Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 4963

 1                           Wednesday, 19 March 2008

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The witness entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.

 5                           [The accused entered court]

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Good morning.  We are starting

 7     our hearing.  Registrar, kindly call the case, please.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Thank you and good morning, Your Honours.  This

 9     is case number IT-03-67-T, the Prosecutor versus Vojislav Seselj.

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, registrar.  Today we

11     are Wednesday, the 19th of March, 2008.  I would like to greet all the

12     representatives of the Prosecution, Mr. Seselj, as well as all the people

13     assisting us.  Amongst other people, the interpreters, who are doing a

14     very valuable job.

15             So today we need to resume with the cross-examination of the

16     witness.  I shall therefore give the floor to Mr. Seselj, who will have

17     an hour and a half for his cross-examination of the witness.

18             And, Witness, of course I would also like to greet you, and I am

19     sure that your testimony will be finished today.

20                           WITNESS:  EMIL CAKALIC [Resumed]

21                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

22                           Cross-examination by Mr. Seselj:

23        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Cakalic, you have testified in three trials

24     in The Hague, Slavko Dokmanovic, Slobodan Milosevic, and the third trial

25     Mrksic Jovan; isn't that right?

Page 4964

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   You testified in open session, publicly under your own name and

 3     surname?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   And what about this particular trial?  Did you ask to have

 6     protective measures under a pseudonym and testify in private session?

 7        A.   No, I never asked for that.

 8             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the speakers kindly slow down and pause

 9     between question and answer.  Thank you.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   So the Prosecution treated you here as a secret witness; right?

12        A.   Yes.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  I think Your Honours

14     that this is a very important issue, and it's not the first time that the

15     Prosecution asked for protective measures without the witness having

16     requested it.

17        Q.   Mr. Cakalic, did you think there was some danger to you in coming

18     in here to testify against me?

19        A.   No.

20        Q.   Any danger from me or --

21             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Again, we have to observe a pause between

22     questions and answers.  I'm sorry, because if you do not do that then we

23     will not be able to understand anything.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes.  I'll do my best.

25             MR. SESELJ:

Page 4965

 1        Q.   As I was saying, you consider that there's no threat to you from

 2     me or from my friends or my political party; isn't that right?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   So you're testifying in a very relaxed fashion, is that right?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Cakalic, that was important for me to hear that

 7     from you personally.  Now I consider that you told the truth about

 8     everything that happened to you, so I can accept your statement almost

 9     entirely.  So as far as you're concerned I'm going to deal with some

10     issues that are secondary as far as you are concerned, but they can be

11     important for me.  I hope you understand that?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   You said here -- rather, you were talking about how you were

14     arrested in the Vukovar Hospital and the fact that after that you were

15     taken in buses to the Vukovar barracks.  Isn't that right?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   And while you were still in the buses some people gathered

18     together whom you called Chetniks and they threatened that they would

19     kill you all.  Isn't that right?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   And you saw that they were Chetniks of Montenegrin ethnicity

22     because they wore the traditional Montenegrin caps did they not?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   All right.  Fine.  Now after that when these Chetniks left for a

25     time you left the bus, didn't you?

Page 4966

 1        A.   I don't remember.

 2        Q.   In the barracks.  Now, you said in testifying at the Milosevic

 3     trial that after you heard -- left the buses that military policemen

 4     turned up who started to beat the people; right?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   And among those military policemen who beat the prisoners in the

 7     JNA barracks, you recognised some Muslims among them.  There were several

 8     Muslims; right?

 9        A.   I don't seem to remember that.

10        Q.   Well, you say that in the Slobodan Milosevic trial and the

11     transcript of it, and it is record on page 9 or 10 of the transcript.

12     And since the transcript was provided to me from a book, not directly, it

13     wasn't directly translated from the original, I don't know what page it

14     is, but I'm sure the Prosecution were able to find the reference.

15             Anyway, Richard May was surprised to hear that and asked you to

16     explain, and you did indeed explain and confirmed that there were Muslims

17     there.  Of course there were Serbs, too, but that there were several

18     Muslims who beat the prisoners, swore at them, and so on.  Do you

19     remember that?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   I just want you to confirm that.  Now, in that same trial, the

22     Slobodan Milosevic trial, you spoke about the people who beat you at

23     Ovcara, and you said that they were Vukovar Chetniks; is that right?

24        A.   Yes.  There were those and other people I didn't know.

25        Q.   There were JNA soldiers, people you couldn't recognise and didn't

Page 4967

 1     know, but you did recognise many as being local Vukovar inhabitants?

 2        A.   Yes, I did know the local Vukovar people.

 3        Q.   You referred to them as Chetniks, did you not?

 4        A.   Well, we didn't call them Chetniks, no.

 5        Q.   But you say here in the Slobodan Milosevic trial transcript

 6     that -- you say that expressly.  You say that they were Chetniks from

 7     Vukovar.

 8        A.   Well, I don't deny that.

 9        Q.   All right.  Now tell me, how do you differentiate between

10     Chetniks and JNA soldiers?  How can you distinguish between the two?

11     Well, the soldier of the Yugoslav People's Army were soldiers who had

12     taken the oath; right?  Isn't that right?  Did you take the oath when you

13     were in the Yugoslav People's Army?

14        A.   I'm an invalid so I didn't serve in the JNA, so I don't know a

15     lot about the army.  But if you took the oath when you joined up, and I

16     do believe you did, then probably you would act upon the oath you took

17     and respect it.

18        Q.   In way do you mean fulfil the oath?

19        A.   Well, you know that.

20        Q.   Do you know what the text of the actual oath was?  I'll try and

21     interpret it so you can deny it or accept it.

22             As soldiers we would take an oath and pledge that we would defend

23     the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Yugoslavia and the

24     constitutional order.  That was the oath the soldiers took, all of them.

25        A.   I remember that.

Page 4968

 1        Q.   So you can confirm that can you?

 2        A.   Yes, I remember that.

 3        Q.   So when the territorial sovereignty of the country was

 4     jeopardised and the territorial integrity and sovereignty and

 5     constitutional order, it was our duty to defend the state and the

 6     constitutional system; right?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   Right.  We agree there on that point.  Now, I'm interested in

 9     this difference.  You said that there were JNA soldiers and there were

10     Chetniks.  Now, were you able to come to that conclusion by some outward

11     appearance?

12        A.   Well, they said they were Chetniks themselves.

13        Q.   I see.

14        A.   And the Yugoslav People's Army soldiers were wearing their

15     uniforms.

16        Q.   Yes, but the Chetniks also very frequently had JNA uniforms on.

17        A.   I assume they did.

18        Q.   For example the volunteers of the Serbian Radical Party, do you

19     know that they had their volunteers there too; for example, they were

20     given uniforms -- issued uniforms, in Bubanj Potok barracks in Belgrade,

21     and they all wore JNA uniforms just took the five-pointed star off?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   And you noticed that some soldiers had the five-pointed star

24     insignia and others didn't, and those who didn't had different insignia

25     or badges or cockades as they were called, but they weren't all the same

Page 4969

 1     were they?

 2        A.   No.

 3        Q.   There were a lot of different badges and insignia; isn't that

 4     right?

 5        A.   Yes, that's right.

 6        Q.   Thank you, sir.  Thank you Mr. Cakalic.  Now, you said on several

 7     occasions that among the officers who were at Ovcara that you were there

 8     when some were beating people or some issued orders for others to beat,

 9     and you mentioned somebody with a whistle in his hand and when he gave

10     the signal group, the groups of people that were doing the beating

11     rotated?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   You said you knew Colonel Mrksic?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   However when the Prosecution showed you a photograph of Colonel

16     Mrksic you were not able to recognise him.  Do you remember that?

17        A.   Well, it's not a sin on my part.  A lot of time has gone by.

18        Q.   I understand you completely I'm not -- I don't think you have any

19     sins here in this regard, but I'm just asking you this first question so

20     I can follow on with another question.  And the Prosecution towards the

21     end of your testimony at the very end in the Slobodan Milosevic trial

22     informed the Trial Chamber that during your proofing sessions for

23     testimony they showed you a series of photographs and you were not able

24     to recognise Mrksic on those photographs.  The Prosecutor said that in

25     court.  Do you remember that?

Page 4970

 1        A.   Yes, I do.

 2        Q.   Now, you did mention afterwards, later on when you were in the

 3     Sremska Mitrovica prisoner camp where part of the prison was turned into

 4     a prisoner camp, you mentioned some Colonel Branko who was the main

 5     investigator there; do you remember that?  Colonel Branko, according to

 6     your statement here, according to your testimony.

 7        A.   Did he have a surname?

 8        Q.   No.  That was a pseudonym.  Colonel Branko was in fact a

 9     pseudonym.

10        A.   I don't know.  I can't remember.

11        Q.   You can't remember.  Right.  What I wanted to ask you is whether

12     you saw this Colonel Branko person at Ovcara.  That's what I wanted to

13     ask you, but if you don't remember him I'm not going to insist upon the

14     point.  I understand your state of health and in view of your years I'm

15     not going to force you to remember if you can't remember, (redacted)

16  (redacted)

17  (redacted)

18             Mr. Cakalic, we're going to refer now to a number of your

19     previous testimonies in the various trials.  Now, you testified in a

20     Belgrade trial against persons accused for crimes committed at Ovcara;

21     isn't that right?

22        A.   They were Croats.  Yes, from Ovcara.  They were taken from Ovcara

23     to Belgrade.

24        Q.   Mr. Cakalic, listen to me carefully.  In Belgrade people were

25     accused and the Prosecutor claimed that they personally committed the

Page 4971

 1     crime at Ovcara.  It's a rather large group of people.

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   They were all Serbs?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   The accused?

 6        A.   Yes and in Belgrade I testified against them.

 7        Q.   That's what I wanted you to confirm.  Right.  And over there you

 8     mentioned on page 13 of the transcript of those proceedings, otherwise

 9     that was on the 25th of October, 2004, on page 13, you also mentioned

10     Muslims in the barracks, Muslims who seized your valuables, chains,

11     rings, and so on, saying that they would keep it in safekeeping and then

12     return them to you one day.  Do you remember saying that?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Then on page 20 of the transcript from the Belgrade trial, in

15     testifying about the events in Velepromet, saying that the Vukovar Fakin

16     or guys, young guys, knew that you would arrive, and there were some ten

17     of them there all wearing JNA uniforms and helmets.  And then they

18     recognised you, and they said, "Give me Berghofer.  Give me Cakalic," and

19     so on, these ruffians?

20        A.   Yes.  They said, "So that we can kill them."

21        Q.   So when you say Fakin these are hooligans or ruffians, this term

22     you used, Fakin?

23        A.   Well, I don't remember using that exact term.  I don't usually

24     use the word.  But anyway -- perhaps I said it in some different way, I

25     don't think I used the word Fakin .

Page 4972

 1        Q.   Well, it's on page 20 from the Belgrade trial and the Trial

 2     Chamber can look that up.  But the point I want to make is this:  They

 3     recognised you by your name and they threatened you, and you confirm

 4     that, do you?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   All right.  Fine.  Now, during that trial you said, and that is

 7     to be found on page 32, that at Ovcara among the people who beat you, who

 8     was in this cordon, there were soldiers there, but there were also people

 9     wearing civilian clothes?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   You said that then and you now confirm it, do you?

12        A.   Yes.  Specifically Slavko Dokmanovic.

13        Q.   Now, as for Slavko Dokmanovic, you said he was wearing a blue

14     army uniform.  Do you remember that?

15        A.   Yes, yes.  Yes, I do.  I remember that.  But when you mentioned

16     these people, I am mentioning him first.

17        Q.   But he wasn't wearing civilian clothes.  He was wearing a blue

18     uniform.

19        A.   Yes, a blue uniform.  Well, I can't remember exactly so don't

20     hold me to that.

21        Q.   That blue uniform could have been either a police uniform or an

22     air force uniform; right?  Because in the JNA it was only the air defence

23     and air force that wore blue uniforms.

24        A.   Well, I didn't pay attention to these details, these minor points

25     that much, because all of us there were fighting to get out of Ovcara.

Page 4973

 1     Everybody there sought ways and means to do that, because we felt what

 2     was going to happen to us.  We had a presentment of what was going to

 3     happen.  And at Ovcara you know more than 200 people were killed and five

 4     or six of us or seven of us were saved.

 5        Q.   Here you stated in several places, Mr. Cakalic, that a total of

 6     207 of you were brought to Ovcara and then 7 were saved.  Do you

 7     remember?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   Is it strange to you that precisely 200 were killed and out of

10     207 precisely 7 were saved?

11        A.   Well, I thought that was a coincidence.

12        Q.   Doesn't it look as if some cold-blooded criminal mind in a

13     position of power issued the order shoot 200 prisoners, and those who

14     carried out the execution drew up a list, counted off 200, and said, "We

15     will save seven because the orders were to shoot 200"?  Did that cross

16     your mind?

17        A.   No, I never thought about it.

18        Q.   Well, now that I'm putting this idea to you?

19        A.   Well, I can believe you.

20        Q.   Evidently --

21             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mussemeyer.

22             MR. MUSSEMEYER:  Sorry.  This is a kind of speculation.  The

23     witness is not able to do this.  The accused should put questions and not

24     speculations to the witness.  Thanks.

25  (redacted)

Page 4974

 1  (redacted)

 2  (redacted)

 3  (redacted)

 4  (redacted)

 5   Q.   Who said that?

 6   A.  General Vasiljevic, the chief of the military security service of the JNA.

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This witness doesn't know that, but

 8     this witness knows other things and I'm questioning him about other

 9     things.  So I think that the Prosecutor's objection is not in good order.

10     May I continue?

11             MR. SESELJ:

12        Q.   Mr. Cakalic, more than once in various trials you were asked who

13     the volunteers were or as you in Croatia say latterly, Dragovoljci,

14     another word for volunteers, and you said that these were people who were

15     going to war voluntarily.

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   There were volunteers on both side, were there not?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   On the Croatian side too?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   There were volunteers from various places in Croatia?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   At the trial in Belgrade, you said that apart from Djapic's

24     party, I think it was Praga's party at the time, though, it's the

25     Croatian Party of Rights; isn't that right?

Page 4975

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   And Praga was its president at the time?

 3        A.   Yes, I think he was.

 4        Q.   They had their own paramilitary formation, HOS, the Croatian

 5     armed forces; isn't that right?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   On page 38 of the transcript from the Belgrade trial you said

 8     that all the other parties sent their people to defend Vukovar.

 9        A.   Not parties but people from different towns, different places and

10     villages.

11        Q.   Well, yes, you did say that, it's in the transcript, too, but

12     then on page 38, and the Trial Chamber can see that if the transcript is

13     put on the ELMO, Djapic's party, it -- and then all the other parties,

14     too, sent their people to defend Vukovar.  "They were all volunteers.

15     Not a single one was forced to do this."  Do you remember saying that?

16        A.   Yes.  Well, I was a volunteer too.

17        Q.   So you were a volunteer too.  Thank you, sir.  Thank you,

18     Mr. Cakalic.  Then there's your testimony in the Mrksic case, Mrksic,

19     Sljvancanin, and Radic, and this was on the 13th and 14th of March, 2006;

20     right?  It was only two years ago.

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   And there you also stated, and that's on 5905, that's the page of

23     the transcript, that the Vukovar territorials beat up the prisoners in

24     Ovcara, some with batons, some with weapons, some with fists.

25        A.   Yes, I did say that, and it's true.

Page 4976

 1        Q.   I don't doubt it, Mr. Cakalic.  I don't think you're a person who

 2     has come here to lie, we were on opposing sides of this war.  We fought

 3     one against the other, but I do not think you are a man who has come here

 4     to lie, and I want you to know that right away.

 5             You also confirmed this number of 207 prisoners in total, seven

 6     of whom were saved, you, Berghofer, and some others.

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   They simply selected you out of that large group of 207; right?

 9     One person recognised you and he approached you and said he would save

10     you?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Another one recognised Berghofer?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   So you were selected according to different criteria because they

15     felt they had to save you?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   You did a favour to one of them once and he remembered it?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   Well, maybe somebody else thought that Berghofer didn't deserve

20     to be shot and so on and so forth?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   So they did use certain criteria according to which they pulled

23     you out of the group?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   And there were people within that group who were simply seething

Page 4977

 1     with hatred; right?  For example, the one called Veliki Boljer, it's as

 2     if everybody hated him; right?  Everybody was focused on him?

 3        A.   He was trampled to death.

 4        Q.   Very well.  Now, it's not very well that this happened, but I

 5     agree with your reply.  You mentioned this song here oh, Slobodan send

 6     some salad we are about to eat.  We shall slaughter Croats and there will

 7     be meat.  You said the group of about 15 were singing this?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   Did you ever hear this song sung before the war?

10        A.   I don't know.  I don't remember.

11        Q.   Were you ever a football fan?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   Did you go to matches?  Who did you root for?

14        A.   Dinamo.

15        Q.   Did you go to matches?

16        A.   I did while I lived in Zagreb.

17        Q.   Well, do you remember in 1990, not long after Tudjman won the

18     elections, there was a big fight and there were disturbances in Zagreb

19     because of a clash between the supports of Crvena Zvezda and Dinamo?

20        A.   Well, this happened often.

21        Q.   Yes, but that was the worst clash as far as I remember.  I'm not

22     a football club supporter but I remember that.

23        A.   Well, I'm not very fervent either.

24        Q.   But there were many people injured in Zagreb on at that day?

25        A.   Yes, I remember.

Page 4978

 1        Q.   And do you remember at that football match the support of Zvezda

 2     sang this song:  "Slobodan send some salad, we're about to eat.  We shall

 3     slaughter Croats and there will be meat."  And then the supporters of

 4     Dinamo retorted by singing, "Kill the Serb, kill the Serb."  Have you

 5     ever heard this song?

 6        A.   No.

 7        Q.   Didn't you hear about the riots in Zagreb in 1990 and the

 8     clashes, the major clashes, a year before the war?  You don't remember

 9     that?

10        A.   No, I don't.

11        Q.   All right.  I won't insist if you don't remember.

12             You made a statement to some Canadian policeman.  There was a

13     woman here, a Lieutenant Colonel Kim Carter; do you remember that?

14        A.   Yes I do.

15        Q.   Well the OTP evidently didn't feel it necessary --

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a minute, Mr. Seselj.

17     Please go more slowly.  On line 2, page 15, we have markings here which

18     indicate that a part of the sentence has not been recorded.  So please

19     try to slow down.

20             Witness, now, in the wake of the questions that have been put to

21     you, this song that was chanted Slobo, you seem to be demonstrating that

22     this chant -- that these were songs that were chanted by supporters of a

23     football team, and here an incident is quoted, a famous incident that

24     occurred in 1990 in Zagreb during a football match.  Can you confirm that

25     what the people were singing in the streets of Vukovar could be the same

Page 4979

 1     song that was sung on other occasion in stadiums?

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There have always been different

 3     football supporters at stadiums everywhere.  One side rooted for one

 4     side, another for another.  It was always the matches between the Red

 5     Star from Belgrade and Dinamo from Zagreb that were the most fiery, and

 6     with some other clubs, but I never saw any particular evil in that

 7     because there may have been people who came to blows, but that was minor.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You yourself, did you go to any

 9     football matches that pitched the Dinamo of Zagreb against the Red Star

10     of Belgrade?  Were you yourself in the stadium?  And did you ever hear

11     this kind of song at the time?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I stopped going to football matches

13     very early on because I didn't like the football supporters.  Some people

14     supported their teams in one way, others in another, and I simply stopped

15     attending football matches.  I preferred to watch on television at home.

16     I have not been to a football match for at least 20 years, but I do watch

17     football on television.

18             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

19             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Do you remember, Mr. Cakalic, that you made the statement to the

21     Canadian officers?

22        A.   What statement.

23        Q.   Well, you made a statement, and you confirmed this in the

24     Mrksic -- or, rather, in the Mrksic, Sljvancanin, Radic case on

25     transcript page 5939.  Some Canadian officers interviewed you, and you

Page 4980

 1     gave them that statement.  Is that true?

 2        A.   I don't remember that.

 3        Q.   All right.  I won't insist if you don't.

 4        A.   No, I don't.

 5        Q.   In the Milosevic trial you testified on the 16th of July, 2003;

 6     is that correct?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   And six day before that you lived in Kastel Luksic near Split for

 9     a while.  Isn't that correct?

10        A.   I still live there.

11        Q.   On the 10th of July, some people from the Ministry of the

12     Interior of Croatia came to see you, from the security service, some sort

13     of secret police, to discuss your testimony in the Milosevic case.  Do

14     you remember that?

15        A.   I did testify against Milosevic, but I don't remember any

16     policeman coming to see me or asking me to do anything.

17        Q.   You said that in your testimony in the Mrksic, Sljvancanin, and

18     Radic case on page 5939 of the transcript.  Can that page of the

19     transcript be shown on the screen if the registry can do that?  5939.

20     First we can see 5938 to see the last few lines of that page, and then

21     5939.  Is that possible?

22        A.   I don't know.  I don't remember that.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] You need a little time.  All right.

24             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   In that same testimony you said that the Serbian people in

Page 4981

 1     Vukovar felt under threat just before the war broke out?

 2        A.   Everybody did.  Everybody.  Both the Serbs and the Croats and

 3     everybody else who lived in Vukovar, all the other nations and

 4     ethnicities.  You know that Vukovar is a town which had the greatest

 5     number of ethnic groups on the territory of Croatia.

 6        Q.   All right.  We'll discuss this at greater length when we round

 7     off this topic, the transcripts of the previous trials, once we see this

 8     on the screen.

 9             In this trial, the trial of Mrksic, Sljvancanin, and Radic, and

10     we can see this on page 6059 of the transcript, when the Prosecutor asked

11     you something about the soldiers who were at Ovcara, you said some of

12     them were in civilian clothes, some had assorted clothing on.  For

13     example, the top would be military and the bottom civilian or vice versa.

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   "These were the paramilitaries of Vukovar, lads I knew.  One of

16     them, for example, approached me when we were already close to the

17     hangar.  He asked me, 'Uncle Emil, what are you doing here?'" And so on

18     and so forth.  You confirm saying that?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Thank you.  Do you recall making a statement in the centre for

21     human rights in Zagreb?

22        A.   Yes, I did.

23        Q.   And what was that statement about?

24        A.   I don't remember any more.

25        Q.   Was it about these events in Vukovar, what you experienced?

Page 4982

 1        A.   Well, I assume so, but I can't be sure.

 2        Q.   Well, as we don't have that statement, we'll probably never

 3     learn.  Did you tell the OTP that you had made that statement?

 4        A.   I don't remember that either.

 5        Q.   Have you found this, please, these pages of the transcript?  Not

 6     yet?  I hope you will.  And I'll put this aside until you do.

 7             You mentioned the fact that among these soldiers at Ovcara there

 8     was a man you first said was called Milan Bulic, and then you said his

 9     name was Milos Bulic, and you said that he hit you with a metal rod or

10     something like that.

11        A.   Yes.  I still have -- I still bear the consequences of that.  One

12     of my neck vertebrae is broken.

13        Q.   You mentioned a major who you said was called Milan Lukic.  Is

14     that correct?

15        A.   Lukic?  Yes.

16        Q.   And later on he was in charge of the transport from Vukovar to

17     Sremska Mitrovica.  You said that he wanted to use an electric baton, to

18     beat prisoners with an electric baton.  Do you remember that?

19        A.   Yes, I do.

20        Q.   Do you remember that it happened or that you said that?

21        A.   It did happen.  It happened in a village called Negoslavci.

22     That's where it happened.  They were taking us to Belgrade or to Sremska

23     Mitrovica.  No, it was Sremska Mitrovica.  And the closer we came to

24     Sremska Mitrovica, the less beating there was.

25        Q.   But later on there was beating in Sremska Mitrovica?

Page 4983

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   A lot?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   And it was the military police who did that there; right?

 5        A.   Yes.  There was the military police, but there were also military

 6     uniforms there.

 7        Q.   Yes, yes.  All right.  We'll have an opportunity to talk to those

 8     people who were in charge of the beatings in Sremska Mitrovica.  The OTP

 9     will give us the pleasure of seeing them in the courtroom so we can move

10     on to other matters.

11             Can you describe this electric baton or rod?  What does it look

12     like?

13        A.   It's a piece of metal, and it has some sort of electromagnetic

14     oscillations probably, and they were used at certain points in time at

15     the demand of the person carrying it.

16        Q.   All right, Mr. Cakalic.  I have a statement of yours here, your

17     most recent statement.  It was made on the 16th of May, 1992.  Police

18     administration, Vukovar.  It was the police administration in Vukovar

19     that took your statement, but it was taken somewhere else; right?  Was it

20     taken in Zagreb?  Where was the Croatian police administration of

21     Vukovar?

22        A.   In Vukovar.

23        Q.   It was in Vukovar before the war, but after Vukovar was liberated

24     it withdrew and they set up somewhere else?

25        A.   Yes, but I don't know where.

Page 4984

 1        Q.   I have this document before me.  It's 00200457.  If we can have

 2     it shown.  If that is not possible, I'll continue.  You say it's not

 3     possible?  Very well.

 4        A.   What's it about.

 5        Q.   You gave a more extensive statement about everything that took

 6     place in Vukovar, and I'm just going to refer to a few details.  Do you

 7     remember that statement?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   Do you remember where you gave the statement?

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, this statement you

11     would have made to the police, you say it's 20457, but we need the ERN

12     number.  The registrar needs the ERN number to be able to find this

13     document.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] ERN number is 0020045.  The

15     Prosecution disclosed the document to me.

16             MR. MUSSEMEYER:  If I may assist.  It's the 65 ter number 01328.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, if you can't find it, we need

18     not waste time on that.

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The document is on our screens.

20             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   That's the document, but we don't know where you gave this

22     statement.  So the official who took the statement -- or rather the

23     official note, compiled the Official Note, was from the police

24     administration, the Croatian administration of Vukovar, but I don't know

25     where the statement was made in the first place and you can't remember?

Page 4985

 1        A.   Well, I really can't remember.  I don't know.  If it says that I

 2     gave that statement, then I certainly did.

 3        Q.   On page 2 here, somewhere towards the middle of page 2 --

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May we have a look at page 2,

 5     please?

 6             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   It says that in the barracks you recognised a man called Radivoje

 8     Jakovljevic nicknamed Frizider or "Fridge."

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   And he went from one man to the next, he would hit some of them

11     and threatened to kill all of them?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   Then you say you recognised a man called Vlado Kosic who was

14     wearing a military uniform, a JNA officer?

15        A.   Yes, and he used to work in the Vukovar municipality.

16        Q.   So he's a local, is he, over there?

17        A.   Yes, because I worked in the Vukovar municipality too.

18        Q.   Yes.  I know that from the documents.

19        A.   And he would say, "Emil, Emil you didn't get into the right bus."

20     And I said "Well, which is a better bus?"  And he said, "It's all the

21     same.  It will be all the same."

22        Q.   So all these are people that you knew from before the war; right?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   And then here you went on to explain that Colonel Mrksic was at

25     Ovcara, but I seem to feel that you've mixed him up with another Colonel,

Page 4986

 1     some other Colonel, but unless you confirm that, I'm not going to pursue

 2     the point.

 3        A.   Well, that's the name he came under.  That's what was said.

 4     People said that's Colonel Mrksic.  So as far as I was concerned he was

 5     Colonel Mrksic to me.

 6        Q.   I see.  And then you recognised another man called Bora

 7     Latinovic; right?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   He was also wearing a military uniform, a JNA uniform; right?  Or

10     at least that's what you say here?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   You say he was wearing an SMB, olive green uniform?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   That's the standard JNA uniform?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   And he boasted and said that he'd killed 50 Ustashas himself the

17     night before?

18        A.   Yes, but I didn't believe him.  I don't believe that's true.

19        Q.   I don't believe that either because the day before there weren't

20     any of these liquidations, but you said that he boasted and bragged

21     because he wanted to instill fear in you?

22        A.   Yes, but I didn't believe him.

23        Q.   So towards the end of that page you say that on the 21st of

24     November, in the early hours of the morning, an active JNA soldier

25     appeared.  He was a sergeant and he introduced himself as a Macedonian.

Page 4987

 1        A.   That was in Modateks.

 2        Q.   Velepromet?

 3        A.   No, Modateks.

 4        Q.   I see, Modateks.  So that was the following day after Ovcara, the

 5     day after you were taken to Velepromet and then transferred to Modateks?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   Now, with him there was a young woman also wearing a JNA uniform.

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   And you recognised her as being a local Vukovar?

10        A.   She is the daughter of a colleague of mine who worked together

11     with me.

12        Q.   I see.  And then you go on to say, and I'm going to quote you and

13     that's towards the end of page 2:  "I wish to stress that the sergeant

14     was a Macedonian and that he threatened us all, and I remember this very

15     well, when he said the following to us:  You'll see what will happen when

16     my Topola sets fire to your irises, because he allegedly has knowledge of

17     us being the defenders of Vukovar."

18        A.   That's the truth of it.  That's really what he said.

19        Q.   So he introduced as -- mentioned this Topola as being one of his

20     own?

21        A.   Yes, as a subordinate.

22        Q.   Yesterday, you described this man Topola as being somebody who

23     was about your height but of a little more slender build.

24        A.   Possibly, but we didn't measure each other.

25        Q.   Now, this is why I'm asking you this, because some other

Page 4988

 1     witnesses when they described Topola say that this -- he was a heavily

 2     built man, 130 kilos in weight, tall and so on?

 3        A.   I don't believe that.

 4        Q.   So you remember him as being a man shorter than you in build?

 5        A.   Well, similar to me.

 6        Q.   Now, on 22nd of November, and that's to be found on page 3 of

 7     that statement of yours, in the early morning hours you say that an

 8     individual appeared who introduced himself as Vojvoda Vojin Misic from

 9     Negoslavci?

10        A.   Yes.  That was in the Vukovar barracks.

11        Q.   I see.  And that was prior to your departure for Mitrovica;

12     right?

13        A.   Yes, before I left for Mitrovica he said -- he introduced himself

14     and said, "I am Vojin Misic, a Serb from Negoslavci.  I am going to kill

15     you all.  We're going to kill you all.  We're going to throw your bodies

16     into the Danube River, and you're going to disappear."  That's what Vojin

17     Misic said, otherwise he was a captain.

18        Q.   A JNA captain?

19        A.   Yes.  Well, anyway that's the kind of uniform he wore.

20        Q.   How come it says here that he was a Vojvoda?

21        A.   Well, I assume he said that.  He probably said that.

22        Q.   He said that.  Do you remember him saying that or what?

23        A.   Well, it's like this:  Somebody else said that, actually, said

24     that he was a Vojvoda, but he was one of the best dressed and most

25     decently clad people.  He had the same sort of suit that Tito wore.  Now,

Page 4989

 1     whether this was just a show or whatever, but he was from Negoslavci,

 2     wasn't he.

 3        Q.   That's what you say?

 4        A.   Yes, he was from Negoslavci.

 5        Q.   I've never heard of him before.

 6        A.   I had never heard of him either.

 7        Q.   I had never heard of him until I read your statement.

 8        A.   Whether he was from Negoslavci I can't say, but he introduced

 9     himself and said, "I'm Vojin Misic, a Serb from Negoslavci."  That's what

10     he said.

11        Q.   I have an unidentified statement by you here, perhaps you signed

12     it.  The ERN number is 00187079.  Can you find that, please?  I was

13     disclosed that by the Prosecution, but it doesn't say when you gave that

14     statement, to what organ, institution, or whatever.

15        A.   What Prosecution?

16        Q.   The Hague OTP.

17        A.   Ah, The Hague OTP.

18        Q.   They provided me with your statement.  It's their duty to

19     disclose all these documents to you.

20        A.   So where's the problem?

21        Q.   Well, I want to identify what statement this is and I'd like to

22     hear from the Prosecutor what statement this is, what this is all about.

23     What kind of statement is that?

24             MR. MUSSEMEYER:  If you give me just a minute, I have to search

25     it on the system.  I will come back to this.

Page 4990

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] You found the previous document.

 2     Very well.  Fine.  We'll deal with that while the Prosecution is dealing

 3     with the other matter.

 4             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   So we're now going back to the Mrksic, Sljvancanin, and Radic

 6     transcripts, and we now have the page number P938, and I assume -- or,

 7     rather, 5938 and 5939.  Can we see one page first and then the other?

 8     Although this doesn't seem to me to be a proper translation.  The

 9     version, although I don't know English, but the version in Serbian seems

10     somewhat different to the English.

11             Let's have a look at 5938, first, please.

12        A.   Do you remember where we met?

13        Q.   No, I don't remember having met you at all.

14        A.   Really?  We shook hands and we talked.  You were at Nikola

15     Pekic's.

16        Q.   Where?

17        A.   Pekic Nikola.

18        Q.   In Vukovar?

19        A.   Yes, Vukovar.

20        Q.   Before the war?

21        A.   Yes, before the war, in the 1970s, and Nikola died quite

22     recently.

23        Q.   I don't remember that.

24        A.   You don't remember?

25        Q.   No.

Page 4991

 1        A.   Well, we had quite a long conversation.

 2        Q.   What did we talk about?

 3        A.   Well, various things.

 4        Q.   I see.  Various things.  Well, the world is a very small place.

 5     But I hope you won't deduct that from my time, Judges.

 6             Now, have you found the page?  Have you found it?  Yes.  It would

 7     be a good idea if the Serbian version of the transcript could be provided

 8     to the witness so Mr. Cakalic can see it.  You haven't got it?  Take my

 9     copy.

10             Three lines are important on this page, and the top part I marked

11     on the second page.  And I haven't got a copy.  It's not just that one

12     copy exist, but I'll use the screen.  So let's see, one page first -- or,

13     rather, the English and the Serbian.  Well, put the English version on

14     the overhead projector so that the Judges can see for themselves first,

15     and then put the Serbian version so that Mr. Cakalic can have a look.

16     Let's have the English first.

17             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I've seen the two pages in

18     English.  Please ask your question, Mr. Seselj.

19             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Well, I would like to have the Serbian version put on the ELMO

21     for Mr. Cakalic's benefit.

22        A.   You mean Croatian.

23        Q.   Ha, ha.

24             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Here we have the page in

25     Serbian.

Page 4992

 1             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   Take a look on that first page now.  They're asking you about

 3     your testimony in -- your testimony in the Slobodan Milosevic trial, and

 4     then on page 5942, which I haven't got on my screen yet, 5942, that's the

 5     following page, towards the end of the page you see there mentioning your

 6     testimony during the Milosevic trial.

 7             Now, next page, the top of the page, please, and the man asking

 8     you the question is counsel Vasic, and he says -- yes, that's Vasic

 9     speaking.  He says:  "After that -- or I have to say before that on the

10     10th of July, 2003, you talked to members of the Ministry of the

11     Interior, the police administration."  And then you add, and these are

12     your initials, EC, Emil Cakalic, you say:  "Kastel Luksic."  There's a

13     mistake here.  It's not Lukzic, it's Luksic.

14             Then counsel says, "In Kastel, and they compiled an Official

15     Note," and you confirm that they did and say, "Yes."  Do you remember

16     that now?

17        A.   Yes, I do.

18        Q.   Well, do you remember this conversation with the Croatian police

19     before testifying in the Milosevic trial?

20        A.   Well, there were many things.  There was a lot of various things.

21        Q.   Well, if you don't remember, I won't insist.

22        A.   I can't remember.

23        Q.   What is important for me is that we have ascertained that the

24     conversation took place.  Now, I understand fully, Mr. Cakalic, that one

25     tends to forget many things, just as I forgot ever having met you before.

Page 4993

 1     But I do remember every time that the police came to talk to me and when

 2     they interrogated me, and this happened very often.  I remember all of

 3     that.

 4        A.   Well, that's why you remembered.

 5        Q.   Yes.  Now we're going to deal with the events in Vukovar before

 6     the war broke out, and as you have helped me out here and helped me

 7     identify and clarify the situation concerning the crime in Ovcara, I'd

 8     like to go on and say that one comes to wonder to the question of what it

 9     was that forced people who were your neighbours until all this broke out,

10     what -- and you socialised with them and so on, what instilled this

11     hatred in them that they appeared in Ovcara and beat the prisoners and

12     later on some of them took part in the liquidation?

13        A.   Well, passions were let loose.

14        Q.   Is it passions, is it ideology, what is it?

15        A.   Well, everybody views this his own particular way, but most

16     probably it's ideology, but I would say it's passions, political passions

17     running wild.

18        Q.   Well, is the reason -- does the reason lie in the fact that

19     before the war, in the beginning of the conflict with the JNA, over 150

20     Serbs were killed on the territory of Vukovar municipality; might it be

21     that?

22        A.   That is the first time I am hearing of that.

23        Q.   The first time.  I see.  Did you hear about the information

24     centre of the Serbian Sabor or Assembly?

25        A.   You mean in Vukovar?

Page 4994

 1        Q.   Yes, in Vukovar.

 2        A.   I remember that there was some sort of Assembly.  Whether it was

 3     the Serbian Assembly or some other, I really don't know.

 4        Q.   And do you know that this information centre of the Serbian

 5     Assembly cooperated closely with The Hague Tribunal, with The Hague OTP?

 6        A.   I don't know that.

 7        Q.   Now, The Hague investigators conducted about 100 interviews and

 8     took about 100 statements from witnesses of crimes committed against the

 9     Serbs in Vukovar, and we have that on the first page of this information

10     centre.  I could provide you with the title page of this report so that

11     the report by the information centre, Serbian information centre, can be

12     seen.  I think you were provided with this this morning, although I sent

13     it up for translation three months ago, but may we have this report by

14     the Serbian information centre put on the overhead projector, please.

15             You can answer my questions in a very relaxed manner.  I am not

16     accusing you of anything.  I don't have you on the list of people who

17     committed crimes.

18        A.   I understand.  You want to arrive at a truth.

19        Q.   Yes, and I'm using documents.

20        A.   And I'm going to help with you that.

21        Q.   Very well.  Thank you.  But if there is something you don't know,

22     I won't insist.

23        A.   Very well then.

24        Q.   I don't have a single piece of information incriminating you, so

25     there's no reason for us to clash.  You may know things, or you may not

Page 4995

 1     know them.

 2             On the front page you can see that this is the Serb Assembly

 3     Information Centre thereof, that they have documents testifying to the

 4     violations of human rights, ethnical cleansing, and the crimes committed

 5     by Croats against the Serbs in Croatia between 1991 and 1996.  Can you

 6     see that in the heading?

 7        A.   Yes.  I have a comment if I may.

 8        Q.   Yes, go on.

 9        A.   I don't believe that the Croatian people committed crimes in

10     Vukovar or committed ill-deeds against the Serb people in Vukovar.  It

11     may well be the case, but this must have been retaliation.  It was not a

12     custom in Vukovar.  We were all neighbours.  We were all socialising.  Do

13     you understand?

14        Q.   Mr. Cakalic, I'm not saying that the Croatian people committed

15     crimes.  The criminals are mentioned by name, Tomislav Mercep and others.

16     It doesn't say that the people committed crimes.

17        A.   It was individuals.

18        Q.   Yes, individuals and certain military forms.  This is a file

19     number 887, and title is "Crime without punishment, crimes committed by

20     Croatian military formations against the Serb civilians in Croatia in

21     1992 -- 1 to 1996 and it was altered by S. Dabic and M. Lukic.

22             On the first page of the report can you please turn to the first

23     page.  Again, this has been translated into English.  The Judges must

24     have the English translation and so do my learned friends.

25             Your Honours, the Prosecutor has been in possession of this

Page 4996

 1     document for over 10 years and they have never disclosed this document to

 2     me.  This is page number 1, contents, and then move on to page number 1.

 3     This is page number 1, ma'am.

 4             The OTP has never disclosed this to me according to Rule 68(i),

 5     although they are in possession of this document and I obtained this

 6     directly from the information centre of the Serbian Assembly.  On page 1

 7     paragraph 2 it says:  We are from The Hague Tribunal to carry out an

 8     unbiased investigation in order to investigate the crimes committed by

 9     the Serbian people in Eastern Slavonia and Western Srem.  And then there

10     is a sentence that says in the seventh line of the second paragraph, The

11     Hague Tribunal accepted our request and its investigation teams on four

12     occasions between 22nd May and 2 June from 10 to 14 July, from 26

13     September to 1 October 1996, and from 16 to 29 January 1997, interviewed

14     about a hundred witnesses in Vukovar.  The investigation did not comprise

15     all the crimes because there were too many crimes committed, and it was

16     just not feasible.

17             This file which was filed during the investigation carried out by

18     The Hague Tribunal in Vukovar contains data and information only on the

19     crimes about which there is enough evidence in The Hague to issue

20     indictments against their perpetrators, members of the Croatian armed

21     formations.  Do you see that Mr. Cakalic?  Do you see that sentence?

22     What do you think about this?  Do you know that this investigation did

23     take place in Vukovar?

24        A.   No.

25        Q.   Did you hear about The Hague investigators coming to Vukovar?

Page 4997

 1        A.   No, I didn't.

 2        Q.   And that they interviewed people?

 3        A.   No.

 4        Q.   Mr. Cakalic, very well then.

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, the Trial Chamber is

 6     discovering these documents with you.  Apparently they had not been

 7     disclosed to the accused, which is a cause for astonishment, but on the

 8     basis of these documents, it would appear that prior to November or

 9     October 1991, in Vukovar, there were crimes committed by Croats against

10     Serbs, and on the basis of this document there were some hundred and

11     fifty people who fell victims.  So from this document, it appears that

12     this very Office of the Prosecutor investigated, and a witness apparently

13     were heard.

14             You were a resident of Vukovar.  Before October and November, did

15     you have any knowledge?  Did you hear that Serbs had been victims of

16     crimes that would have been committed by Croats, or did you never know of

17     anything?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You -- I would answer as follows:

19     The Serbs made up stories about being persecuted in order to smear the

20     name of the Croatian people.  They would flee to Vojvodina first and then

21     to Serbia and so on and so forth.  That's what they did.  But the fact

22     that Croats were killing Serbs, some were killed in duels.  The person

23     who saved me was later on killed in a duel.

24             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   Mr. Cakalic, these people who were killed, the list is a hundred

Page 4998

 1     and fifty names long.  They did not kill each other in order to blame the

 2     Croats.

 3        A.   It was a war.

 4        Q.   This was before the war, Mr. Cakalic.

 5        A.   Yes, before the war.

 6        Q.   This was before the war whilst different gangs under the command

 7     of Tomislav Mercep circled around Vukovar and even after he left Vukovar.

 8             I have an original Croatian document here.  You have this

 9     document in a typed version because the original was not very legible.

10             Can we have the original on the ELMO, and the Judges have a

11     translation into English, and I'm going to be using the new typed version

12     of this document.

13             Mr. Cakalic, the Croatian authorities were aware of these major

14     crimes that were committed in Vukovar, and I'm going to show you a

15     document which is a confidential letter by Marin Vidic.  Do you know him?

16     He is a friend, I believe.

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   He was the commissioner of the Croatian government in Vukovar.

19     On the 18th of August, 1991 he wrote to the president of --

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, I just want to tell

21     you this:  The Judges have not received the translation of the documents.

22     You told us it had been translated, but we don't have the translation in

23     front of us.  So be aware that your questions cannot be enhanced by the

24     English translation of the document.

25             To help us -- for instance, we have a document in front of us.  I

Page 4999

 1     can translate, and I can see that it was written on the 18th of August,

 2     1991.  Tell us who it is sent who and what was the purpose just in a

 3     nutshell so that we know what the document is about.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Honour, over three months ago

 5     I handed this over for translation to the registry, and it is not my

 6     fault if you don't have it in English.  I hope that you have at least

 7     some of the things.  I don't know what you have and what you don't have.

 8     And this is a letter which was the commissioner of the Croatian

 9     government for Vukovar.  You know, in Vukovar there were local elections

10     in 1990, and after the elections the president of the municipality was

11     Slavko Dokmanovic.

12             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Wasn't it, Mr. Cakalic?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   What is his nationality?

16        A.   Serb.

17        Q.   And how did he declare himself?  He was a Yugoslav, wasn't he?

18     Are you aware of that?  Before the war he always declared himself as a

19     Yugoslav?

20        A.   You know what?  We worked together in the municipality, and I

21     really wouldn't know.  I don't know that.  Maybe he declared himself as

22     Yugoslav somewhere else, not in the workplace.

23        Q.   But it was his official position when the questionnaires had to

24     be filled out when he had to declare his nationality, he would fill out

25     as being Yugoslav.

Page 5000

 1        A.   Possibly.

 2        Q.   And then there was a threat that he would be arrested and he fled

 3     Vukovar sometime in July?

 4        A.   Yes.  He went to Vojvodina.

 5        Q.   And then the Croatian government appointed a commissioner, Marin

 6     Vidic Bili?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   Marin Vidic, on the 18th of August, wrote to the president of the

 9     republic, the prime minister of Croatia, to the minister of defence, and

10     to the minister of the interior of Croatia, describing the political and

11     security situation in the municipality of Vukovar.  He calls this a

12     report in Croatian.  Can you see this document in front of you?

13             I'm going to read the first part very carefully and you can

14     follow my words.  I'm going to be reading very slowly because of the

15     interpretation.

16              "By appointing Tomislav Mercep of the secretary of the municipal

17     secretariat of Vukovar, the power has been usurped, and functions have

18     been concentrated in one person, and these functions are the president of

19     the Croatian Democratic Union, Tudjman's party, and the factical

20     [as interpreted] command of the ZNG, the police, the civilian

21     authorities.  He is surrounded by people of dubious moral qualities,

22     former criminals who have taken over the complete control over everything

23     in the municipality of Vukovar and they are not shying from repressive

24     and violent measures again the population of Vukovar.  They burst into

25     private apartments against the law.  They send in to those flats by

Page 5001

 1     people who sought accommodation.  They plunder these apartments.  They

 2     seize vehicles.  They bring against their will people for oppression, and

 3     they even execute people.  This behaviour has created in the town of

 4     Vukovar a general psychosis of fear among both the Croatian and the

 5     Serbian population which has resulted in a mass exodus from the town, a

 6     total blockade of the work of the police, of the ZNG, the organs of the

 7     administration, and this has also created a general state of confusion.

 8             "He has brought upon himself his dismissal from the position of

 9     the secretary of the Secretariat for National Defence because it was

10     visible that this would lead to a general catastrophe.  Upon the

11     intervention of Mr. Manolic, Tomislav Mercep has been withdrawn to

12     Zagreb, allegedly to be the assistant minister of the interior, which has

13     been officially published in the media."

14             Were you able to follow my reading?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Am I reading correctly?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   "When he left Vukovar, the situation became totally confused and

19     we have tried to dealt with the vacuum by establishing a Crisis Staff and

20     by appointing people to important positions and by separating the

21     authorities of the ZNG, the police, the civilian authorities, and

22     parties.

23             "When this started functioning, new complications arose when in

24     incompetent people were appointed by the authorities in Zagreb; for

25     example, the commander of the ZNG, Stjepan Radas who was dismissed, only

Page 5002

 1     he was a very professional and very competent person who instilled trust

 2     and who has support of the commissioner of the government of Croatia.

 3             "The Crisis Staff in Vukovar and commander of the 3rd Brigade,

 4     Mr. Vukovac; the chief of police for Slovenia, Pejic; and the coordinator

 5     for Slovenia, Baranja, Mr. Seks.  Instead of him, in Arbanas was

 6     appointed and Mr. Zadro Blago, and they are people without no

 7     qualifications whatsoever, without any professional knowledge in the

 8     area.  The appointment, the dismissal was carried out without any

 9     explanation at the express order of Minister Bebic.

10             "Upon the proposal of the Crisis Staff, the acting secretary of

11     the municipal Secretariat of Defence, the commissioner for Vukovar

12     appointed Professor Danijel Rehak, for whom we believe that he might be

13     able to perform this job professionally, all of a sudden received

14     appointment on the appointment of Gazo Josip, the former Mercep's deputy.

15     He doesn't have any professional or other qualities to perform this job.

16     He has a high school degree, and he never served in the army.  Because of

17     this confused situation in Vukovar we are requesting your intervention,

18     because the municipality of Vukovar is a very volatile area which

19     threatens to be struck by an armed conflict at a larger scale and the

20     town is almost encircled.

21             "The appointed people are pursuing Tomislav Mercep's policies and

22     again there is terror in town.  There are armed conflicts and shooting as

23     a manner of provocation of which may result in major consequences.  The

24     ZNG and the police and the authorities are again functioning.  The former

25     policies have created a grave psychosis of fear among the Serb and

Page 5003

 1     Croatian population.  The complete Croatian population does not justify

 2     this sort of behaviour and they considered themselves rejected and

 3     compromised.  They do not want to bear responsibility for these policies.

 4     Since we believe that we are not in a position to deal with the situation

 5     with our local forces, we are kindly asking you to send competent people

 6     urgently that would help the legal institutions of authorities and

 7     legal -- and normalise the matter.  Since Mr. Bilic [as interpreted] is

 8     your personal friend, do you recognise his signature on the document?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   Do you doubt that this is list letter?

11        A.   I believe that this is his letter.

12        Q.   You have heard of Mr. Tomislav Mercep, haven't you?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Is it true that he instilled terror not only among the Serbs but

15     also among the Croats in Vukovar?

16        A.   That's not the way I saw him or knew him.

17        Q.   Do you know that when Tomislav Mercep left Vukovar and appointed

18     the assistant -- assistant minister of the interior in Croatia, that he

19     formed an armed formation that committed a mass crimes against the Serb

20     civilians in the Pakrac valley?

21        A.   Yes, but that was during the war.  That was during the war.

22        Q.   But that was before the war.  There was no war in the Western

23     Slavonia at the time.

24        A.   No.  The war had started.

25        Q.   In Western Slavonia the war started some time in September 1991,

Page 5004

 1     or maybe even October, and this had happened before.  Are you aware of

 2     this major crime against the Serb civilian?

 3        A.   No, I hear it for the first time.

 4        Q.   Did the Croatian media write a lot about it?  There was also a

 5     trial, and because of a procedural error the whole group was released.

 6     Do you know that he was tried for that?

 7        A.   I didn't know that.  I thought that he simply vanished from

 8     Vukovar.

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment, please.  Witness,

10     this is document from the municipal authorities in Croatia at the time,

11     so it looks like an official document, and it reports a chaotic

12     situation, people who are incompetent, criminals.  It speaks of

13     executions.

14             Now, this is a picture that may look like an apocalyptic picture

15     and you were a resident and you knew everybody.  What do you have to say

16     to this, because I seem to understand that you deny all this, and here we

17     have a very detailed document that seems to contradict what you said so

18     far.  What was the real situation prior to October 1991 in Vukovar on the

19     Croatian side?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The situation was critical.  There

21     were two major national groups, the Croats and the Serbs.  I won't

22     mention Ruthenians and the others, the other national minorities, ethnic

23     minorities.

24             If you know that this happened I believe you, but I did not know

25     that, and I did not see that.  I can only say what I saw or possibly

Page 5005

 1     accept someone else's ideas and thoughts.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The individual who kind the

 3     document, Bilic [as interpreted], I thought you understood -- you knew

 4     him.  Did you know him?

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do.  I did.

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.  And he didn't tell

 7     you that as far as he was concerned it was a chaotic situation, that he

 8     had warned Zagreb of all these problems, that he wanted competent people

 9     to be appointed, that he wanted control to be taken of the situation?

10     Did he never tell you that?  Did he never tell you that people were being

11     killed -- well, or executed, rather, if we go by the document.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was a collaborator of Vidic.  He

13     was the president of the municipality -- not that.  No, it was a

14     different expression, a different title.  But in any case, he did work

15     for the municipality and I assisted him in that.  I went to Borovo Selo

16     and Borovo Naselje with him more than once.  There were containers and

17     rubbish bins that had been destroyed, and as a sanitary inspector I

18     ordered that all this be dealt with quickly.

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Sir, let's not waste any time.

20     You told us that you worked with him, so normally you should be aware of

21     the situation that prevailed then.

22             This document states that people were killed, and this is the

23     theory of Mr. Seselj, who is based on this document but also another

24     document.  And I remind you that you are under oath, and you tell us

25     under oath that as far as you know, in Vukovar there were never crimes

Page 5006

 1     committed by Croats against Serbs.  Is that so?

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not see that.  As I said, I

 3     did not see it.

 4             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] That you did not see them,

 5     that's one thing, but that you may have heard about them.  I'm not saying

 6     that you were on side when crimes were committed, but we want to know

 7     whether you heard of crimes, and that's quite different.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] People did speak about that.

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We're making headway.  So it

10     was spoken about.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] People did speak about that.

12             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Did you know Zdenko Novak?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   Was his nickname Miner?

16        A.   That's the first time I've heard of this.

17        Q.   Did Stenko Novak had about a hundred kilogrammes of explosives

18     which he used to blow up Serbian houses in Vukovar?

19        A.   That's the first time I heard of this.  Zdenko Novak was in The

20     Hague.

21        Q.   I don't know about his being in The Hague and I'm not interested

22     in that.  I have his name in the documents.  He was a person who blew up

23     Serbian houses.  A Serb family would flee from Vukovar out of fear.  He

24     would turn up right away and blow-up their house, and this explosion

25     would motivate other Serbs to flee as soon as they could.  That was the

Page 5007

 1     method he used.

 2        A.   I'm surprised to hear that, because he was a very well-mannered

 3     person, a person of good character with whom I socialised.

 4             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, here again we're

 5     uncovering another problem.  We've heard about this -- this is the first

 6     time we're hearing about Novak.  But let us imagine that a house would be

 7     blown up in Vukovar.  I suppose that the residents would know that house

 8     has been blown up, and the municipality should also know about it.

 9             Did you yourself hear that Serb houses were exploded, were blown

10     up?  Prior to October 1991.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  Whenever such a thing

12     happened, all of Vukovar knew about it.

13             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Were there any investigations

14     conducted by the municipal police in Vukovar?  What did the municipality

15     do?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I worked in the municipality at the

17     time, but the municipality -- well, there was a commissioner for Vukovar

18     municipality.  His name was Marin Vidic.  I can tell you he's a wonderful

19     man, a very good man who wants to help everyone, and I don't believe he

20     did anything evil, Marin Vidic.

21             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.  We're now going to

22     have --

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [Previous translation continues]...

24     opinion.

25             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, we're going to have a

Page 5008

 1     break.

 2             Mr. Seselj, you've used one hour and 10 minutes so far, so that

 3     after the break you'll have another 20 minutes to complete, to finish the

 4     cross-examination.

 5             We shall reconvene in 20 minutes' time.

 6                           --- Recess taken at 10.28 a.m.

 7                           --- On resuming at 10.52 a.m.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We have resumed our hearing.

 9     Mr. Seselj, you have shown us a number of documents.  I believe you are

10     going to ask for these documents to be tendered into evidence.  If we do

11     not have the translation of these documents, we will mark these documents

12     for identification.

13             Let me say that a few months ago you had asked for these

14     documents to be translated, and as things stand today you do not have the

15     translated documents.  As you have your schedule for the upcoming

16     witnesses, perhaps -- or you do certainly know which documents you would

17     like to show, if you send some of these documents off to be translated,

18     you might just send them a memo and say these documents need to be

19     translated as a priority given the witnesses who are going to come to

20     testify.  Because if you don't mention this to the translation services

21     and if you don't prioritise your documents, well, they will continue

22     working the way they usually do, and in that case you will not have the

23     documents translated in a timely way.

24             So all you need to do is tell the translation services to

25     prioritise the translation of such and such document.

Page 5009

 1             So let me give you the floor back so that you can resume your

 2     cross-examination.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, first allow me to

 4     state my position on what you have said.  I don't know what the precise

 5     order of witnesses is.  I don't know whether there will be any witnesses

 6     next week.  I have been given some schedules by the OTP, but they never

 7     stuck to them.  I don't know anything right now.  When we finish with

 8     this witness, I don't know anything.  I don't know whether there will be

 9     any more witnesses or not.  That's uncertain.  That's one point.

10             The second point is as regards translation, you remember well

11     that as the Pre-Trial Judge, you ordered me to find an agency on my own

12     which is able to translate my books.  I did find an agency which is

13     reliable, which offered the lowest prices, and they were willing to do

14     that by the end of January.  The translation was not done, and you issued

15     a new decision obliging the registry to have these two books translated

16     by the beginning of my defence case.

17             As of today I don't know whether there will be a defence case at

18     all as you are kidnapping my witnesses, subpoena -- issuing subpoenas for

19     them.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, to shed some light

21     on this matter, the Trial Chamber had handed down a decision whereby you

22     have a credit of 10.000 pages that can be sent in for translation.

23     Unless I am mistaken, I think that was the right figure, 10.000

24     documents.  So the Registrar must -- the registry must translate these

25     10.000 pages.  And I stand to be corrected by my colleagues if I'm making

Page 5010

 1     a mistake here.

 2             We said that it was for you to tell the registrar what your

 3     priorities were.  It was for you to tell them which documents should be

 4     translated first, which are a priority for you.

 5             Admittedly you did give us an estimate.  We did factor all this

 6     in when we looked into the matter, and in the end we decided on the

 7     following solution:  The registry will translate 10.000 pages for you

 8     overall, and then it is for you to specify which pages need to be

 9     translated first, and those will be the documents which you will want to

10     tender into evidence.

11             You have written some 84 books.  I believe one is going to be

12     published in the next few days, but these books are perhaps very

13     interesting and very relevant, but it's for you to tell the registry to

14     identify those pages which you will want to tender into evidence when the

15     witnesses come to testify.

16             Now, the Prosecution gave you a provisional list.  Admittedly

17     some witnesses, for whatever reason, will not be able to come to testify.

18     Strinovic, the expert witness, for instance.  But other witnesses are

19     mentioned, and I shall not give their names because some of them are

20     protected, are on the list.  There are witness numbers.  So you know who

21     these witnesses are.  And as of today already, I'm sure you know which

22     documents you are going to be adducing through these witnesses.  We also

23     have the chart for the entire month of April.  It is possible that some

24     of the witnesses that have been scheduled are not going to come.

25     Nonetheless, you are able to prepare this adequately.  Number 34, 51,

Page 5011

 1     number 7, Witness 16.  These are the witness numbers we have and which

 2     should enable you to prepare for them, and you can ask the translation

 3     services to have for number 34, 7, 16, and 51 to have the documents

 4     translated.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I cannot prepare for

 6     all the witnesses at once.  At present I don't know what witnesses are

 7     envisaged for next week or whether there will be any witnesses, nor has

 8     the Prosecutor been able to say here whether he will certainly have

 9     witnesses next week.  That's one point.

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a minute, Mr. Seselj.

11     Unless I'm mistaken, I believe a witness was scheduled for next week, for

12     Thursday.

13             I'm turning now to Mr. Mundis.  There is a witness that's been

14     planned for Thursday, I believe.

15             MR. MUNDIS:  Good morning, Your Honours.  What we're trying to do

16     at this very moment pursuant to the oral order of the Trial Chamber

17     yesterday is arrange for two witnesses for next week that concern

18     Zvornik.  I should have some additional information before we complete

19     the court day today hopefully.  The schedule will be circulated no later

20     than tomorrow for next week, but we do envisage having two Zvornik

21     witnesses for next week, assuming that we can get the authorities to act

22     consistently with the Trial Chamber's oral order of yesterday afternoon

23     in an expeditious manner.

24             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.  Mr. Seselj, so as

25     far as next week is concerned, there are two potential witnesses who are

Page 5012

 1     going to come and talk about Zvornik.  I'm sure you have documents about

 2     Zvornik.  You may have priority documents, important documents.  So there

 3     are some documents you intend to tender into evidence I'm sure, because

 4     these witnesses are going to come and testify about it.

 5             I know that you are representing yourself and you're working

 6     alone.  We're fully aware of that.  But if you did send off some

 7     documents to the translation services that relate to Zvornik, maybe you

 8     should tell the translation services to translate one or other document,

 9     because these are extremely important documents for you, as was the

10     document you showed us a while ago.

11             So these documents merit to be put on a priority list.  So I'll

12     give you the floor back so that you can resume your cross-examination.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I wanted to use the two books to

14     cross-examine your expert witness Ivo Tomic.  I wasn't able to do that.

15     Then I wanted to have this set of documents about Zvornik to use for the

16     cross-examination of a great criminal that has appeared as a Prosecution

17     witness, and I've been told that the Prosecution will have three hours

18     for in chief and three hours for my cross-examination, whereas you

19     changed the decision and the witness appeared under 92 ter with all --

20     full protective measures, completely anonymously, and I refused to

21     cross-examine him.  So that's what I needed this material for, for the

22     cross-examination of that witness.

23             Now I'm going to use it for the cross-examination of Mr. Cakalic

24     who has to give the answers he can to these questions of mine; although,

25     this was intended for quite a different witness and now Mr. Cakalic has

Page 5013

 1     to do this.  He has not is sullied his hand in blood, Mr. Cakalic,

 2     whereas the Prosecution has put him in to this situation where I would

 3     have asked these questions of a notorious criminal, somebody that was

 4     accused of crimes against humanity and who was released from prison in an

 5     exchange with Croatian authorities.  So that's the situation I have to

 6     face and I'm facing it calmly and quietly.

 7             Now, with respect to this other witness, Strinovic, I spent a lot

 8     of time preparing for him and now I see he's not coming at all, and

 9     that's a blow, and I had to check to see whether they might have sent me

10     an expert report by him and when I went through each and every document

11     page by page, I realised that that expert report did not exist.

12             Perhaps this can -- these proceedings can function this way, but

13     I don't know for how long, because my physical capabilities are limited

14     after all.

15             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You are right on a number of

16     points.  This is why I asked the Prosecution last time why a witness who

17     was on -- who was scheduled was not coming.  I'm fully aware of the fact

18     that you prepare for these witnesses.  You invest a lot of time and work

19     in this, and if you then discover that the witness is not coming, you

20     waste a lot of time.  This is why I asked the Prosecution to tell us why

21     these changes had been made.

22             The same applies to Mr. Strinovic who was due to come.  We know

23     now why he will not come.

24             So I'd like you to be aware of fact that we fully understand the

25     difficulties you come up against when it comes to preparing for these

Page 5014

 1     witness testimonies when they don't come.  Nonetheless, the Trial Chamber

 2     has decided that the Prosecution should give us a chart which covers

 3     eight weeks, which spans a period of eight weeks, so that we get an

 4     overall understanding of which witnesses are going to come.

 5             So we want to know over a period of eight weeks which are the

 6     witnesses that are scheduled to come and testify.

 7             Mr. Mundis, can you confirm this?

 8             MR. MUNDIS:  That's the first I've heard of that, Mr. President.

 9     We will certainly endeavour to do that.  I'm not in a position by

10     tomorrow to provide a schedule for the next eight weeks.  Perhaps by the

11     end of next week I would be in a position to do that.

12             We have indicated on a few occasions in the past some of the

13     difficulties that we've had with respect to scheduling witnesses.  I'm

14     not going to reiterate that now.  I simply do want to repeat, however,

15     that in light of the comments made by Dr. Seselj with respect to

16     Mr. Strinovic, that was adequately addressed yesterday.  We have

17     indicated that he will not be coming in April but he will be coming at a

18     subsequent date.  I want to be absolutely clear that we have asked him to

19     produce a new report.  That report will be disclosed and not less than 30

20     days thereafter he will be called as a witness.

21             So I want to be absolutely clear he is not dropped as a witness.

22     He will be called as a witness.  It's a question of him producing a

23     revised or a better report, and then adequate time under 94 bis will be

24     allowed before we schedule that witness I want to be absolutely clear

25     about that.

Page 5015

 1             I don't believe we can take this any further at this point in

 2     time, and I would respectfully request that we move on with the

 3     cross-examination of this witness.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I would like to

 5     remind you that as the Pre-Trial Judge you issued an instruction, an oral

 6     instruction, to the Prosecution to have crime base witnesses appear first

 7     and then the other witnesses and that these crime base witnesses should

 8     be grouped according to the different localities.  So I assume that it

 9     would be natural that they be grouped, crime base witnesses should be

10     grouped for Vukovar.  We had a few.  We'll have a few again, and then

11     later on some more.

12             But that's not a rational use of time and a rational presentation

13     of evidence, let alone the problems that raises as far as I'm concerned,

14     because I heard for the first time today that next week we're going to

15     have crime base witnesses testifying about Zvornik, for instance.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Admittedly during the pre-trial

17     stage, in order to be as rational as possible, I had indicated to

18     Mrs. Dahl that it would be desirable for the Prosecution to call the

19     witnesses on a municipality basis before addressing the more crucial

20     issues, i.e., the volunteers and the individual responsibility, criminal

21     responsibility of the accused.  This seemed logical from a judicial

22     standpoint.  Mrs. Dahl heard what I said, and then I realised that she

23     was proceeding differently.

24             So as we have the first witnesses that are testifying, we are

25     discussing Vukovar.  Unfortunately, we shall have to move on to Zvornik,

Page 5016

 1     and then we shall get back to Vukovar again in a few months' time or a

 2     few weeks' time.  This makes all this rather difficult to follow.

 3             I know it's difficult.  I know that you have your own issues with

 4     your witnesses, but believe me, Mr. Mundis, if I were in charge of the

 5     trial and fully in charge, I would have called the Vukovar witnesses.  I

 6     would then have closed the Vukovar chapter and moved on to another

 7     municipality to avoid repetitions and to avoid wasting time, to be as

 8     rational as possible.  But this Tribunal operates differently.  The

 9     witnesses come to discuss a municipality and then another municipality

10     and then come back for the first municipality.  I know it's a bit

11     hotchpotch.  I know that you're finding this rather difficult to call

12     your witnesses and making sure that they can come, but if I were to

13     prepare all this trial, I can assure you that if I had started first with

14     the Vukovar witnesses and I wouldn't have moved on to Zvornik before I'd

15     finished.

16             But as the Rules of Procedure and Evidence do not entitle the

17     Bench to control the proceedings, it is your responsibility to deal with

18     it.  And we make do with all the inconveniences here.  In other words,

19     we're going to be switching from one topic to another, and when we are

20     concentrated on one, everybody is working in an efficient way, and in

21     three months' time we shall get back to Vukovar again.  We will have to

22     jog our memory and so on and so forth.  So that is what makes our work so

23     difficult.  But you're not responsible for this, and I am not either.

24     This is how things work out here.

25             Initially the people that drafted the Rules of Procedure and

Page 5017

 1     Evidence in 1994 should have been aware of this, but this was more than

 2     ten years ago, and it's not after ten years that you can correct all of

 3     this.

 4             So please resume, Mr. Seselj.  You have 20 minutes left.

 5             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Mr. Cakalic, just prior to your arrival in Vukovar did anybody of

 7     the Croatian authorities, the police, or any other service talk to you?

 8        A.   Get one thing right.  I don't live in Vukovar.

 9        Q.   I meant The Hague.  Perhaps I made a slip of the tongue.

10        A.   You said Vukovar.

11        Q.   You live in Kastel Luksic?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   Did any of the Croatian authorities talk to you prior to that?

14        A.   No, nobody.  Not with respect to your trial.

15        Q.   You didn't manage to answer one of my questions that I asked you

16     earlier on.  You said didn't know about this crime in Pakracka Poljana.

17     Did you hear about the liquidation of more than a hundred Serbs in Gospic

18     which was also committed by this Tomislav Mercep, the assistant minister

19     of police of this crime?  Have you heard about Gospic and the crime

20     committed there against the Serbs?

21        A.   No.

22        Q.   The crime took place about a month before the Vukovar events.

23        A.   You know what?  I had a lot of work to do at the time.  I was

24     very busy and I simply didn't have time to deal with matters like that.

25        Q.   All right.  Now, could Mr. Cakalic be shown page 7 of this

Page 5018

 1     document by the information centre of the Serbian Assembly.  We have the

 2     nationality breakdown or ethnic breakdown of Vukovar because you say you

 3     know nothing specific about the crimes that took place.  I'm going to try

 4     and deal with that through another witness, but as you worked in the

 5     municipality I'm sure you're well aware of things like this.

 6             So put it on the overhead projector, please, and let's have it

 7     nice and big on our screens.

 8             Have we got it now?

 9             Mr. Cakalic, this is -- well, let's see the signature and what it

10     says under the graph.  This is the national or ethnic structure of the

11     Vukovar municipality for 1981.  Can you see that?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   And can you see that it says that in Vukovar there were

14     30.000-odd Croats, 25.000-odd Serbs, 18.000 people who declared

15     themselves as Yugoslavs, and 7.800 others, Germans and various other

16     nationalities and ethnicities?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   Do you agree that among the Yugoslavs, the largest percentage

19     were Serbs who declared their nationality as Yugoslavs because they loved

20     Yugoslavia?  They were people from mixed marriages of course as well, but

21     most of them were Serbs, right?  Would you agree with that?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Now, are you aware that at the first multi-party elections in

24     1990, the Croatian Democratic Union; that is to say, Tudjman's party in

25     Vukovar was completely defeated?

Page 5019

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Would you provide this document to

 2     Mr. Cakalic, and then we can look at the text, the excerpts I underlined.

 3             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Let's have a look at the graph first, and what it says

 5     underneath, the caption underneath.

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a minute, Mr. Seselj.  I

 7     see that when you put the question on the elections in 1990, where you

 8     say that Tudjman's party was defeated, he didn't answer.  There was no

 9     answer on the part of the witness.  So could you ask your question again

10     if you feel that this is an important question.

11             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The witness nodded in the

12     affirmative.

13             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   I asked you whether you remember that the Croatian Democratic

15     Union was defeated in Vukovar in 1990.

16        A.   Well, I don't know that it was such a resounding defeat.  The

17     Croatian Democratic Union lasted for as long as Professor Tudjman was

18     alive.

19        Q.   While Senada is continuing the work.  It's still alive today,

20     isn't it?

21        A.   Yes, but we're talking about individuals of the day.

22        Q.   Look at this graph.  These are the results of the elections in

23     Vukovar municipality in 1990 according to the number of seats won in the

24     Municipal Assembly.  Can you see that?  Can you see these figures?

25             The League of Communists of Croatia had 64.55 per cent; right?

Page 5020

 1     The HDZ, which is Franjo Tudjman's party, had secured 26.22 per cent of

 2     the seats in the municipality; and the other parties and independent

 3     candidates scored 27.23 per cent.

 4        A.   That's what it says.

 5        Q.   Is that correct?  Do you doubt this?  Is that the true?

 6        A.   Well, I would say that it isn't, that it isn't right.

 7        Q.   What are your figures then?

 8        A.   I think that the HDZ was the strongest.

 9        Q.   And how many deputies did it have in the Municipal Assembly?

10        A.   Oh I really can't say I don't know.

11        Q.   Do you think they were the strongest you say?

12        A.   I think they were the strongest.

13        Q.   Why did they elect Slavko Dokmanovic as president of the

14     Municipal Assembly if the HDZ was the strongest?

15        A.   Well, the area of Vukovar has a mixed population.  You are very

16     much aware of that yourself.  There are Croats and Serbs and national

17     minorities, Ruthenians and so on and so forth.

18        Q.   Yes.  We saw that on the last graph.  But why would the HDZ, if

19     it were indeed the strongest, elect a Serb who belongs to the League of

20     Communists, the party for Democratic Change?

21        A.   You mean Dokmanovic?

22        Q.   Yes he was an SDP candidate?

23        A.   Yes, he was indeed an SDP candidate and was the president of the

24     municipality who didn't go home.  He went across the Danube to Vojvodina.

25        Q.   We're not talking about him now.  But your thesis, that the HDZ

Page 5021

 1     had the majority, whereas from this graph we see that it did not, that it

 2     was in the minority in the Municipal Assembly.

 3             Now look at what it says, what the text says, the Information

 4     Centre of the Serbian Assembly and the document that the OTP of The Hague

 5     has in its position -- possession.  I'm going to read the text slowly and

 6     you can give me your comments:  "The Croatian Democratic Union has

 7     suffered a complete defeat at the multi-party elections in Vukovar in

 8     1990, principally because the Serbs and the so-called Yugoslavs who

 9     together made up an absolute majority of the population in this town and

10     its surrounding parts, voted for the League of Communists of Croatia

11     party for Democratic Change candidate.

12             "In the Vukovar municipality, five deputies for the Sabor

13     Assembly of the Republic of Croatia were elected, four deputy seats were

14     taken by the Party of Democratic Change and one place by the so-called

15     independent candidate.  In the Assembly of the Vukovar municipality,

16     which had 117 deputy seats, the Croatian Democratic Union won just 26

17     mandates.  It only won in settlements where the -- there was an absolute

18     Croatian majority population."

19             Is that correct, Mr. Cakalic?

20        A.   That's a relative question, but if this was recognised by

21     somebody from Croatia, then I do believe that that is so.

22        Q.   These are official data of the Croatian authorities after the

23     elections?

24             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] These are the figures for 1990.

25     There are three main groups, the SDP, the HDZ, and the independent

Page 5022

 1     parties, and there are election results which nobody can challenge.  This

 2     is not a relative matter.  Out of the 117 elected MPs, the HDZ has 26,

 3     which from a mathematical standpoint tends to indicate that the SDP is in

 4     the majority.  League of Communists.  So you seem to be challenging this.

 5     This is -- these are the results of the elections.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As to the results, I accept them.

 7     However, it was a little strange to me -- well, I didn't delve in

 8     politics at all as you well know, I dealt with my profession, so I assume

 9     that what it says here is correct.  I do believe it is.

10             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   You worked in the municipality did you not?  You were in the

12     municipality administration?

13        A.   I was the sanitary inspector for the municipality of Vukovar.

14        Q.   So you were a municipality official?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Is it true and correct, Mr. Cakalic, that in the Vukovar

17     municipality five deputies were elected to go to the Croatian Sabor

18     Assembly?

19        A.   I don't know that.

20        Q.   It says here that five deputies for the Sabor, the parliament,

21     were elected, and not a single one of them was from the HDZ, the Croatian

22     Democratic Union.  Four were from the SDP, the Party of Democratic

23     Changes, and one seat was taken by an independent candidate?

24        A.   I don't know.

25        Q.   Do you know of an HDZ deputy from Vukovar?  This wasn't a single

Page 5023

 1     one.

 2        A.   There was -- oh, help me.  What was his name.  He came from

 3     Lovas, Marin Vidic.

 4        Q.   What party did Marin Vidic belong to?

 5        A.   I think he belonged to the HDZ, the Croatian Democratic Union.

 6        Q.   Was he a deputy in the Croatian parliament?

 7        A.   No, no, he wasn't.

 8        Q.   No.  He was a municipal official because the offices in the

 9     municipality were divided proportionally according to ethnic affiliation?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   But he was not a deputy in the parliament?

12        A.   No, I don't think he was.

13        Q.   He became the commission of the Croatian government for Vukovar

14     when Slavko Dokmanovic fled Vukovar?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Would you be kind enough to look at the following text?

17             THE INTERPRETER:  Could there be a pause between question and

18     answer please, the interpreters kindly request.

19             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Look what it says here:  A defeat in the elections in Vukovar

21     municipality prompted the leadership of the Croatian Democratic Union --

22             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, please slow down.

23     The interpreters find it difficult to follow you at this speed.

24             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   Prompted the leadership of the Croatian Democratic Union to

Page 5024

 1     attempt to render null and void the results of the elections in this

 2     municipality by suspending the legally elected organs of the local

 3     authorities and transferring their powers on to a so called commissioner

 4     of the Croatian Government.  How was it possible to achieve this?  Only

 5     under irregular conditions.

 6             The government authorities of the Republic of Croatia were

 7     intentionally provoking Serb-Croatian confrontations.  Well, let me just

 8     mention one thing.  In the footnote here it says, "Report on the results

 9     of the elections in Vukovar municipality," and this was published in the

10     Vukovar newspaper of the 12th of May.  Can you see this footnote?  Could

11     you please turn the next page please.

12             Is this the next page?  I have the next page.  I have the next

13     page.  You were showing the previous page now.

14             There was another important reason which prompted the Croatian

15     authorities to work on a speedy, even a forcible takeover of power in

16     Vukovar municipality because most of the population of Vukovar was

17     composed of Serbs and declared Yugoslavs, Vukovar could become a serious

18     flashpoint and a serious centre of resistance to the Republic of Croatia.

19     Seen from the standpoint of the Croatian government, this danger was even

20     greater because of the geographical position of the Vukovar municipality

21     which bordered on the territory of the Republic of Serbia which at that

22     time opposed the break-up of Yugoslavia.

23             Do you agree with this assessment of the situation?  Could you

24     please give me this document back, because now I miss it and there's

25     something important on it.

Page 5025

 1        A.   Yes.  There were very many people who were Serbs but were not

 2     Serbs.

 3        Q.   They declared themselves as Yugoslavs?

 4        A.   Yes, but there were also Croats to declared themselves as

 5     Yugoslavs.

 6        Q.   There were such Croats as well, especially from mixed marriages?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   But they were all in favour of the survival of Yugoslavia?

 9        A.   Well, I don't know who was in favour of what.

10        Q.   There was some Croats who fled Vukovar because of Tomislav Mercep

11     and his gangs; is that right?

12        A.   Well, I don't know that.

13        Q.   Well, you don't even know about the Serbs.  What can we do?  I

14     can't force you to know --

15        A.   No, no.  I'm telling you what I know.

16        Q.   Did you hear of some powerful and wealthy Mafia bosses who moved

17     to Vukovar in 1989?  This was the Alco Mafia.  They produced alcohol from

18     cereals and traded it in illegally.

19        A.   Well, it rings a bell but I couldn't swear to it.

20        Q.   Have you heard of Marin Pliso?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Vinko Zanic?

23        A.   No, not him.

24        Q.   Josip Dufek?

25        A.   Yes, I have heard of him.

Page 5026

 1        Q.   Were they the wealthiest and most powerful bosses of the Alcohol

 2     Mafia?

 3        A.   Whether it was the Alco Mafia, I don't know.  But even today they

 4     trade in wine and so on.

 5        Q.   And did they begin to gather around themselves workers who were

 6     out after job and criminals, and did they start creating their own armed

 7     groups the members of which obeyed them without question in order to

 8     secure their livelihoods?  It says that these groups became the mainstay

 9     for the Croatian Democratic Union, a branch of which was set up in

10     Vukovar in March 1990.  Are you aware of this?

11        A.   Well, you know when a poor person gets a job he has to work, and

12     he has to do whatever his boss tells him to do.

13        Q.   Do you remember those first armed formations of the HDZ in

14     Vukovar?

15        A.   No.

16        Q.   Do you remember when people began procuring weapons in Vukovar?

17        A.   Yes, I do.

18        Q.   When was this?

19        A.   At the beginning of the war.

20        Q.   Was it as early as 1990?

21        A.   I don't know.  I couldn't tell you the year, but people started

22     obtaining weapons.  Why?  Well, because the army was there in Vukovar and

23     people had to keep themselves safe.  Everyone who to protect himself.

24        Q.   Was the army threatening anyone in Vukovar in 1990?

25        A.   I beg your pardon?

Page 5027

 1        Q.   Was the army threatening anyone?

 2        A.   I don't believe so.

 3        Q.   Why then would people have to obtain weapons?

 4        A.   Who, the army?

 5        Q.   No, the civilians, the Alco Mafia, the HDZ.

 6        A.   I don't know that the HDZ procured weapons.

 7        Q.   Well, who procured weapons?

 8        A.   Well, the Mafia.  You yourself said that.

 9        Q.   But we can see from this document that this Mafia was the

10     mainstay of the HDZ in Vukovar.

11        A.   Well, I don't know that.

12        Q.   Do you believe what this document says?

13        A.   Relatively.

14        Q.   Very well.

15             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, I believe you have

16     two or three minutes left.

17             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

18        Q.   Do you know, Mr. Cakalic, who the first victim was on the

19     territory of Vukovar municipality, the first person who was killed?  Let

20     me remind you.

21        A.   Please do.

22        Q.   On the 1st of May, 1991, in the village of Brsadin not far from

23     Vukovar, that's Vukovar municipality, a Serb, Stevan Inic, was killed.

24     He was born in 1928 and he was killed by a pistol shot to his head.  He

25     was killed by Croat Djuro Gelencir, a member of the party militia of the

Page 5028

 1     Croatian Democratic Union.  Have you heard of this murder?

 2        A.   I did hear there was a murder, but I don't know who committed it.

 3        Q.   In Brsadin?

 4        A.   In Brsadin.  I don't know.

 5        Q.   And in this document it says that with his murder, which

 6     resounded among the Serbs, the first step was taken into the hell of

 7     inter-ethnic war.

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   Do you know that prominent Serbian politicians at the time were

10     Goran Hadzic and Borivoje Savic who came from that area?

11        A.   Well, they were from Borovo.

12        Q.   That's also Vukovar municipality isn't it?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   And they were members of the SDS, the Serbian Democratic Party?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   But they belonged to the moderate wing of the SDS as it was

17     called?

18        A.   I don't know then why they fled.

19        Q.   Well, you know what happened to them on 31st of March 1991 in

20     Plitvice on the road to Karlovac.

21        A.   Yes, I do.

22        Q.   There they were arrested by the Croatian police who beat them up

23     on the spot, who beat them up very badly, and then they transformed a

24     peacemaker into an extremist --

25             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, do you want us to

Page 5029

 1     have the transcript of your cross-examination or is it something we don't

 2     actually need?

 3             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, because you're speaking

 4     extremely fast, and at page 65, line 5, you can see that on your screen,

 5     part of the question has not been recorded.  I don't know.  Afterwards

 6     the court reporters may be able to complete the transcript, but for the

 7     time being we have no idea about the exact substance of your question.

 8     The witness answered, "Yes I do," but we don't actually know what your

 9     question was.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President and Ms. Lattanzi,

11     there's a specific problem here.  I know that very often I speak too

12     fast.  I cannot think about the interpreters and the transcript at every

13     point.  It's impossible.  I'm doing my best, and I will continue to do my

14     best.  But independently of this, there are enormous problems in

15     interpretation which I have pointed out more than once.  I think the best

16     thing to do would be for you, as the Trial Chamber, to hand down an order

17     after every session to compare every transcript with the videotape and to

18     have corrections entered on this basis.

19             I do not receive the transcript.  I have nothing to do with the

20     transcript.  All I get is the video, and in my view what I have is what

21     is on the video.  Then my service takes this down on paper and I use it

22     as my own transcript.  But I think that there should be a check of the

23     transcript after each session.  I'm not sure this is done.  But I will

24     slow down.

25             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

Page 5030

 1        Q.   You know that Croatian television intentionally filmed their

 2     arrest and beating?

 3        A.   Whose?

 4        Q.   Of Goran Hadzic and Savic on the 31st of March near Plitvice.

 5        A.   They hadn't fled yet.

 6        Q.   No, no, that's the 31st of March 1991.  They were moving around

 7     Croatia freely?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   They were arrested and their arrest and the brutal conduct of the

10     Croatian police towards them, as it says on page 13 of this document, was

11     intentionally filmed with a TV camera and shown that same evening on

12     Croatian state television, which was under the complete control of

13     Tudjman's party, and this caused enormous fear in all the Serbian

14     villages.  They saw them brutally mistreating a couple of moderate Serbs.

15     What then would they do with the nationalists?

16        A.   May I respond?

17        Q.   Yes, please do.

18        A.   I was in Sremska Mitrovica, and you know who beat me up?  Goran

19     Hadzic and Boro Savic.

20        Q.   It's possible this happened.

21        A.   It's certain.

22        Q.   It's quite possible, Mr. Cakalic, but this simply proves my

23     point.  Some of those who beat you up in Sremska Mitrovica, of course

24     there are psychopaths on every side always who beat people up for no

25     reason, isn't that correct?

Page 5031

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   But there are people who have been harassed, mistreated, or who

 3     had a close relative or family member killed, and they are blinded by an

 4     irrational desire for revenge.  Maybe the two of them were like that in

 5     Sremska Mitrovica?

 6        A.   Well, there were a few like that.

 7        Q.   Well, my point is that when someone is powerful and strong like

 8     Aleksandar Vasiljevic, and he orders 200 Croatian prisoners to be shot,

 9     it wasn't hard to find perpetrators among the local Serbs, people who

10     were willing to do this because their house had been blown up, a family

11     member had been killed, they had been mistreated and they longed for

12     revenge.  Would you agree with me?

13        A.   Yes that's how it was.

14        Q.   Thank you Mr. Cakalic.  I'm very pleased with your testimony.

15     You have acquitted yourself honourably as a Prosecution witness.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Before we move on to redirect,

17     I for one have two very short questions to put to you.

18                           Questioned by the Court:

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We've just realised that

20     Mr. Goran Hadzic and Boro Savic were arrested by the Croats and

21     mistreated.  A crew of the Croatian television filmed the scene, and it

22     is my understanding that Goran Hadzic and the other one, these two

23     individuals who were arrested, it is my understanding that they

24     mistreated you whilst you were being detained in Mitrovica.  Can you

25     confirm that for us?

Page 5032

 1        A.   Yes, yes.  Yes.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And when they mistreated you,

 3     were they avenging themselves after what had been done to them, or it was

 4     for an entirely different reason?

 5        A.   [No interpretation]

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let me move on to my second

 7     question, which is more important than the first one.

 8             Following the questions that were put to you, we find that the

 9     Vukovar municipality had a commissioner from the government who was in

10     charge of managing the municipality after the departure of Slavko

11     Dokmanovic.  Mr. Dokmanovic left for Vojvodina.  You told that yourself.

12     And as a result, Mr. Dokmanovic was no longer the president of the

13     municipality.

14             You also said in answer to questions put to you by the

15     Prosecutor, you said that in Ovcara Mr. Dokmanovic was there.  He was on

16     the scene.  You even said that he talked to you.

17        A.   Yes.

18             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] If what you say is true, I

19     would like to know the following:  In what capacity was Mr. Dokmanovic on

20     the scene, because he was not the president of the municipality.

21     Apparently he was not a JNA officer either.  He had left Vukovar.

22     Therefore, he apparently was not playing any part in the Territorial

23     Defence unless he had been a Chetnik or a volunteer.

24             Can you tell us from your point of view what it's all about,

25     because you said Dokmanovic was there.  In what capacity was Dokmanovic

Page 5033

 1     there?

 2        A.   This happened at Ovcara when the Croats were captured and

 3     deported to the hangar, the hangars where they sent us and where they

 4     mistreated us.  This Dokmanovic was at the door leading into the hangar,

 5     and every prisoner who entered through that door, not each and every one,

 6     but many of them were beaten up by Slavko Dokmanovic, the president of

 7     Vukovar municipality.  This is a disgrace.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes.  I understand what

 9     happened.  You told us about it.  Mr. Seselj is not challenging it.  But

10     the Judges have a question in their mind.  At least I have a question.

11             What was Mr. Dokmanovic doing there?  Because we know you told us

12     that he had left his position in the municipality, had been replaced.

13     How come he came back?  Do you have an explanation for this, or maybe

14     not?

15        A.   There was desire on his part to beat up as many Croats as

16     possible.  He kicked them and he had shoes on.  He kicked me too.  And

17     many of our lads were beaten up by Dokmanovic for as long as Dokmanovic

18     had any strength left.  Then he left.  But whether he was in Vojvodina --

19     well, he did come there when we were taken prisoner.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In other words, you cannot tell

21     me whether he was a member of the JNA, the TO, whether he was a Chetnik.

22     The only thing you can tell me is that he was there, but you do not know

23     why he was there and in what capacity.

24        A.   I believe that he was a Chetnik.  I'm sure that he was a Chetnik.

25     If he had not been a Chetnik he would not have done the things that he

Page 5034

 1     did.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] But if he was really a Chetnik,

 3     was he wearing a special kind of hat?  Were there any distinguishing

 4     features about him or -- and this is my final question:  Or according to

 5     you is it so that everyone who is not a Croat is a Chetnik?

 6        A.   No.  I deny that.  But Slavko Dokmanovic came to Ovcara as a

 7     Serb, as a former president of the municipality of Vukovar, and there was

 8     no dignity in that, in him coming to Ovcara as the former president of

 9     Vukovar and beat his own fellow citizens.  He lost all credibility with

10     me, and I never bothered to say hello to him after that.

11             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.  Unfortunately we

12     won't be able to put questions to him because he died.  I believe that he

13     hanged himself in his cell, unless I'm mistaken.

14        A.   Yes.  In The Hague, yes, he hanged himself.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, you raised this

16     question beyond the scope of the examination-in-chief and the cross.  He

17     was mentioned, but neither the Prosecutor nor I insisted too much on

18     Dokmanovic's case, but you have to bear in mind that in one of the

19     courtrooms a video footage was shown which showed that at the relevant

20     time Dokmanovic was at a different place, that he gave a statement to a

21     TV station, and you could see that the time and the date of that

22     statement were depicted and he was in civilian clothes.  So in my view it

23     was not very important for me to question this witness with this regard,

24     because Slavko Dokmanovic is no longer with us.  But you have to bear

25     that in mind, and the Prosecutor's office are aware of that.

Page 5035

 1             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.  This has been recorded

 2     in the transcript.

 3             Before I give the floor to the Prosecution for redirect,

 4     Mr. Seselj, are you requesting MFI numbers for the two documents you

 5     produced?

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like all the documents to

 7     be identified, and it is up to you.  And I'm very disappointed with your

 8     decision that the 180 documents that refer to the Sarajevo theatre of war

 9     should not be admitted.  So I'm really resigned.  I'm not asking for

10     anything.  You do whatever.  It is up to me to offer documents, to show

11     them, and it is up to you to either adopt them or not.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.  Mr. Registrar, give us

13     some MFI numbers for the documents shown by Mr. Seselj to the witness.

14     I'm talking about MFI numbers.

15             THE REGISTRAR:  Yes, Your Honour.  The first document was the

16     Vukovar municipality document dated the 18th of August, 1991.  That will

17     be MFI D17.  And the second document is the Serbian Council Information

18     Centre document which will be MFI D18.

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.  Mr. Seselj, to conclude,

20     you told us that you were extremely disappointed because the Trial

21     Chamber decided not to admit the 180 documents you submitted with respect

22     to Sarajevo and the Sarajevo theatre of war.  You will be in a position

23     to put these documents to other witnesses.  They're not lost.  But please

24     produce them at the right time.  That's all I had to say about this.

25     These documents will come back inevitably.

Page 5036

 1             I'm turning now to the Prosecutor.  Do you have any redirect?

 2             MR. MUSSEMEYER:  I have a very short redirect, but I have three

 3     topics where I want to make some annotations.  I think it's not the first

 4     time that we got to the documents from the Accused in the morning or at

 5     the moment when cross-examination starts, and I think this is unfair to

 6     the Prosecution and also to you Judges.  It should have been given to us

 7     well in advance that we have at least have an opportunity to see what

 8     these documents are about.  I don't care if they are not in English.  I

 9     have the possibility to go through them with a language assistant to at

10     least know what they are about.  This is my observation to this point.

11             I have a second observation.  Mr. Seselj mentioned this video

12     about Dokmanovic.  It's true.  I have this -- I remember this video.  We

13     have it in our possession and we will play this in due time.

14             As far as I remember, Mr. Dokmanovic is seen there in civilian

15     clothes, but this is in the afternoon and not at the evening.  We will

16     see this when it's opportune to look at them.

17             Another point I want to make, Mr. Seselj, when he started

18     cross-examining Mr. Cakalic, he said at the beginning, it's at page 2,

19     lines 12 to 15, and I read from the transcript:  "Your Honours, I think

20     this is an important issue, and it's not the first time that the

21     Prosecution asks for protective measures without the witness having

22     requested."

23             I want to make clear that we never asked for protective measures

24     for Mr. Cakalic.  He has always been under his name.  It's true that he

25     has a pseudonym.  This was more or less for technical reasons, but we did

Page 5037

 1     not use it, and we never asked for protective measures for him.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] When Mr. Seselj said that, it

 3     caught my attention, as you can imagine.

 4             When you prepare your 65 ter lists with all the witnesses, why

 5     are all these lists always confidential, whereas some witnesses never ask

 6     for any protective measures and whereas some of these witnesses have

 7     already testified in open session in other trials?  So why do you file

 8     these lists confidentially, and why are there pseudonyms sometimes on

 9     these lists?

10             There was nothing preventing you from stating right from the

11     beginning that Cakalic was going to testify without any protective

12     measures.

13             MR. MUSSEMEYER:  This was the decision of the former senior trial

14     attorney in this trial -- in this procedure.  She decided to have all the

15     witnesses on the 65 ter list with pseudonyms.  This is all I can tell you

16     about this.

17             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.  Please put your

18     questions.

19             Oh, no.  Mr. Seselj.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the first statement

21     that was provided to me that was signed by Mr. Cakalic was under a

22     pseudonym.  The first statement.  That was submitted to me by the

23     Prosecutor's office.  That was signed by Mr. Cakalic.  It was under a

24     pseudonym, and I could not see his signature.  It was only subsequently

25     that they published his name.  They are the ones who give pseudonyms only

Page 5038

 1     to protected witnesses.  I have a list of witnesses who are not protected

 2     and who do not have any pseudonyms, and you can see that from the last

 3     list that was submitted to us by the Prosecutor's office on the -- of the

 4     trial, which means that for a long time Mr. Cakalic was a protected

 5     witness of the OTP under seal, and I could not disclose his name in

 6     public up to the moment when Mr. Cakalic appeared in the courtroom and

 7     when it became apparent that he wanted to be a public statement.

 8             And this is not the first time that this has happened.  We had

 9     other witnesses who said that they didn't -- didn't ask for any

10     protective measures, and it was only in the courtroom that they appeared

11     in public.  And this is all on purpose to thwart the preparation of my

12     defence, because from the statement given by Mr. Cakalic, I didn't know

13     who the person was.  I was only aware of the event and the description

14     but I did not know that it was Mr. Cakalic, so I couldn't investigate who

15     he is, what he did during the war, whether I can put his credibility in

16     question.

17             Mr. Cakalic, we do that in order to test the credibility of a

18     witness.

19             And this was something that I was prevented from doing for years,

20     and now on the eve of the trial I had a lot of disclosed names and then I

21     got lost trying to find information about each and every one of these

22     witnesses.

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, I could agree with

24     you in part regarding what you've just said, but I totally disagree as to

25     the fact that you could not know that this witness was going to be

Page 5039

 1     Mr. Cakalic.

 2             Indeed, you received the transcripts of his testimony in the

 3     Milosevic case, in the Dokmanovic case, as well, in the Martic

 4     [as interpreted] case.  Therefore, by comparing you could imagine that

 5     the witness being given a pseudonym was in fact Mr. Cakalic, because if

 6     he in the Milosevic case said that he was in the Ovcara farm where he was

 7     beaten up, and if he said that Mr. Dokmanovic was present there, if that

 8     is repeated in the Dokmanovic case transcript, and if you discover that

 9     there is a witness with a pseudonym who says that he was beaten up in the

10     presence of Dokmanovic, I mean, you don't need to have invented the wheel

11     to conclude that this was Mr. Cakalic.

12             So I may agree with you in part.  However, as to your conclusion,

13     I do not quite agree with you.  I mean, you are very knowledgeable about

14     this case, and it would have been easy for you to guess that this was

15     Mr. Cakalic.

16             Yes, please go on.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, it was only recently

18     that I received transcripts of Mr. Cakalic's testimony in other trials,

19     and this was definitely after the beginning of my trial.  I can't tell

20     you exactly when but the OTP will have those dates.  But it was recently.

21     Everything from November on is actually recently.  But during the five

22     years while I was preparing for my defence, I was not in a position to

23     prepare properly because they denied me the names of almost all

24     witnesses.  All of their statements were under pseudonym.  And I claim

25     that this was done on purpose.  I fully believe that this was done on

Page 5040

 1     purpose.  They even wanted to have this witness as a 92 ter.  They did

 2     not want to -- to have him say anything.  When they have a 92 ter, they

 3     just show him photographs, ask him whether they saw this or that, as if

 4     somebody denied that Ovcara was where it is or Velepromet or barracks or

 5     the hospital in Vukovar.  This is just nonsense, nothing else.  There are

 6     other things which are more important than that.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] At any rate, Mr. Seselj, the

 8     Trial Chamber has heard your objections regarding the 92 ter procedure.

 9     You know that we have 92 ter witnesses that were scheduled as such, and

10     we have decided to hear them in court maybe in the future.  I know that

11     you'll react to that negatively, but unfortunately there's no other way

12     around.  There may be other 92 ter witnesses.

13             And once again I'm pointing it out to you.  Even though there may

14     be some drawbacks to the 92 ter proceedings, it is of a great advantage

15     to the accused in that he is entitled to cross-examine and to submit

16     documents to the witness.

17             That's the general regime, the general economy as it were of this

18     92 ter proceeding.

19             Do you have any redirect?

20             MR. MUSSEMEYER:  I have one, but allow me to make one remark.

21     I'm -- Mr. Seselj said that he was not able to publish the name and maybe

22     also the statement of the witness.  I have serious concerns about this

23     publishing of names of witnesses and their statements before they come

24     into the courtroom and testify here in the courtroom.  If it is done

25     after, then it's okay.  In my system where I am from, and I'm sure that

Page 5041

 1     it's also in the other civil law systems, this would be a crime;

 2     publishing the name and the statement of a witness who didn't testify in

 3     open session.  This is my remark to this.

 4             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Seselj.  What did you

 5     mean by that when you said publish the names?  Maybe there was a problem

 6     around the translation, but what did you mean exactly, because the

 7     Prosecutor is somewhat concerned.  The fact that you know that a witness

 8     is about to testify in open session, if that is published, do you intend

 9     before that witness appears to say to the press, "Mr. XYZ is going to

10     come and speak about this"?  That's the concern expressed by the

11     Prosecutor.  What do you have to say?

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the first time I saw

13     Mr. Mussemeyer in one of the courtrooms he looked worried to me.  He's

14     always worried.

15             Every document that I receive either from the Prosecutor's

16     office, from the Trial Chamber or the registry that doesn't bear the

17     confidentiality seal is a public document.  I have the right to publish

18     it on my internet site.  I have the right to show it to the public just

19     like the Prosecutor's office does.  For example, if the first statement

20     provided by Mr. Cakalic had been given to me in the Serbian under his

21     name, it is my right to give this to my team of investigators to go to

22     the field and to inquire among the people who Mr. Cakalic is.  If I only

23     have a pseudonym, I can't send my investigators to the field with that

24     pseudonym.

25             I have obtained a lot of statements here owing to the TV

Page 5042

 1     broadcast of the trial and people contacted my investigators and told

 2     them this witness is lying.

 3             And what about this confidentiality?  If it is not a shame to

 4     testify, but when they provide a false testimony which is a common

 5     practice because it is the Prosecutor's office that provides them with

 6     false statements that they repeat, then I have to intervene.  My only

 7     defence is the defence of the general public.  I don't have any other

 8     defence before this Trial Chamber, and the only thing that I rely on is

 9     the judgement of the general public.

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In making this observation you

11     raise a problem for which I or the Chamber has no solution.

12             Mr. Seselj has a web site on which he displays information

13     regarding his trial, publically so.  So the issue appears to be as

14     follows:  What would happen were Mr. Seselj to publish in his web site

15     things about a hearing or evidence before a witness comes to testify?  I

16     have no answer to that.

17             I know that in civil law countries such as mine before a witness

18     appears Defence can say -- can say that such-and-such a person is about

19     to appear and we plan to ask such-and-such questions about him or her and

20     this is being done publicly.

21             So you express a concern which I personally cannot meet.  Neither

22     can the Trial Chamber probably.  So there it is.  I mean, we are in a

23     world of communication.  You know that the trial proceedings are

24     broadcast with a time lag of 30 minutes.  It is broadcast on the

25     internet.  Everybody knows what is happening.  I believe that Channel 2

Page 5043

 1     as of 10.00 p.m. in Belgrade broadcast part of the hearing.  This is it.

 2     This is the world of speed, of information, of media, and this of course

 3     may go against the very principle of judicial proceedings, but I have no

 4     solution to that.  You can always file a motion before the Trial Chamber,

 5     and the Trial Chamber will hand down a decision.

 6             But let's move to the heart of the matter.  That was your

 7     redirect.

 8             MR. MUSSEMEYER:  Exactly, but a short answer.  For the witnesses

 9     who are expected to come here to testify, to read already in the books

10     their whole statement and to have comments on them which are not very

11     positive is for me a kind of harassment.  This is my personal opinion.  I

12     don't want to continue on this but just for you to know.

13             I can put a question.  I have only one question to Mr. Cakalic.

14                           Re-examination by Mr. Mussemeyer:

15        Q.   Mr. Cakalic, does the name Colonel Mrkusic say something to you?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Could you please tell us what?

18        A.   He was also in the Hague, Mrkusic, Sljvancanin, and Radic.

19        Q.   Is it possible that they --

20        A.   They were --

21        Q.   Is it possible that you were --

22             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor, are we talking

23     about Mrkic, Mrkusic?  It's not very clear.  We have various spellings to

24     that name in the transcript.

25             MR. MUSSEMEYER:  I referred to the person, to the Colonel who was

Page 5044

 1     in the hangar blowing the whistle every time when there was a change of

 2     the beating persons.  The witness said this was captain Mrksic, which is

 3     not correct.  He may have mixed it up.  I asked him if he knows Colonel

 4     Mrkusic, and according to my information this colonel in the hangar who

 5     was blowing the whistle was not Colonel Mrksic but his name was Colonel

 6     Mrkusic, and the witness said this in his statement of 1995 on page 7.

 7             This is all I want to let you know.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Cakalic, I want to thank

 9     you on behalf of my colleagues.  Thank you for coming to testify as a

10     Prosecution witness.  You've come here several times.  I hope this was

11     the last time.

12             Madam usher is going to help you get out of the room, the

13     courtroom.  We'll have the 20-minute break now.  And we're going to have

14     video clips.

15                           [The witness withdrew]

16                           --- Recess taken at 12.02 p.m.

17                           --- On resuming at 12.28 p.m.

18             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The hearing's resumed.  Today's

19     and tomorrow's hearing are going -- hearings are going to be devoted to

20     video viewing, and we're going to do it as follows:  Before a video clip

21     is shown, the Prosecutor will give us the date it was done, the origin of

22     it, and the subject of the video and possibly the length of it.

23     Everybody's going to view the footage.  Thereafter, I shall give the

24     floor to Mr. Seselj, who may make some observations, telling us why he

25     opposes the video clip.  Failing any opposition, the Trial Chamber will

Page 5045

 1     give a final number.

 2             Should be there a challenge, there will be an MFI number given to

 3     the footage.  As a result, the Prosecution will have to submit the

 4     footage again at a later time through another witness.

 5             Just to meet a criticism that may be raised, namely that a video

 6     clip may give a snapshot taken out of the whole context of the video as

 7     such and that therefore that may be given a different interpretation, of

 8     course this observation is taken on board by all the Judges, but if such

 9     cases were to arise, the Prosecution will always have the opportunity to

10     show us the entire video footage when a witness comes to testify and the

11     accused will also be given an opportunity to show the entire video to

12     support his case or in cross-examination of another witness.

13             I remind you that the fact that a document is admitted does not

14     mean that we thereby give a great probative value to the document.  You

15     must make a distinction between the admission and the probative value of

16     a document because the probative value is assessed only at the end of the

17     trial.  Therefore, any discussion on a given document may waste time,

18     because the probative value of a document is only assessed at the end of

19     the trial proceedings once the Defence has made its case as well through

20     its own documents, so that a document that may be initially of great

21     relevance may turn out at the it end to be without any relevance.

22             The other way around as well.  A document that may have not

23     initially any relevance may turn out to be extremely relevant as time

24     goes by, but we only know this at the end of the process.

25             I say and say it again:  If you start firing to try and destroy a

Page 5046

 1     document, there's no point to it, because this sort of barrage fire is

 2     only useful when a document is challenged as to its authenticity.  If you

 3     claim that it's been manipulated, that it is a fake document, if you

 4     challenge the authenticity then it's okay.  But apart from such cases, I

 5     fail to see why a document could or should be challenged.

 6             Yes, Mr. Seselj, you wanted to intervene before we see the clips?

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Judges, the Prosecutor prior to the

 8     break made a potentially very important statement, and I think he would

 9     be duty-bound to state his views on that -- on the matter before you.  We

10     saw that this witness whose testimony has just been completed spoke about

11     Colonel Mrksic as a man who was present at Ovcara.  He called him

12     Mrkusic, Mrkusic, and it's a notorious fact established in other trials

13     that Colonel Mrksic wasn't in Ovcara at all and that's something that the

14     Prosecution knows full well.

15             And then the Prosecutor said that the witness isn't in fact say

16     Mrksic but Mrkusic.  We know that the witness said Mrkusic thinking of

17     Mrksic, but I demand that the Prosecutor state his position straight away

18     and tell you whether he has certain knowledge that a Colonel Mrkusic

19     exists at all who could have been at Ovcara at the relevant time.  Has

20     the Prosecutor established that Colonel Mrkusic actually does exist?  I

21     think this is an extremely important point, so that we know that the

22     Prosecutor isn't perhaps speaking off the top of his head.  So please

23     would you ensure we hear the Prosecutor on that issue.

24             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The question put to the

25     witness, and the witness answered it, was whether there was a Colonel

Page 5047

 1     Mrkusic who was present, if I understood properly.  He was the one who

 2     was blowing the whistle.  Is that right?  That's what I understood.

 3             What is it, Mr. Prosecutor?

 4             MR. MUSSEMEYER:  I am not aware if a Colonel Mrkusic really

 5     exists.  I only can judge from the statements I am aware of, and I

 6     realised while reading through the statements of Ovcara that there was

 7     very often a mix between Mrksic and Mrkusic, and I tried to find this

 8     out, and I found out from the statement of the witness Cakalic that he in

 9     his statement from 1995, on page 7, used the name Mrkusic.

10             If a colonel like this really exists, I'm not aware of.

11             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, here you have proof

12     of a fantastic manipulation.  It is quite obvious that this witness is

13     confusing the name of Mrkusic and Mrksic, and that is understandable for

14     a witness of this age and physical and mental condition that he's in.

15     And I'm sure that the witness is not doing this through any ill-intent.

16             The Prosecution knows full well that his colleagues provided this

17     witness a number of photographs, a large number of photographs, to point

18     out Colonel Mrksic, and the witness was not able to do that, and it was

19     stated in the Milosevic trial by the Prosecutor.  The witness was not

20     able to identify Mrksic. (redacted)

21  (redacted)

22  (redacted)

23  (redacted)

24  (redacted)

25  (redacted) don't know

Page 5048

 1     whether Colonel Mrkusic exists.  You know why they don't know?  Because

 2     this person does not exist as having been at Ovcara.

 3             There was a colonel and we are going to establish in due course

 4     who that colonel was and check out why the Prosecution is protecting that

 5     colonel, but there's no doubt about the fact that Mrksic was not there.

 6     That's been established quite definitely.  There was a colonel and now

 7     we'll go and investigate and see which colonel.

 8             And I have another comment and observation to make,

 9     Mr. President.

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment.  While you were

11     speaking, I was having a look at the written statement by Mr. Cakalic.

12     It was given on the 18th of June, 1995.  And the investigator is Vladimir

13     Dzuro.  Apparently the interview took place in a hotel.  And on all pages

14     we see mention -- mention of Colonel Mrksic.  The first mention is on

15     page 6.  It is then repeated on several occasions.  On page 7, as you

16     said, Mr. Prosecutor.

17             So Colonel Mrkusic is mentioned on several occasions.  Well, the

18     witness was not able to answer those questions, but did he think of

19     Colonel Mrksic, or did he have another colonel in mind?  We don't know

20     that at all, only this:  The only one who might have shed some light was

21     the investigator interviewing him, Mr. Vladimir Dzuro.  I guess that

22     he -- he knew the players, as it were, in Vukovar.  And if the witness

23     said Colonel Mrkic or Colonel Mrkusic, the investigator must have checked

24     that, must have checked the accuracy of the name.  I don't know that

25     investigator.  I guess that he was a professional investigator who had a

Page 5049

 1     basic knowledge of the facts.  So when that name was mentioned by the

 2     witness, he must have checked at least.

 3             So that's it.  At this stage, we have no knowledge.  Was the

 4     witness confused or not?  I don't know.  No conclusion can be drawn.

 5             JUDGE HARHOFF:  To avoid further confusion, I would like to ask

 6     the Prosecution if it is the Prosecution's position that Colonel Mrksic

 7     was present in Ovcara at the relevant time, because if that is not the

 8     case, then there's no reason to venture much further into this issue.

 9             MR. MUSSEMEYER:  I personally have no information if he was

10     there.  I believe he wasn't there.  This is what I infer also from the

11     lecture of the judgement in the Vukovar -- in the so-called Vukovar three

12     case.  But as I already said, I realise that there was a confusion with

13     names, and I saw that in the statement of Mr. Cakalic it was mentioned a

14     Colonel Mrkusic who was blowing the whistle, and this is all the

15     information I have about it.

16             JUDGE HARHOFF:  I understand, but if the Prosecution and the

17     Defence are in agreement that Colonel Mrksic was not present in Ovcara it

18     at that relevant time, then I think that solves one difficulty in this

19     proceeding.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] If you look at page 6 of this

21     interview that gave rise to the written statement by this witness,

22     normally speaking we should be able to find a solution, because towards

23     the middle he said this:  "At that juncture a colonel whose name I didn't

24     know, but I learned it later, I learned his name in the case of

25     Mitrovica," and he then gives the name of Mrkusic.

Page 5050

 1             So at first the witness said that he didn't know the colonel's

 2     name, and then he said that he learned it was Colonel Mrkusic, which he

 3     connected to Mitrovica.  And then the witness added:  "I saw a picture of

 4     the colonel.  I recognised the man as being the colonel in Ovcara.  And

 5     underneath the picture there was a name, the name of Colonel Mrksic."

 6             So he said that he saw a picture with Colonel Mrksic.  That's it.

 7             So upon reading this I have the impression that he was speaking

 8     about this colonel, because allegedly this colonel was also in Mitrovica.

 9             The Prosecutor is telling us that he can't say whether this was

10     Colonel Mrksic.  I guess that the Vukovar Trial Chamber looked into this

11     matter and tried to ascertain whether Colonel Mrksic was present or not.

12     So we just have to look at the Vukovar judgement.

13             Let's move on to something else.  What else did you want to say,

14     Mr. Seselj?

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, just one sentence with

16     respect to what we were saying.  I think that the Prosecutor is

17     duty-bound to inform the Trial Chamber, me as the accused, which colonel

18     it is or higher officer, perhaps he was a lieutenant colonel, but anyway

19     which one was in Ovcara at the relevant time.  I think the investigators

20     of the OTP should know that.  That's the least they should know.

21             Now, with respect to the videotapes to be shown today, pursuant

22     to your instructions the Prosecutor on the 18th of March disclosed to me

23     a review of these videotapes in Serbian.  Just before I entered court

24     today, or just now after this break, after our break, I received a new

25     breakdown of the videotapes in English where the order has been changed,

Page 5051

 1     the order in which the videos will be shown, and I don't know whether

 2     some new videotape has been introduced or not.

 3             Since this is in English, I demand that you issue instructions to

 4     the Prosecutor now that the order has been changed, I managed to

 5     establish that, that this be translated into Serbian this afternoon.

 6     It's not a big job.  And then we can start showing the tapes tomorrow

 7     morning, because I can't follow on the basis of what I've been given.

 8     I'll lose more time trying to find where the videotape is than the

 9     videotape itself.  If we're seeing 30 seconds, a minute, a minute and a

10     half of tape, I don't have enough time to do anything.  So may I be

11     provided with this same document in the Serbian language?

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I'm turning to the Prosecution

13     team.  I now discover what Mr. Seselj has just mentioned.  We had a first

14     document, a list of video clips.  The first video had a 65 ter number,

15     1836, and then there was 6063.  Now we have a new document with a

16     different order.

17             Look at the first video clip.  It would be now 65 ter number

18     6063.  That was number 2 in the previous list, and now we have 6005 as

19     number 2 in this list, and that was on page 2 in the first place.

20             Why, Mr. Mundis, did you change the whole lot?

21             MR. MUNDIS:  Thank you, Mr. President.  In fact, we -- what we

22     have done is not -- certainly not added any tapes or added any material.

23     What we have done was to slightly reorganise it in terms of themes, if

24     you will, that would make it a little bit easier to follow in terms of

25     evolving themes contained in the videotapes.  So what they have simply --

Page 5052

 1     what we've simply done is put them into a slightly different order than

 2     they were before, and that's what this table reflects.  Nothing has been

 3     added.  There are no new tapes on this list compared with the list that

 4     was circulated yesterday.  They're simply -- they've simply been put into

 5     a different order based on themes which are visible in bold at the top of

 6     the description -- of the subcategories of the descriptions.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Indeed.  In this new list in

 8     English we also have some Serb parts, some parts in Serbian.  The first

 9     theme is that of the volunteers in Vukovar and cooperation with JNA TO.

10     That's the first thing.  And under this topic we have several video

11     clips.

12             The second theme, on page 5, is that of Mr. Seselj and his

13     Vojvodas.  Under this heading we have several clips as well.

14             Third topic, Mr. Seselj and the Muslims.

15             Fourth topic, the JCE and the way -- and organisation of

16     volunteers.

17             The last topic being Mr. Seselj and his defence at the ICTY.

18             Are these the topics you identified?

19             MR. MUNDIS:  That is precisely what I identified in terms of

20     re-organising them under themes.  Those are precisely the subtopics or

21     themes, if you will, of videotapes on the list.

22             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Now, with regard -- compared to

23     the first list -- there are two changes.  First, you have put together

24     videos by themes, and you reshuffled the order in the videos.  These are

25     the only two changes.

Page 5053

 1             Now, Mr. Seselj, you're not going to now to claim that these

 2     changes will make it impossible for you to prepare for the viewing.  I

 3     would find it hard to believe.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Unfortunately, Judge, sir,

 5     regardless of the fact that you can't -- you find it hard to believe, I

 6     cannot follow those videotapes because I have not received the list in

 7     the order in which they're going to be shown.  You have the privilege of

 8     receiving it all in English.  I have not received a document in the

 9     proper way, so may I have this provided in Serbian.  There's not a single

10     word here in Serbian here except the title -- or, rather, the names.  And

11     then the tapes can be shown tomorrow morning.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, by this afternoon,

13     I know you have of an assistant who speaks Serbian, could you send this

14     list in Serbian to Mr. Seselj?  He would have the whole afternoon to view

15     the video clips he has already.

16             We have time tomorrow.  As I told you, we've got basically one

17     hour of viewing.  There will be comments and observations.  It will take

18     more time, but in theory, we should be able to finish it all tomorrow.

19     And we had basically another 45 minutes, so it wouldn't be much of a

20     problem to stop now.  What do you think, Mr. Mundis?

21             MR. MUNDIS:  I think, Mr. President, that that will in fact be

22     done, and I would expect it would take us no significant period of time

23     in order to simply cut and paste from the prior list and put them in the

24     right order.

25             Let me -- let me just add one other factor, because that might

Page 5054

 1     cause the list or could cause the list to be reduced in terms of the

 2     number of videos.

 3             As Your Honours will note, there are a few of these video tapes

 4     that appear on this list which have already been admitted into evidence,

 5     and I believe these were the videotapes that were shown during

 6     Dr. Seselj's testimony in the Milosevic case.  The first three, in

 7     effect, if you will, on the first page, have already been admitted into

 8     evidence.

 9             With respect to the videos --

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes.  I'm -- I thought of it

11     overnight.  You know, like all of you, I work during the night as well,

12     and I wondered.  I said, what does that mean, "have been admitted into

13     evidence in the Milosevic case"?  Did you file a written motion for the

14     videos to be admitted, to be admitted by our Chamber?  Is that the way I

15     should understand things?

16             MR. MUNDIS:  It's my understanding, Mr. President, that when the

17     transcripts of Mr. Seselj's testimony in the Milosevic case were admitted

18     that these videos came along with that.  The exhibits and materials that

19     came along with that.  In effect, it was an entire package so that the

20     prior testimony would be understandable and that's where these videotapes

21     came from.

22             I do have a question, if you will, or some -- seeking some

23     clarification or guidance from the Chamber as to the best way to proceed,

24     and that's limited -- that --

25             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You are right indeed.  When we

Page 5055

 1     admitted Mr. Seselj's testimony in the Milosevic case, the exhibits that

 2     had been joined were admitted as well.  And that's one more reason for

 3     them to be broadcast, to be shown again so that we can see them again.

 4             MR. MUNDIS:  Well, that was precisely -- that was precisely the

 5     guidance and clarification I was seeking, whether the Chamber wanted all

 6     of these tapes shown in public in this trial or whether the fact that

 7     they had already been admitted would be a reason not to show them in this

 8     trial.

 9             I also note that I believe one or two of these tapes which have

10     been admitted on the basis of the Chamber's earlier ruling have, in fact,

11     already been shown.  Those tapes I could certainly remove in order to

12     save a little bit of time.  But if the Chamber would prefer all of the

13     tapes to be -- all of the tapes on this list to be shown, or at least the

14     ones that haven't already been shown, we would be happy to do that.  But

15     I do want to simply note that a few, not many, but a few of these tapes

16     have already been admitted into evidence, and of that subset a smaller

17     number have been played in court.

18             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] But even those that have been

19     admitted or shown, it's always useful to see them again.  Depending on

20     the themes.  In this way it will be easier to understand the themes more

21     easily through the various videos.

22             For instance, there was a clip that was shown yesterday in

23     which -- of course, if we are to believe the journalist, who would show

24     members of irregular units running behind a flag, and this, last night I

25     was thinking, those people who we saw running behind the flag, are those

Page 5056

 1     the same people we had seen already in a photograph when they were

 2     standing with the flag to be photographed?  So they may be the same

 3     people.  That's why it's useful to see them.

 4             Well, Seselj is saying that they're not the same people.  He's

 5     probably right because he knows the tapes better than we do because he

 6     was able to view them.  But this is the very classic example of the

 7     usefulness there is to see and show the tapes again and to see them in a

 8     logical structure.

 9             Of course we can argue about the themes, but there's one merit to

10     them:  They exist.  And this is no waste of time, because everybody's

11     going to view them.  Mr. Seselj, without, of course, testifying himself,

12     will be able to say, "Well, this journalist is saying this, but I

13     challenge that," and then we'll see all this later on.

14             This hearing is not devoted to the videos on the merit of them,

15     because they as clips may be submitted to other witnesses.

16             Yes, Mr. Mundis?

17             MR. MUNDIS:  I understand what the Chamber's saying, and we will

18     show all of the tapes that are on this list in the order, the thematic

19     order, as indicated earlier.  And I will also indicate that my case

20     manager informs me that the list as we speak is being translated into

21     Serbian.

22             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.  My

23     brother Judge had a question, and we're going to ask this of Mr. Seselj.

24             This new document in English is going to be translated to you

25     into Serbian.  Does it really have to be translated at all?  That's the

Page 5057

 1     basic question.  Because now -- by now you've -- you're aware of the

 2     themes.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, in my view this will

 4     take the Prosecutor 10 to 15 minutes to have this text translated into

 5     Serbian.  Perhaps not even that long for somebody skilful working with a

 6     computer, because they have everything typed in already into the

 7     computer.  All that we're discussing here is the order, and that can be

 8     done quickly, whereas I need to be able to follow the order in which the

 9     tapes are shown.

10             I agree that all the tapes should be shown, but I would like to

11     be able to follow everything attending those tapes, because what is

12     relevant for me is as follows:  All the information given here, when the

13     tape was made, who filmed it, and everything else, and I have to be able

14     to follow with this document.  If I'm not able to follow, then I won't be

15     able to state my views of whether the tapes should be admitted into

16     evidence or not.  So it's important as far as I'm concerned, and it is

17     important that every document that appears in this courtroom be in

18     Serbian.  That is something that I insist upon.  And I think that while I

19     am the accused in this courtroom, no document can be allowed to appear

20     without a Serbian translation.  That is my fundamental right as an

21     accused.

22             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So tomorrow we will start with

23     P62, then we'll have P59 and P30 and so on following this order.

24             So the Prosecution will send this document to Mr. Seselj

25     translated into Serbian so that Mr. Seselj can follow.

Page 5058

 1             We shall reconvene tomorrow.  I remind you that we will be

 2     sitting at 9.00 since this courtroom is free, in Courtroom III.  I think

 3     we should be finished by noon, I believe.  But you always have to show

 4     optimism in life.

 5             Have a good day.  The hearing stands adjourned.

 6                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.00 p.m.,

 7                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 20th day

 8                           of March, 2008, at 9.00 a.m.