1 Tuesday, 28 November 2006
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- On resuming at 2.22 p.m.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam Registrar, could you call
6 the case number, please.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is case number
8 IT-04-74-T, the Prosecutor versus Jadranko Prlic et al.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Madam Registrar.
10 I'd like to greet everyone in the courtroom, members of the
11 Prosecution, Defence counsel, and the accused.
12 The Chamber will now render two oral decisions. The first one
13 which I will read out slowly is as follows: The oral decision of the
14 Chamber concerning the Praljak motion for the admission into evidence of
15 documents relating to Mr. Josip Manolic. The accused Praljak filed a
16 motion on the 27th of November, 2006, in which four documents were
17 requested to be admitted into evidence, documents shown to the witness
18 Josip Manolic on the 5th of July, 2006. The numbers are 3D 00313,
19 3D 00314, 3D 00320, and 3D 00186.
20 The Chamber would first of all like to point out that, although
21 the witness Manolic appeared before the Chamber on the 3rd, 4th, 5th and
22 6th of July, 2006, it is necessary to implement the decision of the 13th
23 of July, 2006, that concerns the admission of documents into evidence.
24 With regard to 3D 00313, document 3D 00313, and 3D 00314, the
25 Chamber notes that the witness was not in a position to enlighten the
1 Chamber with regard to the authenticity and probative value or relevance
2 of this document.
3 With regard to 3D 00320, the Chamber notes that this document was
4 not shown to the witness Josip Manolic.
5 As far as document 3D 00186 is concerned, the Chamber first of all
6 notes that the witness Josip Manolic did not enlighten the Chamber with
7 regard to the authenticity, probative value or relevance of this document.
8 However, this same document was subsequently shown to the witness Peter
9 Galbraith, and the document was admitted into evidence on the 27th of
10 September, 2006.
11 And as a result, the Trial Chamber hereby decides not to admit
12 into evidence 3D 00313, 3D 00314. I'll repeat that. The Trial Chamber
13 hereby decides not to admit 3D 00313, 3D 00314, and 3D 00320. And the
14 Trial Chamber notes that it is not necessary for Praljak, the accused
15 Praljak, to demand the 3D 00186 be admitted into evidence since this
16 document has already been admitted into evidence.
17 And now for the second oral decision that concerns the admission
18 of documents into evidence that relate to Witness CA, who appeared on the
19 13th of November, 2006. The Trial Chamber will now decide on the
20 admission of documents into evidence, documents that relate to the witness
21 CA, who appeared on the 13th of November, 2006. The Chamber hereby
22 decides to admit the following documents into evidence. These documents
23 were presented by the Prosecution, and this decision is being rendered
24 since the documents have a certain probative value and a certain
25 relevance: P 02009, P 02191, P 02200.
1 In addition, the Trial Chamber has to decide on P 02063. The
2 Chamber has to decide on whether to admit this document into evidence.
3 The authenticity of this document has been contested by the Stojic
4 Defence. The Stojic Defence claimed that the signature on the contested
5 document wasn't the signature of Marko Rozic, who allegedly signed the
6 document. In support of its argument, the Stojic Defence, first of all,
7 presented a document for comparison, 3D 00563, signed by Marko Rozic. In
8 addition, Defence counsel claimed that this person could not have signed
9 the contested document since he was in -- in detention when the contested
10 document was drafted, which was on the 23rd of April, 1993.
11 To respond to this -- to respond to this objection, the
12 Prosecution filed, on the 21st of November, 2006, three documents from the
13 archives of the Republic of Croatia and from the government of Bosnia and
14 Herzegovina, the contents of which are identical to the contents of
15 document P 02063.
16 It is the Trial Chamber's opinion that the signature on document
17 P 02063 is the signature of the same individual as the signature on the
18 document used for comparison, document 3D 00563. In addition, the Trial
19 Chamber is of the opinion that the fact that Marko Rozic was in detention
20 for a few hours on the 23rd of April, 1993, does not exclude the
21 possibility of him signing this document later on that day. And finally,
22 the other indicia in support of the authenticity of the contested
23 document, other indicia such as the stamp and the number under which it
24 was recorded.
25 The Chamber hereby decides, therefore, to admit into evidence
1 P 02063 as it has a certain probative value and a certain relevance. The
2 Chamber would also like to point out that the Defence teams have not
3 requested that documents be admitted into evidence in relation to the
4 testimony of Witness CA.
5 We'll now move into private session.
6 [Private session]
11 Pages 10788-10791 redacted. Private session
6 [Open session]
7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, we are in open session.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Now that we're in open session,
9 I will give the floor to the Prosecution so that they can make their
11 MS. EGELS: Thank you, Your Honour, and good afternoon to everyone
12 in the courtroom.
13 The brief summary of this witness goes as follows: This witness
14 was living with her family in the village of Bivolje Brdo, municipality of
15 Capljina, until July 1993. The witness's husband was a member of a Muslim
16 unit within the HVO. On the night of the 30th of June, 1st of July, 1993,
17 most of his unit was arrested by the HVO on the front line. The witness's
18 husband was not arrested because he was on leave.
19 On the 1st of July, a group of 30 HVO soldiers arrived in Bivolje
20 Brdo and searched the houses and mistreated the women to find out where
21 the men were hiding. The witness was threatened.
22 During the next few days, the soldiers kept coming to look for the
23 witness's husband and for any hidden weapons. On each occasion, they
24 ill-treated the witness and her neighbours.
25 In the evening of the 13th of July, 1993, the witness, together
1 with part of her family, fled her village as she was told the HVO were
2 shelling the area. They fled towards Lokva and were fired upon by HVO.
3 In the morning of 13th July, 1993, the witness was told that Lokva was in
4 flames. When the witness got to Lokva in the evening, the village was
5 empty. The witness spent the night in the woods with villagers from Lokva
6 who had fled in the morning. There were at least 500 villagers from
7 Bivolje Brdo.
8 On the 14th of July, the witness was arrested by HVO soldiers and
9 taken with other civilians to the Silos in Capljina. There was a check
10 point at the entry of the Silos where the belongings of the witness and
11 the other Muslim civilians were searched. They were crammed into a room
12 without a ceiling. There were at least 150. The witness had a baby with
13 her and could hardly move. They received nothing for food, had only a
14 bucket for a toilet.
15 Around the 15th of July, the witness and others were transferred
16 to Gradina in trucks, where she stayed for about eight days. Around the
17 23rd of July, she and others were transferred to Sovici, stayed in the
18 primary school for one night, and were then taken to Doljani by truck
19 where they were told to walk towards --
20 MR. STEWART: Your Honours, this summary is not accurate as far as
21 we can see. When -- we don't know where it comes from. It seems to
22 contain information which we've not seen before. We have commented
23 before. We did suggest that summaries might be supplied to us in advance
24 to avoid this sort of problem. It would be a good idea if we are now
25 going to discuss this, it would probably be better if the witness were not
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. Madam Egels, normally the
3 summary should follow the 92 ter summary. Now, if there are any new
4 elements with respect to -- 65 ter, interpreter's correction. Then it is
5 your duty to inform the Defence thereof, of the new elements. Mr. Stewart
6 is telling us that there are new elements. Now, I myself don't know which
7 they are because I don't have the 65 ter summary to check that out. So is
8 Mr. Stewart wrong or right? You -- is it you who are in the right or
9 Mr. Stewart? Can you respond to Mr. Stewart's objection? He says that
10 there are new elements with respect to the 65 ter summary.
11 MS. EGELS: I was just going to ask my colleague which new
12 elements he was referring to, because, to my knowledge, this summary is a
13 summary of the statement.
14 MR. STEWART: I'm slightly reluctant to do that with the witness
15 here, Your Honour. This isn't a debate which should take place in the
16 witness's hearing. It's only fair to her, the witness, that it doesn't.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, but, Mr. Stewart, the time
18 it takes to have the witness shown out of the courtroom and back in we're
19 going to lose precious time. So either what you say is well grounded
20 or --
21 MR. STEWART: [Previous translation continues] ... procedures we
22 had suggested for practical purposes. I really do not know why our
23 suggestion that the summary should be supplied in advance was not
24 adopted. As an obvious piece of common sense, I specifically suggested it
25 so that it would save this sort of waste of time. But, Your Honour, all
1 right. What happened on the way to Lokva, shooting and so on, we don't
2 see that anywhere.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, two points. Mr.
4 Stewart is quite right in the extent to which he says that it would be
5 advisable for the summary read out in the courtroom should be provided to
6 the Defence in advance. That is the least that the Prosecution can do.
7 Now, why wasn't that, in fact, done, Mr. Mundis?
8 MR. MUNDIS: Well, Mr. President, as we've indicated in the past,
9 the summaries are generally based upon the 65 ter summaries. I can't
10 answer the specific question concerning this witness. Let me consult with
11 my colleagues and perhaps the process that we'll adopt is simply to read
12 the 65 ter summary into the record to avoid this kind of problem.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. I think that would be the
14 best way to go about it. Please continue, Ms. Egels.
15 MS. EGELS: Just to answer the issue of the firing upon, it can be
16 found in paragraph one, two, three, four, five -- paragraph number 6 on
17 page 10 of the statement of this witness.
18 So just to finish on that summary. Around the 23rd of July, they
19 were transferred to Sovici, stayed in the primary school for one night,
20 and were then taken to Doljani by truck, where they were told to walk in
21 the direction indicated by the HVO soldiers in order to reach the Bosnian
22 front line from where they were taken to Jablanica.
23 Examination by Ms. Egels:
24 Q. Good afternoon, Witness CG. You provided a written statement to
25 investigators of the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICTY in February and
1 March of 2001; is that correct?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Did you provide this statement freely?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. When you answered to the questions of the investigator, did you
6 answer truthfully?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. At the end of the interview, was your statement read back to you
9 in your own language?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Did you sign that statement in the French language? And maybe I
12 can ask the witness to look at Exhibit number 9770, which is in front of
13 her. At the bottom of this page, is this your signature?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Yesterday, when you met with me and an investigator, you were
16 given the opportunity to review your statement in your own language; is
17 that correct?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Upon reviewing your statement in your own language, you had some
20 corrections to make; is that correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Is it correct that on page 3, paragraph 12 of the English version
23 of your statement, which is page 3, paragraph 7 of the French version,
24 when it says the Serbian house which had been abandoned, that that
25 sentence should be deleted and should be replaced by the sentence: "The
1 Serbian house first floor was used as a school and the upper floor as an
2 apartment by a Serbian family until it was shelled by the Serbs"? Is that
3 what you told us yesterday?
4 A. Yes, that's right.
5 Q. On page 9, paragraph 6 of the English version of your statement,
6 which is page 7, paragraph 4 of the French version of your statement, you
7 wanted to correct the sentence which said that: "They made me responsible
8 for going and finding out because there was an arms cache." And you
9 wanted to explain that you were the one who offered to go and check what
10 had happened to the village of Bucevici; is that correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And finally on page 10, paragraph 5 of the English version of your
13 staple, which is page 7, paragraph 11 of the French version, when it is
14 referred to a certain -- and maybe we can go into private session, Your
15 Honour, because I will have to name a person.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let's move into private session.
17 [Private session]
2 [Open session]
3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
5 MS. EGELS:
6 Q. Witness, should you be asked today to provide a full statement to
7 this Court, would the content of that testimony be the same as what is in
8 your written statement?
9 A. Yes, that's right.
10 Q. I would like to show you some documents now, Witness CG. Can I
11 ask you to go to Exhibit number 3035. This -- in your statement, you
12 mentioned the arrest of all the men in your husband's unit during the
13 night of 30 June to 1st of July, 1993. This document is an order by a
14 commander, Ivan Primorac, dated the 30th of June, 1993. I would like you
15 to take a look at items 6 and 9 of that order. And this is on page 2 of
16 the version in your language and on page 1 of the English version.
17 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, with your permission,
18 before the witness answers that question, I should like us to clarify the
19 previous question, whether the 3rd Brigade of the HVO was active in the
20 area in which the witness lived and resided, or was it the 3rd Brigade of
21 the HVO, whose order this is, was in some other territory? Because if it
22 was active in some other territory, then there are no grounds for this
23 witness to comment on this particular order. Thank you.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Madam Egels.
25 MS. EGELS: Yes, this is not part of my question, Your Honour, so
1 would you like -- would you like me to ask that question, or do you think
2 this is a question for cross-examination?
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You just wish to establish
4 whether the contents of this document corresponds to the situation as she
5 knew it.
6 MS. EGELS: Yes.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] That's the object of the
9 MS. EGELS: Of course. I didn't even ask a question yet.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ask your question, then, and
11 we'll see.
12 MS. EGELS:
13 Q. So my question is: Paragraph 6 and 9 that I was referring to, do
14 they correspond to what you experienced or perceived on the ground on that
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Can I now ask you to move to Exhibit number 3063, please. In your
18 statement you mention that between the 1st of July and the 13th of July,
19 1993, HVO soldiers came on various occasions to your village to find out
20 where the men were and if weapons were hidden. This document is an order
21 by --
22 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'd just like to draw
23 your attention to the fact that this order is an order from another
24 brigade, the 1st Brigade of the HVO, Knez Domagoj Brigade. So we really
25 must ask the question of which of these brigades was active on the
1 territory that the witness was on. Thank you.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. But the witness might not
3 know who was on the ground. Ms. Egels, could you ask the witness whether
4 she knew whether the 1st Brigade of the HVO was in the region.
5 But, Counsel Alaburic, we're wasting time here. It's a useless
6 exercise. But I don't want you to have the impression that we're not
7 listening to what you are saying, so we'll ask Ms. Egels to ask her
9 Ms. Alaburic, when you have a witness, your witness, called by
10 you, who is faced with the same document and the Prosecution says but this
11 witness knows nothing about that, you're going to be in the same
12 situation. You're going to face exactly the same situation.
13 So, Ms. Egels, ask the witness whether she knows of the existence
14 of the 1st HVO Brigade in the area.
15 MS. EGELS:
16 Q. Witness CG, do you know whether the 1st HVO Brigade, Knez Domagoj,
17 was active in your area, in the area of Bivolje Brdo?
18 A. Well, I think that my husband was a member of the that brigade,
19 the Knez Domagoj Brigade. I don't know what company and battalion he was
20 in, but I think they held control of that territory and that they belonged
21 to that same battalion, unit.
22 Q. Thank you, Witness CG. So to go back to this order, this is an
23 order by commander Nedjelko Obradovic dated on the 1st of July, 1993, and
24 I would like you to take a look at the first item of the order which is on
25 page 1 of the version in your language and the English version. And I
1 would like to know what this paragraph states about the mopping up of
2 Bivolje Brdo. Does this correspond to what you experienced or perceived
3 on the ground during those days?
4 A. Yes, it does correspond to that.
5 Q. Witness, can I ask you now to go to document number 3668, 3668.
6 In your statement you mention that towards the end of July, 1993, you were
7 taken together with other civilians from Gradina to Capljina, then to
8 Risovac and then to the Sovici primary school in the middle of night where
9 you were counted to be about 420 people. The first question is: Do you
10 remember if on that journey you drove through the neighbourhood of
12 A. Yes, that's right.
13 Q. I would like you now to take a look at this document, number 3668,
14 which is a handwritten draft request from the president of the HVO in
15 Jablanica and an HVO commander, to amongst others, Valentin Coric and
16 Berislav Pusic. And I would like to ask you if what is described in this
17 text is conformed to what you experienced or is it not?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Can I ask you now to go to Exhibit number 3652. Following up on
20 that journey which brought you to the Sovici primary school. In your
21 statement you say that you stayed a few hours after arriving in Sovici and
22 that then you were taken by truck to Doljani where you were made to walk
23 towards the ABiH line. I would like you to take a look at this document,
24 which is a telex from Berislav Pusic to Jablanica, and I would like you to
25 tell us if what is described in this text is conformed to what you
2 A. Yes, it does.
3 MS. EGELS: Your Honours, if the Defence have no objection, I
4 would like to tender also the following document, number 3665, which is in
5 fact the implementation on the ground of the previous order, 3652.
6 Otherwise, I'll show it to the witness.
7 MR. KARNAVAS: No objections from this.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Continue.
9 MS. EGELS:
10 Q. Witness, can I ask you now --
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Counsel Tomasevic.
12 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] We do have an objection,
13 for the simple reason that this is an order pursuant to a order. We don't
14 have the previous order. We don't have the signature to this order. We
15 can't see who issued it or a stamp. All it says is what we see here. I
16 don't know what we can deduce and prove based on an order, based on a
17 previous order, which we haven't seen. So we object in principle. The
18 authenticity of the document. There's no signature, no stamp. We haven't
19 seen a single document like this. Documents are usually at least signed.
20 We can't see who issued this, pursuant to whose orders. The military
21 police department of a previous order of theirs, and I think we ought to
22 be shown the previous document so that we can assess this one.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We're going to take note of your
24 objection. Continue.
25 MS. EGELS:
1 Q. So, Witness, Exhibit number 8858, please. And if I can ask you to
2 go to the last page of this document which is page number 12 in both your
3 language and the English version.
4 MS. EGELS: Your Honour, if we might go to private session because
5 I will have to name names.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
7 [Private session]
5 [Open session]
6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Egels, you have the floor.
8 MS. EGELS: Thank you.
9 Q. Witness, can I ask you to go now to Exhibit number 9086. Do you
10 recognise this place?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Can you tell the Court what this place is?
13 A. It's the Silo.
14 Q. Is this the place where you have been detained?
15 A. Yes.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Egels, there are a number of
17 photographs it seems. So are you going to ask the witness about all the
18 photographs? If you're going to ask about all the photographs, then you
19 have to give the numbers, 9943, 994, et cetera.
20 MS. EGELS: I was going to do that, Your Honour. I was just going
21 to ask her to turn to number --
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.
23 MS. EGELS: [Previous translation continues] ... 9739.
24 Q. 9739, please.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a minute. Ms. Egels, in
1 the document 9086, there are a number of photographs: One, two, three,
2 four. There are four. And each have a number, 9943, 9944, 9945, and
3 9946. Now, if you want to admit and tender the four photographs, then the
4 witness will have to say, "I recognise 43. I recognise 44," et cetera.
5 MS. EGELS: Your Honour, you're completely right. I was jumping
6 already to the next one.
7 Q. Can I ask you to go back, please, to 9086, Exhibit 9086. And flip
8 through all the photographs under that number and tell us if you recognise
9 them. So the second -- the second photograph will be 0144-9944 at the
10 bottom. Do you recognise this place?
11 A. Yes. This is also the Silo.
12 Q. Can you be more --
13 A. We would go out to relieve ourselves there while we were in
14 detention and walk around a bit.
15 Q. And the next picture.
16 A. This is also the Silo.
17 Q. For the record, this is the picture with -- at the bottom
19 The next one, please. And this is 0144-9946 at the bottom.
20 A. Yes. This is also the Silo.
21 Q. And the last picture of that exhibit number, which is 0144-9947 at
22 the bottom.
23 A. Also the Silo.
24 Q. Thank you, Witness CG. Can I ask you now to go to Exhibit number
25 9739. Do you recognise the place?
1 A. This is the Silo.
2 Q. And number 9740?
3 A. It's also the Silo.
4 Q. Can I ask you now to turn to number 9742.
5 A. This is Bivolje Brdo.
6 Q. Can your house be seen from here, from that picture?
7 A. No. No.
8 Q. Thank you. Number 9743, please.
9 A. This is the mine at Bivolje Brdo, and that's where the people
10 killed were exhumed.
11 Q. How do you know this place?
12 A. I lived there, and we have a field nearby, and we went to watch it
13 all when they were exhumed. And we went to the place afterwards as well,
14 to visit it.
15 Q. Finally, can I ask you to take a look at Exhibit number 9738. Do
16 you recognise this place?
17 A. Yes, I do. This is the place we were in Sovici. I think it's the
18 primary school in Sovici.
19 Q. Thank you, Witness CG.
20 MS. EGELS: Your Honour, I have no further exhibits to show to the
21 witness and no further questions.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. Counsel Alaburic.
23 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, with your permission,
24 before we start the cross-examination, I'd like to make two observations
25 which I would like to be recorded in the transcript. My colleague from
1 the Prosecution, when asking a question about Exhibit P 03668, and this
2 was recorded on page 18, probably presented by mistake the erroneous
3 assertion that the document was issued by the commander of the HVO of
4 Jablanica whereas it was the president of the HVO of Jablanica who issued
5 the document.
6 And the second remark, with respect to my objections to the
7 documents of the two different brigades, did not relate to the fact that I
8 would expect the witness to speak to the authenticity of the document, but
9 was along the lines that the witness can not tell us whether this was an
10 order pursuant to an order if the order did not come from the territory
11 and area she lived in. That was the gist of my objection.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Egels.
13 MS. EGELS: Thank you, Your Honour. Just to set the record
14 straight. On page -- let me check. Page 18, line 17 -- 16, 17, and 18, I
15 said it was a draft request from the HVO in Jablanica and an HVO
17 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] That was what I was saying. It
18 wasn't a commander, it was the president of the HVO, and this is an
19 important difference. The president of the HVO represents civilian
20 authorities, and the HVO commander represents military authority. Thank
21 you very much.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. The Chamber will
23 rule on the objections raised with regard to the admissibility of this
25 It's now quarter past 3.00. We have half an hour before the
1 break. The Defence has about an hour and a half in total. I don't know
2 what you have agreed on.
3 Mr. Karnavas, any questions?
4 MR. KARNAVAS: I have no questions, but my time has been donated
5 to the Praljak team.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica.
7 JUDGE PRANDLER: I'm sorry. I apologise to Ms. Nozica that I take
8 your time. I just want to come back to that exchange of views concerning
9 what Ms. Egels said. And I believe that she said in lines 17, 19, that I
10 said it and I now repeat and quote, "I said it was a draft request from
11 the HVO in Jablanica and an HVO commander." So I believe that, for the
12 record, it should be said that it was what she said and she didn't speak
13 about the president or -- president of HVO in Jablanica. Thank you.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas has given his 15
15 minutes to the Praljak Defence. An hour and a half. That's 45 minutes.
16 That means 15 minutes for each Defence team.
17 Ms. Nozica.
18 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Mr. Praljak
19 will start, and then I will follow on. Thank you.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Mr. Praljak, you
21 have 30 minutes; your 15 minutes plus the 15 minutes from the Prlic team.
22 You have 30 minutes. Please go ahead.
23 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Thank you.
24 Cross-examination by the Accused Praljak:
25 Q. [Interpretation] Good day, madam. I can't use your name, so I'll
1 just call you madam.
2 A. Good day.
3 Q. I'll be dealing with 1992 and part of 1993. According to your
4 statement, is it correct to say that the Serbian forces, the JNA, arrived
5 in the area of Stolac, Mostar, the left bank, in the spring of 1992 and
6 even earlier, but for you it was in March, 1993?
7 A. 1993.
8 Q. 1992. I apologise.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Is it correct to say, according to your statement, that at one
11 point in time, we can't be precise, you and other people from your village
12 fled to the right bank and went to Capljina?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And before, you were sheltered in the basement of a Croat's house,
15 or all of you; is that correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Do you know that at the time, in the area of Sevas Njive, a group
18 of HVO soldiers transferred towards a hill, about 200 of them, and in
19 April 1992, there were fierce clashes and there were people who were
20 killed and wounded? Are you aware of that?
21 A. At the time, I was in the shelter with my children, so I can't
22 really say anything with certainty about that event.
23 Q. Thank you. After you had returned, there was the JNA. Things
24 were still functioning to a certain extent, but reserve forces from
25 Montenegro arrived at one point in time and the situation became extremely
1 difficult and once again you and other people crossed the Neretva to the
2 right bank; is that correct?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. On the third page of the B/C/S version of your statement, you said
5 that at the time they were trying to stop the JNA, trenches were dug in
6 the vicinity of a house.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And you said, "I think that these were HV soldiers." So soldiers
9 from the Croatian army. And then you say, "Because at that time the HVO
10 had not yet been established." Are you aware of the fact that at the time
11 the HVO, regardless of whether this was official or not, already had
12 units, people in Western Herzegovina had organised themselves, and is it
13 correct to say that you personally saw any HVO soldiers with HVO insignia?
14 A. I saw soldiers, but I didn't see any insignia, not exactly.
15 Q. Thank you very much. Here you say, "We then left the shelter and
16 went to a house behind a hill. This house belonged to Karlo Prce, a
17 Croat." Is that correct?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And then you go on to say that the intensive shelling continued.
20 Normal life had been disrupted. Panic spread and we all fled to Pocitelj.
21 Is that correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And can we therefore conclude that there was fighting and the
24 reserve forces from Serbia had attacked Capljina and they had taken the
25 entire left bank of the Neretva. Is that correct?
1 A. Well, I don't know exactly what they had taken, but I do know that
2 there was panic in our village. There was shelling and my child had a
3 wound in -- in her mouth, and I know it was like that in Bivolje Brdo. I
4 don't know what it was like in Mostar and Capljina.
5 Q. I'm talking about Bivolje Brdo, in that area, not about Mostar.
6 Thank you.
7 I'm interested in another sentence of yours. Here you say, "When
8 the Serbs started opening fire on the HV soldiers, soldiers who were
9 digging trenches, well, they fled and they looted houses."
10 A minute ago you said you didn't see these soldiers were Croatian
11 soldier. How did you see them looting houses? Had you left earlier on?
12 Were you in the basement? Or is this something you heard after the event?
13 A. I didn't hear about that. But when we were returning home, things
14 had been looted from our house.
15 Q. That's quite certain, but you go on to say, I'll find the passage.
16 You said that, after the event, the Serbs, when you first returned there,
17 you said your houses were looted. They had stolen your -- they had stolen
18 your television and other electrical appliances; is that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. So we can conclude that you knew that the houses had been looted
21 and when you return the second time, you knew that the Serbs had done
22 that, but you didn't see the HVO and you don't know who exactly looted
23 those houses, at least in relation to the HVO. Can you claim for sure
24 that the HVO, at that time, looted your houses?
25 A. I can't claim that with certainty, but my husband's mother didn't
1 leave. She immediately returned home after the shelling and she was there
2 throughout that period of time.
3 Q. Thank you. You know that the HVO -- or do you know that in June
4 an HVO offensive in the direction of Stolac was started. Your husband
5 participated in it and an area was liberated?
6 A. Yes, I know that.
7 Q. You say that, in Pocitelj, a mass of people gathered and then you
8 crossed over to the other side in boat -- in a boat and there were lorries
9 waiting to take you away. Do you know that on that occasion 10.000 people
10 crossed the river over, some at a point near Pocitelj and others at Sevas
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Do you know that over 3.000 cars, used by the people to flee in,
14 were in the area of Sevas Polje and Pocitelj. They were by the road, on
15 the road, in the fields, et cetera?
16 A. Yes, I know that.
17 Q. Do you know that from the 13th, 14th, and 15th, 16th, and 17th of
18 April, 1992, cars and even lorries were taken from the left bank of the
19 Neretva to the right bank?
20 A. Yes, to large extent.
21 Q. To a large extent. Do you know that even later, after the 17th of
22 April and right up until the 20th, people came from Stolac, from Visoravan
23 and crossed the Neretva, went to the right bank and went to shelters. Do
24 you know about that?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Do you know that I was the commander at the time. I was the
2 commander down there and people were following my orders and my
4 A. Yes, I think that's correct.
5 Q. Thank you very much. Let's show 3D 00595 to the witness, please.
6 This is a report dated October 1992 signed by --
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam Usher, could you help the
9 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] 3D 00595.
10 Q. It's been signed by seven individuals. I'll read out the names.
11 Tell me whether you know any of them. Zulfo Sabanovic?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Mustafa Sabanovic?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Enver Bojcic?
16 A. Yes, I know Enver.
17 Q. Huseir Sabanovic?
18 A. Pardon.
19 Q. Huseir Sabanovic?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Hamic Sabanovic?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Dzafer Sabanovic?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Sulejman Sabanovic?
1 A. No.
2 Q. Thank you very much. This is a voluminous document. It relates
3 to that period of time. Let's have a look at page 7 in the B/C/S version.
4 Have a look at the second paragraph. On the 4th of April, 1992 -- it's on
5 page 7, paragraph two. Have you found that?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. It says: "From the right bank to the left bank of the Neretva, a
8 unit with a hundred individuals crossed over with all their equipment."
9 And then it says: "These people were escorted another unit in boats, a
10 unit of about 60 people. And then on the third night, a group of about 50
11 individuals were taken across. They went to fight in Bivolje Brdo." And
12 on page 8, paragraph three says: "On the 10th of April, fierce fighting
13 broke out at the front in Bivolje Brdo. A tank unit set off from Pijesak
14 in the direction of Bivolje Brdo. Artillery fire was opened. It was hell
15 on Bivolje Brdo on that day. And also in Sevas Polje."
16 And then the third paragraph, on the bottom of the same page, it
17 says: "On this day in Bivolje Brdo, Beno Franjo died, Beno Martin as
18 well, Raguz Dragan. There were others who were wounded," et cetera. Can
19 you see that? Do you know anything about this, since that was near you?
20 A. I heard about this, but at the time, I don't think I was at home.
21 Q. Thank you. You've heard about that. Now have a look at page 9.
22 Towards the bottom of that page it says: "The entire column returned to
23 Pocitelj and Sevas Polje. Vehicles were left, abandoned, and they crossed
24 over the Neretva. The Crisis Staff assessed that at the time there were
25 about 10.000 individuals in Pocitelj and Sevas Polje. The boats kept
1 taking people across the Neretva," et cetera, et cetera.
2 And then on page 10 there's a list. Have a look at page 10,
3 please. It says, "On the 13th of April, the Chetniks attacked Capljina."
4 Are you aware of the fact that at the time Capljina was shelled on
5 a daily basis?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Do you know that they were doing this from the left bank of the
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And do you know that on the right bank, behind Capljina, in the
11 village of Grabovina, that there was a barracks that belonged to the JNA.
12 And they also opened fire on Capljina from there. Capljina was fired on
13 from two directions?
14 A. I know that there was a barracks there because I was born in the
15 vicinity, but I don't know whether there was shooting from it because I
16 wasn't there.
17 Q. Very well. Thank you. Then paragraph 4, it says, "On the 17th of
18 April, all the refugees were taken across the Neretva River to Sevas
19 Polje. Many vehicles were abandoned. In our assessment, there were about
20 3.000 of them." You have testified about this and that's correct?
21 A. Yes it is.
22 Q. And then it goes on to say, and you've already testified about
23 this, it says, "that all those vehicles were taken across as well as a lot
24 of quite heavy lorries." Let's go on. Let's move on.
25 Do you know that all these people were put up in houses in
1 Medjugorje? They were put up in the complex that belonged to the Kompas
2 company. They were put up in student homes in Capljina, in Ljubuski, et
4 A. Yes, I know that.
5 Q. So everybody was provided accommodation and was taken care of. Do
6 you know if anyone went hungry?
7 A. I don't think so.
8 Q. Thank you. And subsequently, as you yourself say, and that's what
9 it also says in this document, units were established in which there were
10 Muslims, and there was a company that was formed in Medjugorje as well as
11 in Ljubuski?
12 A. Yes. I know that. A husband -- my husband was in one of those
14 Q. Did your husband ever say that he had met me?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Thank you. Do you know that these units were also trained?
17 A. Yes, I do.
18 Q. Thank you do you know that they were provided with weapons,
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And in your statement, you say, "My husband organised a massive
22 exodus of the people"?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. You say there were lorries waiting there, et cetera. I don't
25 doubt that. And here it says that many Muslims became involved and so on
1 and so forth. But can you assess how many lorries, buses, and petrol was
2 used, how many tyres were used to make a raft so that the lorries could be
3 transported across the river, 3.000 vehicles, 12.000 people? Can you
4 imagine the effort involvement.
5 A. Yes, an immense effort.
6 Q. Thank you very much. And you also know that there was fierce
7 fighting, Capljina was being shelled, it was burning around Mostar and so
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Thank you very much. And then you go on to say that when you
11 first returned, a gentleman approached you, his name was Sulejman
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Do you know that this gentleman, shortly after that event, shortly
15 after that period, became the deputy commander of the ABiH 4th Corps in
16 Mostar? He didn't immediately become the commander of the 4th Corps
17 because there was no such unit but he became the commander of the
18 headquarters of the ABiH in Mostar.
19 A. I know that he had some sort of official position, but I don't
20 know of what kind.
21 Q. Madam, it's very simple. If you don't know, just say you don't
22 know. None of us know everything here. And what I'm interested in is
23 this, just a few more questions and then we'll be able to wind up. So the
24 companies were formed, and those Muslim refugees were put up in the area,
25 and afterwards, the following things happened: A large number of Muslims
1 joined up with the HVO and another portion joined the Bregava Brigade that
2 was established to the left of your village; is that correct?
3 A. What I know is that many Muslims joined the HVO. Perhaps I heard
4 about the rest of it, but I'm not quite sure, so I can't say.
5 Q. Tell me, please, did your husband receive a salary in the HVO just
6 like the others, if they received a salary?
7 A. Yes, he did.
8 Q. You say at one place that you were forced to take Croatian dinars.
9 Tell me, please, when you went shopping to the shops that were open, could
10 you pay with German marks, if you had German marks of course?
11 A. Yes, we could.
12 Q. Could you pay in dollars, for example, if you happened to have
14 A. Yes, we could.
15 Q. Could you pay in French francs, if there were any around?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. So apart from those currencies, was there any other currency,
18 except for the Croatian dinar, the currencies I've just mentioned?
19 A. I don't remember.
20 Q. You don't remember. Right. While your husband was in the HVO, up
21 until that June or the end of June, 1993, did he happen to tell you that
22 there was any -- ever any difference within the HVO in terms of weaponry,
23 food, salaries, between Muslims and Croats, any differentiation there?
24 A. No.
25 Q. So they received equal treatment with regard to their shifts,
1 going up to the front line and generally speaking?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. So you at the time as a civilian, you or your neighbours, could
4 you go to Croatia, to Ploce, Metkovici, Split, without any great problems?
5 A. I didn't go, but I think that was possible, yes.
6 Q. And was there medical care and attention available? Were doctors
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Was it all free of charge or did you have to pay?
10 A. I don't think we had to pay.
11 Q. You didn't have to pay.
12 A. No.
13 Q. And now when people would go to Split for an examination of any
14 kind, did they have to pay the hospital fees there?
15 A. I really can't say. I don't know.
16 Q. Did you hear anybody complain when they went to Split that they
17 had to pay for their hospital fees?
18 A. No, I didn't hear of anything like that.
19 Q. I'd just like to show a map, map 29, to the witness before my time
20 is up.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam, Mr. Praljak has just
22 asked you a series of questions and I have a question myself, a follow-up
23 question. In your written statement, you explain that -- how in your
24 village you could see Croatian television. Now, I'd like to know why you
25 weren't receiving Sarajevo television. Could you explain that? Why
1 couldn't you watch Sarajevo television?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because we didn't receive a signal,
3 any signal.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] No signals. Right. So was that
5 due to the configuration of the terrain or was there no relay station, or
6 maybe the -- or you couldn't watch Sarajevo television even in previous
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We could watch Sarajevo television
9 before, but we couldn't at that time, and I don't know why. I don't know
10 the reason.
11 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] May I --
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So you said that before you
13 received the signal and could watch Sarajevo television, afterwards you
14 couldn't because there was no signal; is that right.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right. We received a signal
16 before but not at that time, and I don't know why.
17 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Madam, you know that there was a general relay station put up at
19 Velez for the region?
20 A. Yes. Yes. Everybody knows that.
21 Q. And you could see the relay station and you were able to see, I'm
22 sure, that in 1992, the Serbs destroyed it.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. So it was this relay station that catered to the entire area and
25 when that was destroyed, there was no further possibility of watching
1 Sarajevo television; is that right?
2 A. Yes that's right.
3 Q. Thank you. I'd now like to have a look at the following document
4 which is map 29, please, page 30 of the map. On e-court, it is P 09276.
5 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] May I have the usher's
6 assistance, please, and could she take the map to the witness?
7 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, you have not received
8 a copy of this map, that folder, because it was a map and it exists on
10 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Madam, I have drawn up a map where you can see the river Neretva
12 and Pocitelj, and could you just mark on that map where the crossings
13 were. Sevas Polje, crossing at Sevas Polje, and Pocitelj. Just put
14 crosses by those two places, please. Larger, so we can see them better.
15 A. [Marks]
16 Q. And put a 1. That's Sevas Polje. Put number 1. Oh, that's
17 Pocitelj. Right. So put number 1 by Pocitelj. At Sevas Polje, a little
18 further up, you can put a number 2 there.
19 A. [Marks]
20 Q. And put today's date there, too, and your signature, please. We
21 have to follow procedure.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And put a CG as well, the
23 initials CG.
24 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]
25 Q. And the date, please.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam Registrar, may we have an
2 IC number for that, please.
3 THE REGISTRAR: This will be IC number 118.
4 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] I've almost finish.
5 Q. Can you just tell me one more thing? Throughout the spring of
6 1992 and the first half of 1993, despite the war that was being waged, the
7 life of civilians, both the displaced persons and everybody, was
8 relatively tolerable and that Croats and Muslims were -- not only were
9 they in the army together but the whole atmosphere was tolerant if we
10 don't count the exceptions to the -- this example. Would that be the
11 general rule?
12 A. Yes, that's right.
13 Q. You also say -- you said something that when we arrived at the
14 lines at Stolac facing the Serbs, because they were far mightier, there
15 was a lull there, and then you say, "According to an agreement with the
16 Croats." Do you think there was an agreement between the Croats and Serbs
17 to calm the situation down or was that the rumour going round?
18 A. That was the rumour going round, but since we experienced the
19 shelling by the Serbs, we realised that they were very strong and that it
20 was very difficult to budge them, to get them away from that territory.
21 Q. But we nonetheless held the line?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Now, for the -- do you know that for the Virgin Mary holiday, that
24 in Herzegovina and with the Catholics is very celebrated, based on the
25 15th of August and in 1992, there was a large-scale offensive with Serb
1 tanks against Stolac? Have you heard of that offensive of theirs? And we
2 barely survived. Just say yes or no.
3 A. I can't confirm this with any certainty.
4 Q. Well, thank you, Witness, for your answers.
5 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] That completes my
6 examination. Thank you, Your Honours.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. We're going to take
8 our break and we'll have one hour left afterwards for the remaining four
9 Defence teams. I'd like to give this document back to the registrar. It
10 is Mr. Praljak's document with an IC number. And we reconvene at 5
11 minutes past 4.00. Thank you.
12 --- Recess taken at 3.44 p.m.
13 --- On resuming at 4.06 p.m.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Is it Counsel Nozica
16 Yes, Ms. Egels.
17 MS. EGELS: Sorry. Just for the record, Your Honour, I believe
18 there is a little mistake. During the examination, the cross-examination
19 by Mr. Praljak, on page 38, lines 7 and 8, he referred to a map, map
20 number 29, that he showed to the witness being P 9270. The map that was
21 shown to the witness is not map 29. It seems that it is an amalgamation
22 of two maps, map 28 and 29. So for the record, what has been marked and
23 now given the number IC 110 is not map 29. No, 118, sorry.
24 MR. STEWART: While we're correcting the record, I think I noticed
25 that when the witness dated the map put to her by Mr. Praljak, in fact,
1 she put yesterday's date. That probably just ought to be corrected.
2 MR. KOVACIC: Your Honour, yes, I agree. It is -- the maps Mr.
3 Praljak used are actually the copies of two pages from the Prosecutor's
4 evidence, and since the Prosecution was kind enough to prepare that
5 document, I think that having that document changed into the IC, I think
6 that there should not be any problem. But if needed, we can produce the
7 same maps which the Prosecution actually used for that chart from the book
8 where they took it as well. Yes. Exactly, Your Honour. Thank you for
9 showing me.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The important thing is to have 1
11 and 2 that was marked, the crossing points across the river. The rest is
12 less important.
13 Yes, Ms. Alaburic.
14 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, with the Court's
15 permission, I would like publicly to apologise to my learned friend of the
16 Prosecution. My remark that her question in relation to an exhibit --
17 well, what I said was unfounded because, yes, my colleague did indeed
18 mention civilian authorities.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. Ms. Nozica, you have
20 15 minutes.
21 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. For the
22 record, I would like to inform the Trial Chamber, very precisely, that I
23 have my own 15 minutes, seven minutes from Mr. Coric's Defence and seven
24 minutes from Mr. Pusic's Defence, which makes 28 minutes in all for the
25 record. Thank you.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. Our legal advisor will do
2 the calculations. It's getting a bit complicated now.
3 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. It's no less
4 complicated for me, but I'll try and get through my questions before the
5 allotted time.
6 Cross-examination by Ms. Nozica:
7 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, madam.
8 A. Good afternoon.
9 Q. I have placed a pink folder next to you. You needn't look at it
10 now, but when I come to show you two documents, you will find those
11 documents in that binder. And we're going to start off with the
13 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] May we move into private session
14 because I want to ask the something that might disclose her identity.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Private session, please.
16 [Private session]
13 [Open session]
14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
15 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Madam, tell me, do you know that on the 30th of June, 1993, the BH
17 army, in cooperation with part of the HVO members who were Muslims, of
18 Muslim ethnicity, attacked and took control of the so-called North Camp in
19 Mostar and the Tihomir Misic barracks, and the entire territory of Bijelo
20 Polje north of Mostar when certain -- a certain number of HVO members were
21 killed and some civilians detained who happened to be in the area?
22 A. Well, I heard about most of it. Not about everything, but most of
24 Q. So we can take it that you knew of these events, did you?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. You also go on to say in your statement, that after that day, that
2 is to say the 30th of June, 1993, your husband, together with the other
3 fugitives from Kapa's unit, as you say, and with a number of locals, took
4 to the forests and hid there; is that right?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Would it be correct to conclude, in view of what you say on page 7
7 of your statement, it is page 7 of the B/C/S and paragraph 4 in the
8 English, that on that territory at that time, and we're talking about the
9 13th of July until the end of month, there were about 300 members of the
10 BH army or, rather, that that group contained about 300 men?
11 A. Yes. But it wasn't only at Bivolje Brdo. It was the entire area
12 of Dubravska Visoravan.
13 Q. I see, those 300 were all there. Now, how was that whole group
14 armed? Do you know anything about Kapa's unit, whether they had any
15 weapons or --
16 A. All I can tell you is whether my husband had any arms. I can't
17 tell you about the rest, whether they did or did not.
18 Q. I'm speaking slowly for the record, because everything you and I
19 say has to be recorded. Can we then say that it is true and correct that
20 your husband had an automatic rifle?
21 A. Yes, we can say that.
22 Q. In your statement, in several places, you say that the members of
23 the HVO came by to ask you where your husbands were and that they were
24 looking for weapons mostly; is that right? Hidden weapons in the houses.
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. I'd like us to go back into private session, because I have to go
2 into some details now.
3 [Private session]
11 Page 10829 redacted. Private session
7 [Open session]
8 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Do you know that -- may I?
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let's move into open session.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
12 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Madam, do you have any information about this group? Do you know
14 that this group, and your husband was in it, and you actively helped him,
15 and there are many details about that in your statement, do you know that
16 on the 13th of July, this group was involved in sabotage action against
17 the HVO? This group or some other group that was on the Dubrava plateau,
18 as you say. Are you aware of any sabotage committed against the HVO?
19 A. I heard about such sabotage action but I don't know who was
20 involved in the sabotage. I wasn't there. I didn't see it. But later,
21 when I spoke to my husband, I found out that, in fact, on the 14th, he was
22 already in Blagaj. But I have heard about that sabotage and about acts of
23 sabotage being committed.
24 Q. In your statement you described the Croatian soldiers who were
25 detained in a garage. There was Mujo Sose halfway between the hamlet of
1 Lokva and Vitina. At that point in time, I think it was on the 13th of
2 July, according to your statement -- well, at that time, was there any
3 fighting between the ABiH and the HVO? And what happened? Could that be
4 described as a sabotage action carried out by those in the area?
5 A. Well, let me tell you. We heard the sounds of -- the sound of
6 firing and explosions, but in the area that we were actually in, we didn't
7 see a single soldier at that time, at the time that I saw those prisoners.
8 I think they were prisoners because they were imprisoned. They were kept
9 behind locked doors. But at that time and in that area, there was no
10 fighting. You could only hear explosions in the distance.
11 Q. But you don't know the circumstances under which they were
12 imprisoned. You don't know whether a group of inhabitants from your
13 village, from the surrounding villages, or members of the ABiH had come
14 and imprisoned them?
15 A. No, I don't know.
16 Q. I'd like to remind you about part of your statement in which you
17 describe the event, an event that appears to be a sabotage action, in my
18 opinion. I'd like to refer you to page 8. And it's also page 8 in the
19 English version of your statement, the penultimate passage. And you
20 say, "I was surprised that HVO soldiers could have been taken prisoner
21 when they occupied the village, as if it was their place. I thought that
22 the men hiding in the woods had probably managed to take some prisoners.
23 I didn't see anyone else in the area who could have done that."
24 And just wait briefly before you answer. Is that what you said in
25 your statement?
1 A. Yes, I did.
2 Q. Very well.
3 A. Madam, from the 1st and up until the 13th, we saw only HVO members
4 with our own eyes. That's why I said that they had quite simply taken
5 over the village. But the men who had fled, well, they were in the
6 woods. But during that period, there were only HVO soldiers walking
7 around the village, and they would enter houses and maltreat people.
8 That's why I said that.
9 Q. Very well, madam. But there were Croatian soldiers who were
10 imprisoned there?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. By Muslims. They had been imprisoned by Muslims.
13 A. Well, I suppose they didn't imprison themselves.
14 Q. Very well. That's all I wanted to ask you about. Thank you.
15 You said that you had heard about sabotage actions. I'd like to
16 ask you whether you heard about anything else. Did you hear about the
17 killing of the ambulance driver and the wounding of a nurse on the 13th of
18 July? And you described quite a lot of events on that day. This took
19 place in Domanovici on the road to Capljina. It's fairly close to your
20 village. Isn't that correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Let's have a look at something that might refresh your memory.
23 Let's have a look at document 2D 00276. It's the first document that you
24 have. While waiting for it to appear on the screen, and the Judges have
25 the document, too, I'll move on. It's dated the 14th of July, the health
1 sectors, Defence department, and it states the following: "Yesterday in
2 Domanovici, on the road to Capljina, while transporting wounded, there was
3 an ambush and a burst of fire was opened as a result of which Franjo
4 Boskovic, the ambulance driver, was killed. And as a result of that same
5 burst of fire, the nurse, Mijatovic Vesna, was seriously wounded."
6 I haven't got much time. I have another important document
7 under -- I'll read out the next page. "The late Franjo, up until
8 yesterday and from the beginning of the war, would save people in the
9 territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina regardless of their ethnicity or
10 religion. He was killed by members of the MOS yesterday." Have you heard
11 anything about this?
12 A. No.
13 Q. And you never heard about this afterwards either?
14 A. May I? When we were taken to the Silos, well, the soldiers showed
15 us the road that had been damaged beneath the cemetery in Domanovici, and
16 they said, "You done even know who did this." And that's when we found
17 out about this act of sabotage in Domanovici, if that's where it was.
18 Otherwise, I know nothing about it.
19 Q. Very well. Let's have a look at the next document, P 08648. And
20 listen to my question while we're waiting for the document to come up on
21 the screen. Have you heard about someone being killed or, rather, 23 HVO
22 members being killed and about 10 being wounded in the Gubavica sector,
23 which isn't far from your house? Isn't that correct? In fact, it was on
24 the 15th of July, 1993, at the Dubrava plateau. On that day, on the 16th
25 of July, you were in Gradina, and you were in Becir Boskailo's house for
1 about eight days. So during that period, did you hear anything about this
2 act of sabotage?
3 A. I heard that soldiers had been killed, but I didn't see anything
4 and I wasn't there, but I heard about it.
5 Q. This event in which these soldiers were killed was quite
6 important. A lot of people suffered. It was the day of the dead in
7 Capljina on that day. Did you hear anything about that?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Since this document has to do with what you have said in your
10 statement, I'd like to have a look at it together with you. At the
11 beginning, on the first page -- well, the document is dated the 8th of
12 February, 1996, but it mentions the sabotage in the Gubavica sector, the
13 Dubrava plateau, and the result of the act of sabotage was that there were
14 23 dead and 10 wounded.
15 Then there was this event on the 15th of July, 1993, and as I have
16 said, there were 23 men killed and 10 wounded. This could have been
17 prevented if everyone had acted responsibly, if everybody had performed
18 their duties.
19 The intelligence service informed their superiors in written form
20 on two occasions and -- on the 3rd of July and just before the event
21 itself on the 11th of July, 1993.
22 I will just read out the next paragraph: "The intelligence
23 service with Bruno Krvavac, the chief at its at its head, carried out
24 operative work and reconnaissance and found out that the ABiH was planning
25 sabotage terrorist action in that area in cooperation with ABiH members
1 who had remained in the Dubrava area." Let's have a look at the next page
2 of the document. It's a Prosecution document.
3 First, we have an intelligence record. It was mentioned in the
4 previous document. It's dated the 11th of July. Have a look at the
5 original, although we have it on the screen now. Let's have a look at it
7 Item 1 -- or, in fact it says: "Through analysis of intelligence
8 received from intelligence sources, we have obtained the following
9 information: Three groups of a total of 150 men have been spotted in the
10 forest above Satorova Gomila in the area towards Stanojevici. Most of
11 them are between 25 and 30 years of age. All members of this group have
12 automatic infantry weapons, and they also have a certain number of Zolja
13 hand-held rocket launchers and rocket-propelled grenades." You said your
14 husband had an automatic rifle. Isn't that correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. In your statement, you also said that certain individuals, whose
17 names I won't mention since we are in open session, you also said that
18 some of his comrades had automatic rifles. Isn't that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Now let's have a look at item 7. Item 7: "The basic
21 communication between the groups on the run is through a courier, but
22 there's also a possibility that someone or more of them have wireless
24 On page 7 -- on page 7, the last paragraph in the English version,
25 you said that you had provided batteries for radios to some of the -- to
1 one of the men who came, who was with your husband, because he had
2 problems communicating with Buna. I won't mention his name since we are
3 in open session. Isn't that correct though?
4 A. He wasn't with my husband. He came and we went to the shelter
5 which was far away from my house. He came from the other part of the
6 village. Mine husband was hiding in the vicinity of our house then.
7 Q. Could we agree that there were several groups, as it says here,
8 and they weren't all at the same location? He was at another location, as
9 you say. He wasn't at the same location as your husband.
10 A. He came from another direction. All I know is where my husband
12 Q. Did he ask for a battery, because he said he had interference and
13 he wanted to be able to communicate with Buna?
14 A. Yes, he said something like that.
15 Q. Who was at Buna at the time?
16 A. I don't know.
17 Q. Very well. Let's have a look at item 9. "On the basis of what
18 has been said, there's the possibility of maintaining contact between the
19 members of the group and majority of the armija forces in Blagaj and
20 Mostar area, and there's also the possibility of organising and
21 synchronising the action of these individuals."
22 Item 10: "Certain group commanders insist on sabotage and
23 terrorist acts and activities."
24 This document is dated the 11th of July and it corresponds to what
25 you said you knew about. You heard about certain terrorists and sabotage
1 groups. Isn't that correct? Or, rather, you heard about such activities.
2 A. Well, I heard something about that but never from my husband. He
3 never gave me an answer to anything like that, either positive or
5 Q. Well, I can understand why he didn't do that, but you heard not
6 from your husband but, as you said, from others that this kind of thing
8 Now, let's take a look at the next document, the 3rd of July.
9 Once again, it is an intelligence report. So let's skip the first point
10 and focus on the second bullet point. It says: "There is realistic
11 possibility for group and individual sabotage and intelligence activities,
12 and we especially would like to focus on the individuals and groups aimed
13 at linking up, organising themselves with the ultimate intention of
14 breaking through in the direction of the BH army units in the area around
16 Now, you say something about that in your own statement. Do you
17 know whether at that time you were aware of the fact that certain people
18 from the military circles of Mostar wanted to meet this group, and do you
19 know if there were any initiatives in that regard or whether this linking
20 up actually happened? Did they manage to link up with the Mostar people
21 with these small groups which together, as you say, made up the 300
22 resistance fighters?
23 A. I've already told you, I heard something about that but I didn't
24 get a definite answer from anybody as to whether that was true or not, so
25 I can't really answer your question.
1 Q. Well, I'll end there with my last question. On page 7 of your
2 statement you said, and I'll read it out to you. Take a look at page 7,
3 please. It says: "My husband" -- you say, "While I was going to take
4 some stores to my husband, I heard rumours that somebody would arrive from
5 Mostar to have a meeting with a group of people who were hiding in the
6 woods and help them to set up the defence lines towards Rude near the
7 bauxite mine."
8 Now, I'm interested in this next paragraph. It says: "My husband
9 never confirm the rumour to me, but I know that will he was involved with
10 the group in an operation coordinated with the villagers in the region.
11 In all, there were about 300 resistance fighters, but I can't tell you any
12 more than that."
13 Now, my question is this: What was your husband involved in
14 together with the other co-fighters? So this whole group, not only your
15 husband, but what did you have in mind when you say, "But I know that he
16 was involved in the operation"?
17 A. Well, I don't know what it was about and what was going on, but as
18 he was with them and talked to them and moved around in the forest with
19 them, naturally he was involved. That's how I concluded that he knew
20 about something. But otherwise, I didn't have any special indicators.
21 Since he was with them, he wasn't an exception. He must have been with
22 them in whatever they were about.
23 Q. Now, you took a fairly active role, and I'm not criticising you
24 for that, I'm just stating it as a fact, but what was your role in actual
25 fact? What did you think you were doing when you were taking weapons that
1 had been dug into the ground? You dug them up. You played a very active
2 role in bringing in information, news, resources, equipment. What was
3 that group preparing to do? Was it preparing to continue fighting the
4 Serbs, or was it preparing to fight the Croats? What would you say in
5 view of all of the things that you have said in your statement?
6 A. I don't exactly what they were getting ready for, but I thought
7 they were getting ready to break through to free territory and escape.
8 That's what I thought. I wasn't thinking of any sabotage, killing, or the
9 like. All I thought was, quite simply, that they wanted to gather
10 together and then break through together to go to Blagaj, Mostar, or
11 further on.
12 Q. But nevertheless, as we've seen from the documents that I showed
13 you, and on the basis of your own knowledge, throughout that time, some
14 sabotage activities were going on.
15 A. But I don't know about that.
16 Q. You confirmed a moment ago that you had heard about some of them.
17 A. Well, I heard about them later on, not at that actual point in
19 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you. I have no further
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Next Defence counsel. Mr.
23 MR. STEWART: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour.
24 Cross-examination by Mr. Stewart:
25 Q. Witness, when your husband was home on the night of the 30th of
1 June, 1993, you say that he was on leave. How long was he on leave for as
2 planned at that time?
3 A. I think he was supposed to go back in the morning.
4 Q. But the fact is -- consider this: Is it correct that he wasn't
5 actually on leave at all? He had already decided to leave the HVO, and he
6 was never going to go back. Is that correct?
7 A. No.
8 Q. And in fact, it was not the practice for men in his unit to be
9 given a single night's leave at that time, was it?
10 A. I don't know. All I know is -- may I be allowed to say something?
11 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... of course.
12 A. All I know is that since our house was there, he went by car to
13 the front line, and he would often come home, and I would cook some -- or,
14 rather, prepare some food. He would take some food to them. So they
15 would let him go back home fairly often.
16 Q. There had been a major attack on an HVO barracks in Mostar on that
17 day, the 30th of June, hadn't there?
18 A. Well, I heard about that. Yes, I did hear about that.
19 Q. Your husband knew about that on that day, didn't he?
20 A. Well, I can't speak for him. I don't know if he knew or not. I
21 don't know myself.
22 MR. STEWART: Counsel apparently has an objection. I'd be
23 interested to hear what it will be.
24 MS. EGELS: I have an objection because this goes to speculation.
25 The witness answered whether her husband told her and why he came back.
1 Putting this question to the witness is asking for speculation, unless you
2 have proof that the husband said something else to her, to his wife.
3 MR. STEWART: That is so far short of speculation that we've seen
4 in this case, Your Honours, that I'm just going to proceed.
5 Q. So did you -- as far as you remember, there was no conversation
6 and no indication of any sort between you and your husband that evening or
7 that night about anything having happened by way of attack in Mostar. Is
8 that your evidence?
9 A. The only thing he mentioned was that I was to wake him up early in
10 the morning so that I -- and that I could get as much cheese and food as I
11 could muster, so that he could take it to his fellows up at the line.
12 Q. Did you have any knowledge of an armed -- any armed group of
13 Muslims, not part of the HVO, already being in the nearby woods at that
15 A. You mean between the 30th and the 1st? Is that what you're asking
16 me about?
17 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... of June, that night. Did you
18 already have any knowledge --
19 A. I don't know.
20 Q. Did you have any knowledge yourself -- I'll rephrase that. Had
21 you heard anything about any collection, gathering or hiding of any arms
22 or ammunition by Muslims, ammunition obtained while they were members of
23 the HVO for future use by Muslims for their own purposes?
24 MS. EGELS: Your Honour, I would like to object. This is a very
25 wide question, unless my colleague can make a more specific question on
1 who he's talking about, where he's talking about, what he's talking about,
2 but any Muslims, any gathering of weapons. It's too wide.
3 MR. STEWART: No, it's not Your Honour. It's a very wide question
4 to which the -- it's giving the witness the opportunity to say, no, she
5 had heard nothing, in which case, her negative answer will be very wide,
6 or to give a positive answer, in which case we will then go, in the light
7 of that positive answer, to the narrower area. The objection is
8 completely misplaced, to use a word. But in the light of that
9 intervention, I will unfortunately use my time to repeat the question so
10 there is no misunderstanding.
11 Q. Had you heard anything about the gathering, collection, hiding of
12 weapons or ammunition by Muslims for their future use other than as
13 members of the HVO?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Did it come as a complete surprise to you when you learnt about
16 this arms cache that you went to dig up?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. How near -- you were in -- you were in Bivolje Brdo. When you
19 leave -- let's assume you leave by foot. If you leave Bivolje Brdo by
20 foot, how far is it, then, as you leave, until you come into Domanovici?
21 A. You mean from my house?
22 Q. Well, all right. Let's take it from your house then. That's the
23 easiest thing. From your house, if you walk to Domanovici, how far is it
24 until you come into the outskirts of Domanovici? It's about a kilometre
25 or not much different; right?
1 A. A bit more.
2 Q. A little bit more.
3 A. Yes, a little bit more. Up to one and a half kilometres.
4 Q. Right. We can leave that then. The -- may I show you, please --
5 I think the witness has, or can easily have a bundle of documents which
6 contains a number of exhibits I wish to show her or prospective exhibits
8 Witness, I think those -- the documents are marked. Is there one
9 which is marked and I'd like it to come up on the screen, please,
10 4D 00461. And if necessary, if there is any difficulty, perhaps the
11 witness could be helped by Madam Usher.
12 This is an order signed by Mr. Stojic, Mr. Bruno Stojic. I'm
13 reading from the English of course. It's dated the 3rd of July,
14 1993. "Custody and care regarding the arrested and isolated Muslims fit
15 for military service from the municipalities of Capljina and Stolac. I
16 hereby order, 1, HVO of Capljina and Stolac municipalities shall
17 immediately assume obligations of custody, accommodation, et cetera,
18 regarding the arrested members of the Muslim armed forces fit for military
19 service with parts of the police forces from Capljina and Stolac police
20 stations and home guard formations."
21 Did you on or shortly after the 3rd of July, did you notice any
22 assumption of those responsibilities, those tasks, the custody,
23 accommodation and so on for arrested members being taken by the HVO of
24 Capljina municipality?
25 A. Well, I don't know what happened with that. I know that all these
1 people were taken away, whether to Dretelj or wherever. Now, who replaced
2 them in their responsibilities and who did what, I really don't know.
3 Q. Did you know Pero Markovic or know who he was?
4 A. He was the president of the Capljina municipality.
5 Q. And from what you knew, was he effectively the man in charge in
7 A. Well, probably for certain areas, he was the man in charge and
8 responsible, but I don't know for how much. But, yes, he was responsible.
9 Q. All right. Let's look at the first document in this bundle. The
10 number is P 03439. Do you have that?
11 A. I do.
12 Q. Thank you. This is a signed report of an interrogation of
13 somebody called Asim Sustra. Did you know Asim Sustra or know who he was
14 in July 1993?
15 A. This is the first time that I hear that name, name and surname.
16 Q. All right. Further down the page, it's in the fourth paragraph,
17 there's a reference to his group being supposed to capture the check-point
18 on Masline on the morning of the 13th of July. How far from your house is
20 A. About 15 kilometres. I don't know exactly. I would say that it
21 was about 15 kilometres.
22 Q. Do you know somebody called Ekrem Veledar?
23 A. Veledare.
24 Q. I'm sorry. Do you know him?
25 A. The name seems familiar, but I don't know him personally.
1 Q. All right. We'll move on then. Do you know somebody called Musar
3 A. No.
4 Q. Well, I can tell you he was a member of Kapa's unit in the HVO,
5 and you do have some knowledge and familiarity with that unit, don't you?
6 A. I do know because my husband was a member of that unit. But of
7 course, I can't know the entire unit.
8 Q. Can we clarify? Your statement says that your husband was
9 assigned to a unit led by Mirsad Zuhric and the other Muslim unit was led
10 by Kapa. Did your husband change units at some point?
11 A. I don't know. I'm not sure. Perhaps, maybe, but I'm not quite
12 sure, so I can't answer that question.
13 Q. Could you look at the Exhibit P 03469. Do you have that? Last
14 paragraph. This does relate to Mr. Klaric. This last paragraph: "In the
15 evening of the 12th of July, we," that's his unit, "headed in the
16 direction of Masline with the intention of capturing the check-point on
17 Masline and controlling the Stolac-Capljina road. Were you ever aware of
18 your husband being involved in any such activity in relation to Masline,
19 control of the Stolac-Capljina roads?
20 A. No.
21 Q. There's a reference there to Becir Suta.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Stewart, you started at
23 16.41 minutes and 3 seconds plus 15 minutes. Your time's up. Have your
24 colleagues given you any time?
25 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, we have not been the
1 beneficiaries of any such time. Your Honour, may I -- may I ask this: I
2 really have only a very tiny number of questions to go through, a couple
3 more documents in the same way, just taking maybe no more than a minute or
4 so each. Your Honour, we will be extremely short with the next witness.
5 And unless something unexpected comes up, we almost certainly will have no
6 questions at all. I therefore wonder if Your Honours could just give me
7 the indulgence to finish off these two or three short items which really
8 won't take more than five minutes.
9 MR. KARNAVAS: And, Your Honour, I won't be having any questions
10 for the next witness either. So if that may be of assistance.
11 MR. STEWART: Do I detect a --
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, but complete just
13 those two documents.
14 MR. STEWART: When I say two or three, Your Honour, I don't want
15 to abuse Your Honour's indulgence. I'll crack on straight away.
16 Q. This particular document we were looking at, then -- perhaps I
17 won't -- can't count that Your Honour, since I was already on that, 3469.
18 The reference to Becir Suta and then says that "we were in the woods until
19 the soldiers found us." Does -- was your husband in any way, now that
20 this jogs your mind, was your husband in any way, that you're aware of,
21 linked in his activities with Mr. Suta or Mr. Klaric?
22 A. I don't know.
23 Q. All right. Could we look then at Exhibit P 03546. Do you have
24 that, Witness?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Thank you. It's a report, 18th of July. I want to go to its --
2 in English, it's the second page. It's the fifth paragraph, Witness. It
3 begins: "On 13th July, 1993 ..." Do you see that, a paragraph beginning
4 with that date? Should be about five paragraphs into the report. Do you
5 find that? Thank you.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. [Previous translation continues] "... 1993, there started an
8 attack at the HVO units in the whole of the 1st Brigade area of
9 responsibility." Now, your statement indicated that you did have
10 knowledge of responsibility of different units for different areas
11 earlier. Did you -- did you know what the area of responsibility was of
12 the 1st Brigade yourself at -- in July, 1993?
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a moment. Mr. Stewart, as
14 there are names there --
15 MR. STEWART: I don't wish to -- unless my client is going to
16 correct my question, I wonder if I might ask his indulgence to get the
17 answer to my question, unless I've got the question wrong. If I've got
18 the question wrong, then, of course, I'm ready to be put right.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Petkovic.
20 THE ACCUSED PETKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it says in the
21 transcript, the HVO started the attack and that it says an attack started
22 against the HVO units. The transcript says that the HVO started an attack
23 but the text says that someone else launched an attack on HVO units, so
24 the first sentence wasn't translated correctly. Thank you.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please move on.
1 MR. STEWART: [Previous translation continues] ... get these things
2 right. Yes. I see where the problem arose from the English. Thank you,
3 Mr. Petkovic. I see that.
9 A. Well, not that close.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a minute.
11 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I've been reminded that we are in open
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. That's why in line -- in
14 one of the lines -- well, line 19, page 64, I said be careful when names
15 appear, and you said -- well, in fact, you didn't hear me.
16 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, my apologies. We are under that
17 permanent injunction. My apologies.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, could you prepare an
19 order so that we can redact this name. That means that we'll lose 10
20 minutes during the break. Please carry on.
21 MR. STEWART:
22 Q. So -- well, this man, relative of yours, how close a relative?
23 A. Not that close.
24 Q. All right. It goes on. "A smaller group was supposed to detonate
25 the Domanovici headquarters." Did you ever hear or find out anything
1 about that plan to detonate the Domanovici headquarters?
2 A. No. No.
3 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour. Thank you for that
4 indulgence. I'm sorry to have lost the 10 minutes after you gave us the
5 extra time.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And now for the next Defence
8 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
9 We have no questions for this witness.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Ibrisimovic.
11 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Thank
12 you. We only have a few questions for the witness.
13 Cross-examination by Mr. Ibrisimovic:
14 Q. [Interpretation] The Prosecution provided you with some documents
15 and I'd like to have another look at some of them. Document P 3668 is the
16 one I'm interested in. P 003668. Have you found it?
17 As my colleague said, this is a draft document, a handwritten
18 document dated the 23rd of July, 1993, and you said that this reflects
19 what you in fact experienced at the time. Have a look at the upper
20 right-hand corner of the document. Apparently the document should have
21 been forwarded to the command of the operative zone of South-eastern
22 Herzegovina. Mr. Marinko Lasic. Do you see that?
23 A. I can see that.
24 Q. To the command of the military police and to Mr. Berislav Pusic.
25 Is that what it says here?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Thank you. Have a look at the next document in the same binder,
3 P 03652. Have you found it? Have a look at the upper left-hand corner.
4 It says the "HVO, defence department, military police, Mostar, 23 July
5 1993." It's a fairly confusing document, in our opinion. There's a stamp
6 from the Main Staff at the bottom. In the upper left-hand corner there's
7 no protocol number for the document. Can you see that?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. There's just the date.
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. I've asked about this because this document is one we object to
12 because it doesn't have a protocol number. It just has a date. And we
13 have a look at paragraph 13 of the indictment -- well, Mr. -- my client
14 was involved in different activities, not in the activities mentioned in
15 the document. He wasn't in the HVO police. We have no further questions.
16 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. No other questions
18 from the Prosecution, Ms. Egels? No?
19 MS. EGELS: No, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness CG, on behalf of the
21 Judges, I would like to thank you for having come to testify in The Hague.
22 I wish you a safe trip home, and I do hope that it will be possible for
23 your plane to land at the airport given the weather.
24 It's now 10 past 5.00. We will have a 30-minute break because of
25 the redaction that has to be made. We will resume after the break. The
1 Prosecution must proceed rapidly. They have 20 minutes, but you're used
2 to this now. The Defence will have to complete their cross-examination by
3 7.00 p.m., otherwise, we'll have the pleasure of seeing you again
5 Mr. Mundis, you were rising. Did you want to say something?
6 MR. MUNDIS: I was just going to suggest that we take the break at
7 this point and deal with the witness in one go.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. I was reading your
9 mind. That's why I said we would have a break. We will resume in half an
11 [The witness withdrew]
12 --- Recess taken at 5.08 p.m.
13 --- On resuming at 5.40 p.m.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Regarding the witness who is
15 about to appear, with respect to voice distortion, we have decided that
16 there will be no voice distortion for this witness, because we consider
17 that in view of what she said in her written statement, there's no need to
18 allow voice distortion. So the witness will not be having that measure
20 We can go into private session to have the witness brought in.
21 [Private session]
11 Pages 10852-10853 redacted. Private session
11 [Open session]
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
13 MR. FLYNN: Thank you, Your Honours. Good afternoon to Your
14 Honours, to members of the Defence, and to everybody else in the
16 Examination by Mr. Flynn:
17 Q. Good afternoon, Witness.
18 I'll begin with the brief summary. Just for Your Honours'
19 information, the summary is based on the summary as contained in the 65
20 ter list with some very small variations.
21 To start, the witness lived in Prenj Stolac. Early on the 1st of
22 July, 1993, armed HVO soldiers surrounded the witness's home and took away
23 the witness's father and other villagers. Five or six days later, a Croat
24 neighbour warned the witness to leave. The next day, HVO soldiers came to
25 her house and took the witness, her mother, sister, and brother away on
1 trucks threatening to kill them if they refused.
2 At a place called Zujina, the HVO soldiers ordered the witness and
3 two others to get out and to run 15 metres ahead of soldiers. The HVO
4 made the witness search houses in Zujina and neighbouring Kamenica for
5 Bosnian men who were hiding. She also had to tell women and children in
6 Kamenica to gather together. Other women there were taken for use as
7 human shields, including pregnant women. There were around 300 HVO
8 soldiers in the woods searching for Muslim men. The witness was forced on
9 foot to a place called Bregava and had to search for the men.
10 Following this, the witness and other women had to walk further to
11 a place called Habatnice. HVO soldiers fired bullets at the witness's
12 legs to make them walk faster. The witness was part of a group overall of
13 15 women who were gathered there. They were told that they would be used
14 as human shields until all the men in hiding were found.
15 Over six days, the women were taken out as human shields in search
16 of the men. During this, an HVO soldier took the witness aside and
17 started to touch her and told the witness to take off her clothes and
18 touched her over her body. Eventually, the witness returned to the group.
19 The witness and others were put into two houses for six days. Each day
20 the witness and the five others were taken into the woods as human
22 One night when Bosnian men came for food, the HVO fired at them.
23 After six days, the witness and others were taken to the elementary school
24 in Aladinici. They were there about a thousand people including old men,
25 women and children, and they stayed there for 15 days. Women were
1 assaulted there.
2 Once the witness and a 60-year-old woman was forced to run around
3 a car chanting Croatian slogans. The HVO took jewellery and money from
4 detainees. Witness and others were taken to Buna on the 2nd of August,
5 1993. From there they had to walk to Blagaj. The witness says in her
6 statement that an old man died while getting off the bus.
7 And that would conclude the summary.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Would you like us to move into
9 private session to deal with certain documents or not?
10 MR. FLYNN: My first question will involve perhaps reference to
11 some names and perhaps we should move to private session.
12 [Private session]
11 Pages 10857-10867 redacted. Private session
12 [Open session]
13 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are in open session.
14 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Witness, in your statement, you say that in the surrounding areas
16 of your village there were men who were hiding in the woods; is that
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Tell us, please, were they men fit for military service?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Were they former members of the HVO?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Were these men armed?
24 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness repeat the answer, please?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could you repeat the question,
2 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Why these men armed? Did they have weapons with them?
4 A. The members of the HVO you mean?
5 Q. Those hiding in the woods.
6 A. No.
7 Q. They didn't have any weapons then. Right. Tell us, please,
8 whether there was any danger that these men without weapons should shoot
9 at anyone? Was there the threat of that at all?
10 A. Well, anybody could have shot.
11 Q. But these men, since they didn't have any weapons, logically,
12 couldn't have shot, couldn't have done any shooting.
13 A. Well, some of them did have, others didn't. The ones that were
14 with us didn't any weapons when they came to us, when I was in the human
16 Q. So explain this to us. Some of the men hiding did, in fact, have
17 weapons, did they?
18 A. No, they didn't have any weapons.
19 Q. So the men who were in hiding didn't have any weapons. Is that
20 what you're saying?
21 A. Not in the hills.
22 Q. Right. Not in the hills. And when you tried to find them in the
23 hills, they were not able to shoot because they didn't have any weapons.
24 Isn't that right?
25 A. Yes, that's right.
1 Q. Tell me, what do you understand by the term "human shield"? What
2 does it mean to you?
3 A. I protected other people's lives.
4 Q. How did you protect or shield other people's lives when you search
5 the area looking for people who were not armed and could not shoot?
6 A. I was -- HVO members, they came in the morning, and they were
8 Q. Madam, I apologise, but I was just asking you about the human
9 shield. Explain to us what this is. A human shield is when you with your
10 own body protect or shield somebody else. And if somebody shoots at you
11 from the other side, you will be hit as part of the live shield and not
12 the person you're shielding behind you.
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Now, my question is this: As you were looking for men in the
15 hills and woods who were not armed, who then could you have protected and
16 shielded with your body if there was no fear of shooting, no danger of
18 A. Well, down there --
19 Q. Don't go down there. When you went looking for these men in the
20 woods who weren't armed, as you say, tell us about that. There was no
21 danger that the men you were looking for, since they weren't armed, could
22 shoot at you or anybody else. Isn't that right?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. So tell me, when did you hear about the term and concept of human
25 shield and who explained to you the contents of that concept?
1 A. Nobody.
2 Q. Nobody told you what that meant?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Well, how do you come to know this term?
5 A. You mean human shield?
6 Q. Yes.
7 A. Well, I assume -- I knew that it was a human shield, what it
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam, on the basis of what
10 you're saying, the HVO was searching for men hiding in the woods. Now,
11 specifically, did they say, "You women move forward and we're going to
12 advance behind you so that if anybody happens to be armed and shoots at us
13 it will be the women who are shot, who are the first victims because they
14 are up at the front line"? Is that how things happened? So when they
15 were searching the woods, they put you forward, put you in front, and the
16 HVO soldiers were behind you; is that right?
17 A. Yes.
18 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Are you sure that that's how things happened? And you didn't find
20 anybody in the woods when you were searching?
21 A. No.
22 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Madam -- sorry. Madam, you have answered the
23 question of whether the men in the woods were armed. You said no. How do
24 you know this?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Some were, some weren't. I don't
1 know who was in the woods. Perhaps they did have weapons, but I don't
3 JUDGE TRECHSEL: When you were sent towards the woods, did you
4 assume that you were approaching men who were armed, and others perhaps,
5 but also men who were armed?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Would you repeat that question,
8 JUDGE TRECHSEL: When you were sent towards the woods, were you
9 afraid that some people in the woods might shoot at you?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
11 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Were you also sent into houses?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
13 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Were you afraid that someone might be in the
14 house with a weapon and shoot at you?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
16 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
17 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Madam Witness, in response to His Honour Judge Trechsel, you've
19 just given a different answer than you gave me. You said that some men in
20 the woods were, nonetheless, armed, and others weren't. Tell us now,
21 finally decide, were those men armed? Were they partially armed? Were
22 some of them armed, or were all of them armed?
23 A. Well, the HVO members were armed, but of our people, nobody was in
24 the woods then.
25 Q. When you say HVO members, do you mean the Muslims who used to be
1 HVO members and deserted and were hiding in the woods? Is that who you
2 mean, or are you referring to somebody else?
3 A. Could you repeat that question?
4 Q. You said that the HVO soldiers were armed. Now, I'm asking you
5 the following: Let's clear up which HVO soldiers. Are you thinking of
6 the Muslims who deserted from the HVO and who were hiding in the woods,
7 and that's why they were combing the woods searching for them, or are you
8 thinking of someone else?
9 A. The HVO, the soldiers.
10 Q. Yes, but who are those? Who were they? Were they the Muslims who
11 had deserted, left the HVO, or were they HVO soldiers who asked you or
12 demanded of you to search the hills?
13 A. They were HVO Croats.
14 Q. So it was the HVO soldiers who were armed, and they demanded that
15 you comb the area, the hills and slopes.
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Now, let's define these Muslims who were in the HVO and deserted
18 and were hiding in the woods, and that's why they were looking for them.
19 Did they have weapons or not?
20 A. They weren't there at all. There weren't any of those there.
21 Q. Ah, there weren't any of those there. So you were searching an
22 area looking for those deserters, whereas these deserters weren't there at
24 A. That's right.
25 Q. So where would the danger have come from, then? Why the danger of
1 shooting, and who were you supposed to be shielding? What HVO soldiers
2 were you shielding as a human shield then?
3 A. There were nobody there, but in the canyons of Bregava, there were
4 Bosniaks there who were hiding, who were in hiding.
5 Q. Madam, let's just speak of the area you search. Let's leave the
6 other areas for the moment. So in the areas that you searched, in those
7 areas, were there any Muslims who had deserted from the HVO?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Now, these Muslims who had deserted from the HVO, and for that
10 reason were hiding in the woods, were they armed or not?
11 A. Yes. He had to have a rifle.
12 Q. Do you know for sure that they were armed or do you assume that
13 they were armed?
14 A. I assume that they were armed.
15 Q. Tell me, please, before you searched the area, those Muslims who
16 deserted from the HVO, had they been called to surrender through a
17 loudspeaker or however?
18 A. Well, we went. We went.
19 Q. So they were called to surrender; is that right?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Did any incident take place there? Was there any shooting when
22 the areas were searched? What you know personally.
23 A. No.
24 Q. There were no incidents.
25 A. No.
1 Q. Were there any cases where -- where the Muslims who had deserted
2 from the HVO surrendered when the HVO called out to them to surrender?
3 Did they come out of the woods and surrender in groups? Did anything like
4 that happen?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Were you demanded to search the area because you knew the area
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Did they ask you to do this because you could also know where some
10 people could be in hiding, because you knew the area better than anybody
12 A. No.
13 Q. Did you know the area better than someone else?
14 A. No.
15 Q. When I asked you about whether you were asked to search the area
16 because you knew it, your answer was in the affirmative. You said you did
17 know. Now I'm asking you, did you know the area?
18 A. No.
19 Q. You didn't know the area at all, the area you were searching?
20 A. No. I was never there. I was never down there.
21 Q. Tell me, some of the other women who were with you, did they
22 happen to know the area or parts of the area?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Were you asked to call out to the men, the Muslim men, who had
25 deserted from the HVO? Did you call out to them when you were -- while
1 you were searching the area?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Can you tell us what you said? What was it you shouted out?
4 A. We said, if there is anybody in the woods that they should
5 surrender. That's what we called out to them.
6 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have no further
7 questions. I think that the role of the women in searching the terrain is
8 quite clear according to what the witness has just told us.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] This forest, madam, can you tell
10 us how large it was, these woods or the forest, or can you not help us
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was a small forest.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The surface area, how wide an
14 area? Could you give us an approximation perhaps?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I don't really know. It was a
16 small forest.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Were there a lot of trees? Was
18 it very dense or was it sparse?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Sparse?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, dense.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Dense. Right.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. Now for the next
25 Defence team.
1 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we have no
3 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] No questions, Mr. President.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] No further questions from the
7 Madam, this completes your testimony. Thank you for coming -- for
8 having come from so far to contribute to understanding the events that
9 took place in your country. And on behalf of my colleagues, I wish you a
10 safe return to your country.
11 I will now ask the usher to lower the blinds before you leave.
12 As far as the document numbers are concerned, you will have a
13 chart prepared for the IC numbers, and then the Defence will raise
14 objections if they believe it's necessary. We have recorded the
15 objections for some documents.
16 [The witness withdrew]
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, can you inform us of
18 the situation tomorrow and on Thursday, given the information that you
19 must have been provided with in the course of the afternoon.
20 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President. It's my turn to try to
21 read Your Honours' minds. I anticipated that question. I just received
22 an e-mail from my investigator who informs me that VWS has confirmed that
23 the two witnesses who are now scheduled to appear on Thursday in fact are
24 in the air at the moment having departed Zagreb. So we expect those two
25 witnesses here in The Hague sometime shortly after midnight this evening.
1 We will meet with them tomorrow afternoon and they will be available to
2 testify on Thursday afternoon.
3 I will give my assurance that we will endeavour to do everything
4 possible to reduce the amount of time that we spend with these two
5 witnesses so that they can both be completed on Thursday and be on their
6 way back to Bosnia as soon as possible.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you for that information.
8 Mr. Mundis, as we still have a few minutes, I personally wanted to tell
9 you the following: As you are well aware, we rendered a decision on the
10 amount of time allocated to the Prosecution, and you are also aware of the
11 fact that you made a request for the certification of an appeal and the
12 Appeals Chamber will rule on the matter. But independently of the Appeals
13 Chamber decision, certain witnesses will be appearing. I don't know when
14 the Appeals Chamber will render its decision. We should hope that it will
15 it be rendered rapidly.
16 But in our decision, we drew the Prosecution's attention to a
17 procedure that had to be followed in relation to victims. We asked you to
18 call certain key witnesses, key victims, who could then be cross-examined
19 in detail, and we asked you to supplement these key witnesses with certain
20 92 ter witnesses and then complete the entire procedure by following
21 this -- the 92 bis Rule.
22 If we followed this procedure in relation to Gabela and Dretelj
23 and the Heliodrom, et cetera, for example, this would allow you to save a
24 lot of time. And the time that you saved in this way could be used for
25 other far more important witnesses that have a direct link to the charges
1 in the indictment. So that's what we suggested in our decision.
2 For the moment, I don't see that this suggestion has been taken
3 into consideration. Is the Prosecution thinking about this suggestion?
4 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President, for the opportunity to be
5 heard on this point.
6 Absolutely, the Prosecution -- it has always, in fact, been the
7 Prosecution's intention to rely upon viva voce testimony to be followed by
8 92 ter testimony and written 92 bis motions at the completion of each of
9 the various municipalities and crime bases, and we -- I assure you we are
10 endeavouring to do that.
11 Let me also take the opportunity to again point out that with
12 respect to the witnesses that have been scheduled through the December
13 break, that the plans for those witnesses were put into effect well before
14 the Trial Chamber's decision and were a bit like a speeding train, if you
15 will, that we certainly can't just stop at moment's notice and reconfigure
16 the entire court schedule, partially, because of course that might create
17 problems and dilemmas for the Defence. But also, again, given some of the
18 logistical and practical difficulties we encounter, both in terms of
19 ensuring that our victims and witnesses have passports, that they have
20 visas, that the travel arrangements are made, et cetera. So that I can
21 assure you that the plan that we're working on with respect to 92 bis
22 testimony is well under way, and is -- we should be making additional
23 written submissions concerning 92 bis witness testimony for municipality
24 packages that should be filed in the very near future.
25 I can also assure you that we are looking at the remaining
1 crime-base municipalities, in light of the Trial Chamber's decision, and
2 of course, we are doing everything possible to streamline the presentation
3 of the Prosecution case. But I do beg for the Trial Chamber's indulgence
4 in understanding that certain things that were put into effect as early as
5 mid-October, in terms of planning the trial schedule for the period
6 running through the middle of December, is not something that we can
7 simply stop and change, not withstanding the Trial Chamber's orders and
8 decisions and directives. But I can assure you that we are taking that on
9 board. It has always been our intention to combine viva voce, 92 ter, and
10 92 bis. We have done so and are in the process of doing so, and again we
11 are doing everything possible to streamline and to make the presentation
12 of our case as efficient and as expeditious as possible given our
13 obligations to represent the victims and witnesses and the international
14 community as a whole.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you for that. Up until
16 court recess we have a few more weeks. When do you intend to inform us of
17 the schedule for January, February, and March? Have you already planned
18 to call certain witnesses? We have two hypotheses. Either the Appeals
19 Chamber will confirm our decision, or the Appeals Chamber will make it
20 possible for the Prosecution to have unlimited time. Are you taking into
21 consideration these two hypotheses, and when will you inform us of the
22 schedule for January, February, and March?
23 MR. MUNDIS: Again, thank you for the opportunity to put forward
24 our -- our plans. Clearly we are in the final stages of -- of arranging
25 for the witness schedule for January that goes into the month of February.
1 Mr. Scott and I will be having further meetings on this topic if not
2 tomorrow then certainly into Thursday morning. We are doing what we can
3 to finalise the schedule, particularly with respect to January, as quickly
4 as possible, so that we can get that into the hands of the Defence with
5 enough time for them to commence their preparations prior to the December
7 What we're working on, in effect, is some alternative plans and
8 approaches given the two scenarios that Your Honour has rightly
9 identified, being an Appeals Chamber decision affirming the Trial Chamber
10 or contrary, a decision reversing the Trial Chamber's decision with
11 respect to the amount of time available to us. What we will probably be
12 in a position to do, if not later this week, on Thursday, again, because
13 of perhaps some time constraints with trying to fit the two witnesses in,
14 I would expect that hopefully by Monday afternoon we might be in a better
15 position to at least outline where we believe we'll be going and perhaps
16 to put forward two alternative approaches based on what the Appeals
17 Chamber does. And of course we share the Trial Chamber's optimism, in the
18 sense, that hopefully the Appeals Chamber will be rendering a decision
19 relatively quickly, but nevertheless that remains to be seen. And of
20 course our planning must take both contingencies, both of those potential
21 options under consideration as we plan what our approach will be moving
22 into the spring of 2007.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Very well. Thank
25 Are there any issues that the Defence would like to raise? Mr.
2 MR. MURPHY: Your Honour, just one related matter. During our
3 argument on the 6th of November, we made one or two specific proposals to
4 the Trial Chamber with regard to the possible amendment of the decision on
5 evidence of the 13th of July, and I'd just like to remind the Trial
6 Chamber of that and inquire perhaps whether it is your intention to make
7 such amendment. It would help us to know whether that may be coming also.
8 MR. KARNAVAS: Thank you, Mr. President, Your Honours. Yesterday,
9 it was brought to my attention, as the witness was finishing up his
10 testimony, the last sentence or so was not quite caught by the translator,
11 but those who speak B/C/S were able to hear it and it was brought to my
12 attention, and obviously the -- what was uttered would appear to be rather
13 favourable to my client and to the other gentlemen sitting along with my
14 client. So I've taken the liberty of asking the Translation Unit to --
15 the folks that handle these things, to go back and listen to that. So I'm
16 just alerting the Trial Chamber of that.
17 One other matter -- and I will update you when I have the update.
18 One other matter. It was also brought to my attention that when
19 we had witness Stjepan Kljuic here, because he came and testified a second
20 time as you may recall, and initially, I had questioned him during his
21 first time here, there were several documents that we had introduced, that
22 we had shown the gentleman that we did not tender, and it was an
23 oversight. We should have tendered them after -- after he came the second
25 I have the list here. I brought it to the Prosecution's
1 attention. I gave that list to the Prosecution. I'm not suggesting that
2 I tender the list now for the record. I want to give the Prosecution an
3 opportunity to look through those -- through that list, so they can raise
4 any objections, if any. I suspect none -- they will have none, but in the
5 event they have any, they can raise them. Perhaps we can deal with this
6 matter on Thursday, but I just wanted to alert the Trial Chamber of this
7 since we have a few moments. Thank you.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Mr. Mundis, Mr.
9 Karnavas says he has a list of documents, and he will be asking -- he will
10 be tendering them into evidence, and he would like the Prosecution, having
11 examined the document, to express its position. Yes, as far as that is
13 MR. MUNDIS: Again, Mr. President, this was just provided to us
14 just a couple of hours ago. I would ask perhaps if we can respond either
15 on Thursday or perhaps in writing as per the Trial Chamber's recent
16 practice with respect to that. I believe at least one of the exhibits
17 listed has already been admitted, perhaps under another witness, but I
18 would prefer if we could deal with that later this week, perhaps even in
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Mr. Praljak.
21 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
22 I'm --
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We'll move into private session.
24 [Private session]
11 Pages 10884-10885 redacted. Private session
8 [Open session]
9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're in open session.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Now that we're in open session,
11 we're dealing with the issue of the need to call a military expert. I was
12 saying that the Defence, when cross-examining various witnesses and
13 victims, sometimes deals with military problems or refers to orders,
14 stamps, signatures, the circulation of information, et cetera. If all
15 this had been dealt with by a witness and if such a witness had been
16 cross-examined by the Defence, it would have enabled us to save a lot of
18 MR. MUNDIS: Again, Your Honour, I will take to heart what Your
19 Honour has just indicated. I will again inform the Chamber that the
20 expert that's on our witness list is a retired major general of the
21 British Army. His expertise may or may not include specific issues such
22 as stamps or issuing of military orders pursuant to the HVO. He's much
23 more of an overall command and control and theory of command and control
24 type of issues is what he was charged with examining.
25 To be quite frank, one of our concerns has been that if we were to
1 bring in a military expert and perhaps spend two or three or four hours in
2 direct examination, that we could then be in a situation where four or
3 five or six or eight days are then consumed in cross-examination. And to
4 be quite open with the Trial Chamber, that, in our opinion, is not
5 something which we wish to use the limited amount of time available to
6 present. And so we do have a very practical concern in light of the prior
7 testimony and cross-examination of the expert witnesses who have appeared
8 to date. Even if we were to spend one hour with -- with the expert, if it
9 were to be a situation where the Defence teams would insist upon having
10 many, many hours of cross-examination and a week or more than a week would
11 be consumed, that is something that the Prosecution has to take into
12 consideration and is something which, again to be quite open and
13 transparent, is not a situation that we would anticipate in a positive
15 So that's certainly a factor; not the only factor, but a factor
16 that has gone into the Prosecution calculus in determining how to approach
17 this subject.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. I'll conclude with
19 this matter.
20 Ideally, if the Chamber had designated an military expert, it
21 would have been good to have two generals, one general from the HVO and
22 one general who was part of the ABiH. And then these two generals would
23 have been asked to draft a common report on this problem, even if it meant
24 calling them here and cross-examining them. This is perhaps a very civil
25 law manner of proceeding, but believe me, it is extremely efficient.
1 And you've said you would be calling a British general. Fine.
2 He's certainly extremely competent, but if we had people from the area who
3 were familiar with the problems of the HVO and the ABiH, who had direct
4 knowledge of these problems, this would have certainly enabled us to
5 advance significantly. Perhaps when the Defence calls their expert
6 witnesses, they'll think about this.
7 MR. MUNDIS: Again, we will continue to take on board these
8 comments. If -- I can assure you, if I could have found an ABiH general
9 and an HVO general who could draft a common report, I would have done
10 that, but I'll just simply leave this point at that, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Yes, Mr. Praljak.
12 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Very briefly. Mr.
13 Prosecutor, isn't the most important thing to find out what could have
14 been done, what was possible, so that we don't base everything on what one
15 thinks is possible. There's something that is called the law of
16 gravitation. People aren't responsible for being subject to the law of
17 gravitation. If there is anything important in this trial, well, you
18 can't be held to be responsible for falling down because of the law of
19 gravity. If anything's important in this case, it's necessary to
20 establish what could have been done and perhaps was not done, and it's
21 very difficult to determine what this is if people are not called here who
22 can compare what an American, French, or English army should be and what
23 the HVO is or the ABiH, and then we can see how Petkovic, Praljak, or
24 anyone else within such a framework, within such a system, actually acted
25 on a daily basis, from day-to-day. Otherwise, we can just admit our guilt
1 and go to prison and spend 20 years there and that will be the end of it.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak, we've listened to
3 what you have just said. Let the Prosecution give some thought to the
4 matter, and we will calmly wait for expert information on the matter. And
5 you and General Petkovic sometimes provide us with technical information,
6 information that's difficult for people who aren't experts to have access
8 It's time to adjourn, and we will resume on Thursday at 2.15 p.m.
9 Thank you.
10 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.56 p.m.,
11 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 30th day
12 of November, 2006, at 2.15 p.m.