOLJAN:  And if we could briefly have on e-court Exhibit

 6     4491, and if it could please not be broadcasted.  If we could please go

 7     to the second page.

 8        Q.   Do you recognise this document, Mr. Janc?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   And can we look at the third page also, please.  And the fourth.

11     Thank you.

12             Can you describe for us briefly what this is, what this document

13     is?

14        A.   As I explained before, this is part of the Confidential Annex D,

15     and these are the individuals which were found and identified in Cerska

16     grave.

17        Q.   Can you explain also to the Trial Chamber how Confidential

18     Annex D is laid out?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Or what portions it consists of?

21        A.   Yes.  Confidential Annex D has several parts.  First part is

22     related to the graves.  So both three types of graves which I made up,

23     mass graves, smaller graves, and individual graves.  Then is a portion of

24     the other and Serbia-related graves, which is followed by surface remains

25     section, and the last part is -- just -- is, yes, there are individuals

Page 33381

 1     related to the DNA -- DNA connections.

 2        Q.   And can you tell us what the difference is between the DNA

 3     connections presented at Annex C and DNA connections presented in your

 4     Confidential Annex D?

 5        A.   Yes.  What you can see now on the screen and also what is also

 6     part of the DNA connections portion of this confidential annex, these are

 7     the entries which are taken from the ICMP 2009 -- March 2009 update.  You

 8     can see the exact entries as you can see them here in that -- in that

 9     list.  So what is included in Annex C is, I would say, more

10     investigative -- investigative work.  So there you don't have names, but

11     you have actual connections between the graves included.

12        Q.   Okay.  And we will go -- we will go into that shortly, but before

13     that and before I go into some questions about the methodology you used,

14     I'd like to ask whether you received any assistance with the preparation

15     of this report?

16        A.   Yes, indeed.  When we are here with these connections, I can say

17     that I was assisted by our analyst Panayota Vassou, who was mainly

18     dealing with the connections regarding my report, upon my supervision and

19     upon my instructions, and she also provided the chart that is attached to

20     the Confidential Annex C.  Then also during the finalisation of the

21     report I was assisted by yourself regarding grammar and language, because

22     I'm not a native speaker.

23             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  When you say I was assisted by our analyst,

24     could you repeat her name again and what do you mean by "our"?  That

25     means a member of the Office of the Prosecution or what?

Page 33382

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, yes.  I mean the

 2     member of the Prosecution, our team, her name is Panayota Vassou.

 3             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.

 4             MS. SOLJAN:

 5        Q.   Mr. Janc, what was the main source of information used for your

 6     report?

 7        A.   Yes, as I already explained the main source was indeed the ICMP

 8     March 2009 update.

 9             MS. SOLJAN:  And for the record, the complete March ICMP update

10     can be found as Exhibit 4494.

11        Q.   Did you use any other sources of information?

12        A.   Yes.  I also used the other sources, mainly exhumation records,

13     some autopsy records, also photographs, but mainly I was focusing --

14     focusing on -- on exhumation records regarding the -- regarding the

15     exhumations.

16             MS. SOLJAN:  Could we please have on e-court Exhibit 4493, and

17     not to be broadcast.

18        Q.   Mr. Janc, can you tell us what this page represents?

19        A.   Yes.  This is sample page I prepared in order to present you the

20     methodology I have used in order to get the numbers for the individuals.

21     So this is --

22        Q.   What is it a sample page of?

23        A.   This is a sample page of the ICMP March 2009 update.  When you

24     open the file, you will get the results as you can see them here on the

25     screen.  They will appear on your screen as well.  So these are only

Page 33383

 1     first 30 entries out of more than 10.000 entries which you can find on

 2     that -- on that spreadsheet.

 3        Q.   And the colours of the rows, for example, the greys and the

 4     pinks, are these yours?

 5        A.   No.  This is -- this is everything what you can see on screen is

 6     done by the ICMP, and you can see it as it was provided to us.

 7        Q.   Okay.

 8        A.   So different colours are, yeah, done by -- by there side.  So I

 9     can explain these colours, what did they mean, what -- what kind of

10     information we have about these colours.

11        Q.   Okay.  Can you tell us, please.

12        A.   Yes.  Okay.  Grey colours are not that significant, so they're

13     included all.  Probably they are using this as a background.  But we have

14     different slight yellow colour here.  So if you see the colour, the

15     entries in this colour, that means that the relatives of this particular

16     individual -- individual have not been informed about the result of the

17     DNA match.

18        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.  Can we go to the next page, please.

19             Mr. Janc, can you tell us what the difference between this page

20     and the first page is?

21        A.   Yes.  Now, if I may, I will explain first these different

22     colours, because we can see here orange colours also or something, and

23     I'll explain what this represents.  So the colours -- the entries which

24     are in this colour means that these are new entries in relation to the

25     last -- to the previous update they have sended to us; in November, for

Page 33384

 1     example, was the previous one.  ICMP sent us the updated list of the

 2     individuals, and if you find the individuals in these new March update in

 3     this colour, that means that in between these two dates these were added

 4     as new identifications.  So -- and that I respond to your question, this

 5     is also, okay, sample page, but we are moving towards how -- how I came

 6     up with the numbers which are included in my report for each in

 7     particular grave-site.  So what I was doing, you can see here that first

 8     step was that I sorted the -- the entries or sorted the data by case ID.

 9     This is first column on the left-hand side.  And you can see they are

10     going alphabetically.  So I have taken example from the same March 2009

11     update and to present you how it looks like when you have, you know,

12     sorted -- sorted version of the same data.

13        Q.   Okay.  Can we go to the next page, please.  Can you describe what

14     we see here, Mr. Janc.

15        A.   Yes.  This is -- can we go more to the left?  It's more -- no,

16     left, please.  Yes.  This is more important.  First column is more

17     important.

18             So this was next step what I was doing.  In order to -- to find

19     how many individuals we have in certain grave, I had to extract or I had

20     to find particular entries related to these particular graves in this

21     spreadsheet.  So you can see here, for example, if you are looking into

22     the first column, case ID is BIS 01 SEK.  So that means this site is

23     related to Bisina.  So I have included this site because it appears the

24     first -- the first mass grave if you sort it by alphabetical order.  So

25     I've used this Bisina site as an example.

Page 33385

 1             So what I was doing with the -- with the ICMP data was that when

 2     I sorted this data, I was copying each and every single entry which you

 3     can see in the previous sample into special spreadsheets.  So -- and

 4     these special spreadsheets now relates to one and single particular grave

 5     as you can see it here now on the screen.  So this is the result, what

 6     you get when you copy each and every single entry from that main

 7     spreadsheet into separate spreadsheets.

 8        Q.   And is this the final step?

 9        A.   No.  This is not the final step yet, and I can explain it why.

10     If we can move to the right a little bit.  You can -- and if you look

11     into the last column where it says "Type Of Report," you have "Main

12     Cases," and then you have "Reassociations."  Currently on the screen we

13     can see only one, but I think there are two more in this down there.

14             So reassociation means that one individual -- or body parts of

15     the same individual were found in different grave or different location

16     all within the same grave, you know, in different grave or in different

17     location.  All within the same grave, you know, in different location.

18     So it means that these cases are reassociated to the main case.  So in

19     order to get the exact number of the individuals which are coming out

20     from particular grave, that you don't count any individual twice, you can

21     take into consideration only main cases and that's what I was doing.  So

22     when I got this spreadsheet, then I filtered the last column which says

23     "Type of Report" by main case.

24        Q.   Okay.  Can we go to the next page, please.  Can you tell us what

25     you see here, Mr. Janc.

Page 33386

 1        A.   Yes.  That's exactly what I was explaining before.  So you can

 2     see again it is grave-site related to Bisina, and if we can move to the

 3     right again.  So this is the final result when you have only main cases

 4     included.  So -- and then you just count how many of them you have on --

 5     on the list, on the spreadsheet, and that means that many individuals

 6     have been identified from particular grave-site.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  Could we go to the last page of this exhibit, please,

 8     page 7.  Now, Mr. Janc, can you explain to us what this is or what this

 9     represents?

10        A.   You can see these are again data from the same spreadsheet, ICMP

11     update.  So -- but these cases are related to the connections between the

12     graves.  So in order to get this kind of spreadsheet, so you would have

13     to sort it, the spreadsheet, by "Protocol ID," which is the fourth column

14     from the -- from the right.  So you can see it on the top, "Protocol ID."

15        Q.   If we could maybe close in on the very top five rows, please.  So

16     can you describe for us specifically --

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   -- what you have there.

19        A.   Protocol ID is important in order to find one individual.  As I

20     understand this data, one protocol ID can be attributed only to one

21     individual.  So -- and in case the body parts of one individual have been

22     found in different graves, you will find these connections.  As you can

23     see it here, if the -- if you see the red entries -- so and just to

24     clarify that, these are my colours, so I put it that you can follow it.

25     So this red, blue, and then we have green, and at the bottom there are

Page 33387

 1     also, I think, brown ones.  So these are five connections which you can

 2     find in that spreadsheet.

 3             So, for example, if you look into the first one, the red one, you

 4     can see from the case ID that this particular -- particular individual

 5     was found or his body parts were found in Budak number 1 grave, as well

 6     as Zeleni Jadar number 4 grave.  Although you can see here Zeleni Jadar

 7     number 8, it is actual our number 4.  So it is reflected in my report,

 8     because sometimes -- or very often now the BiH commission are putting

 9     their own markings.  So in order to be consistent with our markings, I am

10     calling it Zeleni Jadar number 4.  So you have -- in order to get the

11     connection between two graves, it is important, as I explained, that you

12     have sorted by protocol ID, and then you have to consider the case ID.

13        Q.   Okay.  And how about the next situation, the writing in blue?

14     Can you briefly just comment on that?

15        A.   Yes.  It's the situation where we have two brothers, and we can

16     say that one of those brothers have been identified in three graves.  So

17     why one?  Because we have only -- the protocol ID is 7924, for example.

18     That means for all three entries, that means that one of those two

19     brothers have been identified.  We just know -- we just don't know who of

20     those two brothers.  So -- and on the left-hand side you can see that

21     body parts of this individual have been found in three different graves,

22     Budak 1, Budak 2, and again Zeleni Jadar number 4.

23        Q.   Okay.

24        A.   And if I just can add something.  If you can move to the right

25     again.  More.  Okay.  To the end.  Okay.  Thank you.

Page 33388

 1             And as you can see it here, "Type of the Report."  So in order to

 2     get a conclusion regarding the connections, you have to take into

 3     considerations -- into consideration both main cases as well as

 4     reassociations.  So this is the difference between counting the

 5     individuals found in particular grave or of trying to find the

 6     connections between the graves.

 7        Q.   And Mr. Janc, can you just summarise what is the main identifier

 8     you look for when you are looking for connections between graves or for

 9     reassociations?

10        A.   The main identifier is, as I explained before, is protocol ID.

11        Q.   Okay.  And if, for example, we were to take the protocol number

12     for -- right at the top of this example, protocol ID 7923-06, where could

13     we find this example in your report?  Can you show us?

14        A.   Yes.  This can be found in Annex C.

15        Q.   Okay.  And if you could show us specifically.

16             MS. SOLJAN:  And for that if we could go back to Exhibit 4490,

17     and it can be broadcasted.

18        Q.   Yes, Mr. Janc.

19        A.   Yes, I found it.  It is in Annex C, so I can give you the ERN

20     number.  It is X0194280.

21        Q.   That will be page 50 of the report.  And can you tell us where we

22     need to look, Mr. Janc?

23        A.   Yes.  It is -- if you look into the first column.  So you will

24     find it the fifth entry from the top down.  So you will see the number

25     7923/06, and this --

Page 33389

 1        Q.   What is this number?

 2        A.   This is protocol ID which you can see it in the previous

 3     spreadsheet.  Next to it are our markings, to which particular site is

 4     this individual -- or where you can find the connections between the

 5     graves.  So between Budak 1 and Zeleni Jadar 4, as I explained before.

 6     And on the right-hand side you will see the site codes which you can also

 7     find in the previous spreadsheets.

 8        Q.   Okay.

 9        A.   So ...

10        Q.   Thank you.  Now, Mr. Janc, you had mentioned that Annex C of your

11     report also contains a chart at the end.

12        A.   Yes, indeed.

13        Q.   Can we go to the last page of this exhibit, please, page 65.  Can

14     you briefly explain for the Trial Chamber the meaning of this chart.

15        A.   Yes.  This chart was prepared, as I explained before, by our

16     analyst, and it is DNA connection chart between disturbed mass graves.

17     You can find all the connections between the graves which are listed in

18     the table we have just seen also in this chart.  So you will find how

19     many different cases were found to be connected between different graves.

20        Q.   And when you say "cases," what to does it mean, a case?

21        A.   A case, it means one connection.  So if there is -- if there were

22     body parts of one individual found in two different graves, that means

23     one connection, one case.  If body parts of one individual were found in

24     three different graves, as we have already seen that example also, then

25     there would be three cases.  I would count them three times, for example,

Page 33390

 1     because you have connection between grave A and B, A and C, and B and C.

 2     So three times would that individual be counted -- not individual, but I

 3     would count three cases as three DNA connections.

 4        Q.   Okay.  And just briefly looking at the chart, can you just

 5     looking at it tell us what kind of DNA connections you see here between

 6     which primary and which secondary graves?  Just generally speaking.

 7        A.   Okay.  We can see here from -- from this chart it is also -- part

 8     of the chart also shows the forensic evidence which were already known

 9     before between these graves which connect the primary and secondary

10     graves, and also beside that on the right-hand side in -- in -- in red

11     lines you can see the connections between -- between the primary and

12     secondary graves, how many cases, how they are connected, and, yes, you

13     can see between Branjevo farm and the -- the graves which are in Cancari

14     Road, secondary graves in Cancari Road we have 20 cases, so 20

15     connections.  Between Kozluk and Cancari Road we have 55 -- 52 of those

16     connection and so on.  You can -- it speaks for itself.

17        Q.   Okay.  Do you also summarise this data anywhere in your report?

18     The data regarding specific connections between graves.

19        A.   Yes, yes, indeed.  It is part of the Annex A.  At the end of

20     each -- each grave, you can find the explanation regarding how many

21     connections we have between this particular grave with the -- the other

22     graves.

23        Q.   Okay.  And, Mr. Janc, are all the connections that you identified

24     from the ICMP March update, are they all reflected in this chart?

25        A.   No.

Page 33391

 1        Q.   Can you please explain why?

 2        A.   Yes.  In the ICMP update we have also find -- we have also found

 3     the connections which are not included here, and we -- I think the best

 4     way would be to look into the spreadsheet, and I can explain why.

 5        Q.   Okay.  If we can go two pages before this one, so page 63 of this

 6     exhibit, please.

 7        A.   Yes.  This is the -- this is the table, what I was talking about.

 8     And first column you can see I've marked it as "Not counted."  So it

 9     means if you see "not counted," that means they're not reflected in chart

10     or in my report but I have put them here because think found them into --

11     into the spreadsheet, into the ICMP update.  So -- and there were several

12     reasons why I did not include these particular cases into -- into the

13     total count.

14        Q.   Okay.  Can you please give us some concrete examples?

15        A.   Yes.  Most of them are related to connections between Ravnice 1

16     and Ravnice 2, as you can see it at the end of or from the second part of

17     this table, and also on the next -- next page you will see more

18     connection between those two graves.  So I did not include Ravnice 1 and

19     Ravnice 2 because what I was including were disturbed graves.  So we all

20     know that Ravnice is not disturbed grave, and I did not include into my

21     chart.

22             Although I did not include them, it doesn't mean that they're not

23     important.  They are important and significant, because it shows that

24     actually Ravnice is most probably one grave.  So because we have so many

25     connections, but it was just exhumed in two different -- in two different

Page 33392

 1     occasions.  So we have -- that's for Ravnice.

 2             The second -- the second reason why I did not include some of

 3     them are those which are between Glogova itself.  You can see them, for

 4     example, the second entry, Glogova 2 and Glogova 8, because we are

 5     counting -- we are considering Glogova -- Glogova 2, sorry, as -- as a

 6     grave with several sub-graves.  So from -- going from 2 up to 9.  And you

 7     have, as you can see here, several such connections between Glogova 5 and

 8     7, 5 and 9, these connections.  So I did not include those either.

 9        Q.   Okay.

10        A.   And the third reason or series of these cases were the ones which

11     were, at least at the time when I was preparing the report, somehow

12     illogical.  And you can see, for example, which are those cases on this

13     spreadsheet.  I can -- I can tell you it's the first one --

14        Q.   Maybe it's easiest if you give us the protocol number?

15        A.   The protocol number 8019/06.  Then --

16        Q.   And can you tell us why it's illogical?

17        A.   Okay.  This one.  This particular one it's illogical because we

18     have connection -- we can see connection here between Cerska and Hodzici.

19     So we all know that Cerska is primary undisturbed grave and Hodzici is

20     secondary grave.  So it is not logical to me that there can be any

21     connection.  So then if we move to the case which is the third one down,

22     protocol ID 2741/03, connection between Glogova 5 and Cancari 3.  Glogova

23     1 -- Glogova 5 is actually primary grave, and Cancari 3 is again

24     secondary grave, and so far we have no evidence that these two graves are

25     connected -- connected.

Page 33393

 1             Then if we move down, we have a connection.  It is protocol ID

 2     157/02 between Hodzici 5 and Zeleni Jadar 5.  Again, same reason.  We

 3     don't have any indications that these two secondary mass graves are

 4     connected.

 5             Next one was 3122/03 between Kozluk 3, Cancari 3, and Liplje 2.

 6     So here we have the same problem because there were no established

 7     problems so far between Cancari and Liplje.

 8             Then we have case which is protocol ID 1041/07 between Kravica

 9     and Zeleni Jadar 2.  That one was illogical or not that illogical.  At

10     that time it was the problem with this one was that we did not have

11     enough information regarding the specific location, as well as for the

12     next one, Krke, Zeleni Jadar.  I know that Krke is surface remains, and

13     I'm not presenting in my chart these surface remains connections, but we

14     have connection here.

15             And the last one which is illogical is the last one on the next

16     page, which is between Ravnice.  Can you see it?  Yes, indeed.  It is

17     Ravnice and Hodzici 5.

18             And for all of these cases I have reviewed, because they were not

19     logical to me, the autopsy reports and photographs from the exhumations.

20     So I found in several instances, for example, that the entire body was

21     found in one of those locations and then it was connected to body parts

22     which were found in different locations.  For example, Ravnice 2 and

23     Hodzici 5, I think this is the case that we have the entire body in

24     Hodzici 5 and parts of the bodies in Ravnice 2.  I think this is the

25     case, but I can't be sure.  But I think that I've seen those cases, or

Page 33394

 1     you could see that for these illogical connections you can find the same

 2     part of the bodies in two -- in two places.

 3        Q.   And what did you do, if anything, to obtain clarification beyond

 4     looking at the autopsy reports?

 5        A.   Yes.  We have sent the -- our findings to the ICMP in order to

 6     get the clarification from their side.

 7        Q.   Now, if we could just go back one page in this exhibit, please.

 8     And you were mentioning a connection that is, I believe, 11 rows down.

 9     It's protocol number 1417/07 relating to or showing a reassociation

10     between the site Kravica and the site Zeleni Jadar.  Can you tell us a

11     little bit more about what you know about this particular connection?

12        A.   Yes.  When I was writing this report, I was not aware of the

13     exact meaning of this case ID which is

14     KA01-110-BP [Realtime transcript read in error KA01-00-BP] so I was not

15     able to conclude anything.  But just recently I have been reviewing

16     the -- Michael Hedley's report.  He was the crime of scene officer at the

17     Kravica warehouse and he found the tooth of one individual, and you can

18     find it in his report, and that he marked that tooth with exactly the

19     same case ID as you can see it here,

20     KA01-110-BP [Realtime transcript read in error KA01-00-BP].  So that was

21     on 13 of October, 2000.  And based on that we can conclude that we have

22     DNA connection now between Kravica execution point and secondary mass

23     grave Zeleni Jadar 2.  That same individual or body parts of the same

24     individual can be found also in Zeleni Jadar 2.

25             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right.  For the record, because the reference

Page 33395

 1     is reported wrongly twice, the reference that the witness referred to was

 2     KA01-110-BP and not what appears on line 8 and line 13 of page 82.  Thank

 3     you.

 4             Any time, Ms. Soljan.  It's 7.00.

 5             MS. SOLJAN:  Your Honours, we can stop now.  I will have to

 6     continue briefly.

 7             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  We are going to stop here.  I take it

 8     there is nothing changing in relation to Professor Parsons.  Nothing.  So

 9     tomorrow we're sitting in the afternoon.  Thank you.

10                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.01 p.m.,

11                           to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 29th day

12                           of April, 2009, at 2.15 p.m.