Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 7151

1 Wednesday, 21 May 2008

2 [Open session]

3 [The witness entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 8.30 a.m.

5 [The accused entered court]

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, could you please

7 call the case.

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.

11 This is Wednesday, and I greet our witness, representatives of

12 the OTP, and Mr. Seselj, as well as everyone helping us around this

13 courtroom.

14 We're now going to continue with the cross-examination of this

15 witness. The Registrar told me that Mr. Seselj had one hour and two

16 minutes left.

17 Does the Prosecution want to ask anything?

18 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Yes, absolutely.

19 Your Honour, just before starting, I've just received two

20 documents which Mr. Seselj intends to use, obviously, during his

21 cross-examination. According to what is mentioned on the -- these are

22 documents that -- these are faxes that we received yesterday, around 7.00

23 or 8.00 in the morning, but I only obtained them today. So I raise an

24 objection regarding their use today, since they were disclosed too late.

25 It is true that sometimes there are mishaps and documents that

Page 7152

1 were forgotten, but regarding this witness, we didn't obtain a single

2 document, so this is why I raise this objection.

3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, obviously we have

4 documents 6 and 7 on our table, and the fax shows that you obtained them

5 yesterday at 7.48 in the morning. I fully understand that you arrived in

6 the courtroom yesterday at 8.30 a.m. and you didn't have enough time,

7 maybe, to take a look at these documents. I note that regarding document

8 7, you have studied it, since some paragraphs have been earmarked, five

9 paragraphs have been earmarked, which means that you did take a look at

10 these documents. Maybe you looked at it yesterday in the afternoon, I

11 don't know, and maybe this is why we are only given this document this

12 morning.

13 Could you please explain what you've done with these documents?

14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, there probably is a

15 way for the Registry to at least give you a record of the number of pages

16 that I received by fax. I get more pages than I actually use. For

17 instance, I have two statements by Vojin Vuckovic, Zuco. Both came in

18 yesterday. I will only be using one. I will not use the other one

19 because it deals with some scandal involving Kuwaiti dinars, and Zuco

20 claims that Mr. Alic was involved. But this is of no interest to me,

21 because it has nothing to do with war crimes, although his claims are

22 quite interesting when it comes to the funding of the purchase of weapons

23 for the Party of Democratic Action.

24 I have to say something. I remained in the courtroom until 1.15.

25 I wait for about an hour to get transported to the prison, and I can only

Page 7153

1 start working until I get, once I get to the Detention Unit. I have some

2 sports activities, I have to go for a walk, I have to talk to my

3 associates, and what can I do? I get it in the morning and then I submit

4 it to the Prosecution, and they claim it was not on time.

5 Why don't they give me things on time? I found out that the

6 Prosecution interviewed Vojin Vuckovic, Zuca, as a suspect. Why was I

7 never given Zuca's statement? For months, we've had victims, witnesses,

8 testifying about their ordeal in Zvornik. It's all about the Yellow

9 Wasps. The commander of the Yellow Wasps gave a comprehensive statement

10 to the Prosecution, and the Prosecution never told me about that. And I

11 hear from Zuca directly yesterday that he gave this interview to the

12 Prosecution, and now it is my fault for the Prosecution that I'm late by

13 one day. And the fact that the Prosecution fails to disclose anything

14 that is relevant to me, that's nobody's fault. It's the usual practice

15 in all the cases. The Prosecution is not held accountable for what they

16 do.

17 Every time a Prosecution calls a false witness, for instance 007

18 or the one testifying before him, the one who threw grenades at Belgrade

19 mosques, the Prosecution should be sanctioned, each and every time. In

20 every legal system, it is impermissible for the Prosecution to prep their

21 witnesses for years and then to have this kind of fiasco, and now the

22 Prosecution is criticising me for being late for one day. I cannot give

23 something to the Prosecution before I've studied it.

24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, several things.

25 Once again, you are talking about false witnesses. Each time you

Page 7154

1 mention these false witnesses, this raises havoc in this courtroom. I've

2 told you over and over that the Trial Chamber will only determine itself

3 on the probative value of the witnesses in the end. Witnesses come, they

4 are heard, they say things, you challenge what they're saying. Very

5 well. Other witnesses come and testify either in your favour or against

6 you. But it's only in the very end that we will decide. So the Trial

7 Chamber is telling you, once again, not to mention false witnesses.

8 You've already said this once. We've heard you. Fine, but remember that

9 we assess the witnesses as they come, listening to you, of course, but we

10 don't necessarily decide that they're false witnesses. You might be

11 right, you might be wrong, but as of today, it is totally impossible for

12 anyone to say this person is a false witness, 100 per cent sure.

13 You know just as well as I do that the consequences of this are

14 huge. If it is proven that a witness, under oath, lied, this witness

15 risks a contempt procedure. So, please, sometimes, you know, you fly off

16 the handle and say things very quickly, but pleases try to think twice

17 and not to be so bold about these false witnesses, because this just

18 creates problems every time.

19 On the other hand, you have said something which I believe is

20 very serious and which might have consequences, and I have to turn to the

21 Prosecution.

22 Mr. Seselj just told us a few minutes ago that regarding Zuco,

23 the accused suddenly found out, through the written statement of this

24 Zuco which Mr. Seselj received, that this Zuco had been heard by the OTP

25 as a suspect. Having been heard as a suspect, this should have been

Page 7155

1 disclosed to Mr. Seselj. So what happened exactly, Mr. Mundis?

2 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.

3 Good morning, Your Honours, and to Mr. Seselj and everyone in and

4 around the courtroom.

5 We are, as I speak, checking the records concerning any possible

6 statements that this person, Mr. Vuckovic, Zuco, gave to the Prosecution,

7 and hopefully we'll be able to determine that in just a moment.

8 On the broader issue, of course, of suspect interviews, we are

9 doing everything we possibly can to get those interviews transcribed and

10 translated into the Serbian language. As I've indicated before, there

11 are a number of resource and logistical issues concerned with that. We

12 are working as diligently as we can to provide all such suspect

13 interviews, many of which have never been transcribed before.

14 I do, however, want to place on the record one other concern the

15 Prosecution has with respect to the issue that the Presiding Judge raised

16 concerning allegations of false witnesses. I'm not going to go into this

17 in any elaborate detail, but I will put on the record that the

18 Prosecution position is that that, in and of itself, is a form of

19 intimidation with respect to future potential witnesses. And so it's not

20 simply an issue of whether the Trial Chamber should be making any kind of

21 determinations at this point. As the Presiding Judge clearly indicated,

22 all the evidence will be weighed at the end. And of course, it is

23 potentially serious if witnesses were found to be less than truthful

24 during their testimony. That is also a separate issue. But we are very

25 concerned about statements being made by the accused concerning false

Page 7156

1 testimony or false witnesses because of the impact that such allegations

2 may have on future witnesses. And for that reason, we also want it

3 placed on the record our position, the Prosecution's position, that that

4 is a form of witness intimidation, and it must be stopped. And we are

5 very grateful for the Trial Chamber's comments that have been made in

6 that respect, but I do want to put that on the record.

7 Thank you.

8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

9 Mr. Seselj, Mr. Mundis has addressed two points. First, he's

10 looking in his database to see whether or not this Zuco was interviewed

11 as a suspect. As soon as they know, of course, they will tell us about

12 it.

13 Now, regarding the second item, this is not the first time that

14 the Prosecutor has been saying this. Mrs. Dahl before him also said

15 that, and others said that before. When you say that witnesses to come

16 are false witnesses, this has consequences.

17 Just imagine for one second, Mr. Seselj, that Mr. Mundis would be

18 saying that all witnesses -- all your Defence witnesses are false

19 witnesses. You would be the first one to protest, and justly so, if the

20 Prosecutor was claiming that, but you keep accusing the Prosecution

21 witnesses of being false witnesses, quote/unquote. What consequences

22 does this have? Well, for the witnesses to come, when they're reading

23 the papers, when they're following the trial on TV, they keep -- they

24 think, "Well, the accused thinks I'm going to be a false witness," and

25 this could very well have a consequence on the testimony given by these

Page 7157

1 people, and the Trial Chamber has drawn your attention to this on several

2 occasions, on many occasions, actually; notably, the fact that the

3 Prosecution could also allege that your witnesses are also in the same

4 category. This is really an issue, so please refrain from saying this,

5 because this has grave consequences.

6 I fully understand that for your part, in your opinion, you

7 believe that the witnesses that have testified up until now, according to

8 you, lied regarding this or that. You can say it. In your submissions,

9 you can write it also. You can say it, you can ask for a private

10 session, but please do not say this in open session. This has

11 consequences on the witnesses to come, whoever they may be and whoever's

12 side they may be on; Prosecution, Defence. There could be consequences.

13 Of course, in the heat of the moment, sometimes you get a head up

14 and say this. It's true you've been waiting years for your trial, and I

15 fully understand that sometimes it's hard to stay in control when you

16 absolutely want to say things, but this is a technical issue. Witnesses

17 come here. They make the solemn declaration. If they lie, they run the

18 risk of being accused of contempt charges.

19 As I told you, when a witness came, testified, if you had

20 elements that could challenge what he said on a number of issues, you can

21 just make a submission under Rule 77. You can always do that, but do

22 this after the fact. Don't just do this when the witnesses are here.

23 Now you have the floor.

24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, first of all, I'm

25 never hasty in what I say and I'm never impassioned. I am old enough to

Page 7158

1 be somewhat bereft of passion, and I have never been hasty.

2 I am frankly concerned that the Prosecution might call Defence

3 witnesses publicly false witnesses, but I'm prepared to bear it. I am

4 quite happy, despite this concern, that the Trial Chamber and the

5 Prosecution are in such agreement on this issue. What you are saying

6 about the Rules, as a principle, it would be fine, were it not for the

7 fact that our practice is different here.

8 Less than a month ago, you had a protected witness here with all

9 the protective measures. I will not be saying his name. He admitted to

10 the Prosecution that he had given false testimony in another case. And

11 then you brought duty Defence counsel here for him and you prevented me

12 from cross-examining him on this issue, lest he should repeat the fact

13 that he had given false testimony.

14 A month is gone, and there are no sanctions against this man, no

15 indictment has been issued. I can see now that some journalist who

16 disclosed names of protected witnesses have been indicted, deliberately

17 or by accident. There are quite a few journalists on such charges. Some

18 were tried before this Court. And a witness who admits that in a

19 previous case, he had given false testimony, is gets away with it with

20 impunity. And now you tell me there are protection mechanisms in place

21 against such witnesses, and I don't believe you because I can see that

22 they are not being applied, at least not in this case.

23 We had a witness here who admitted to the Prosecution that he had

24 testified in a previous case falsely. I will not mention his name,

25 because you know that he testified in closed session for a week. You

Page 7159

1 know who that is. And what am I to do, take your word that this is how

2 it is going to be? On what basis? I cannot take anyone's word for it.

3 I'm sorry.

4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, let me answer you

5 without giving a name, of course, because it's a protected witness.

6 There is a witness who said something in front of another Trial

7 Chamber, and in front of this Trial Chamber he had a different story.

8 And you are absolutely right, this was noted. I told you that our Trial

9 Chamber, this Trial Chamber, is not competent in the matter. The

10 competent Trial Chamber is the other one. We do not have jurisdiction

11 here. By definition, when this person gave us his own version on this

12 issue, it's the truth he told us. He did not lie to us. Since he did

13 not lie to us, why would we launch any kind of proceedings against this

14 person?

15 However -- and I've already told you this. However, regarding

16 the other Trial Chamber, you can seize this other Trial Chamber, and so

17 can the Prosecution. It's your problem and the problem of the

18 Prosecutor. It is not our problem, because this witness told his truth

19 in front of us, unless he lied to us again, which that would mean that he

20 told the truth to the other Chamber.

21 There is only one Trial Chamber that can have jurisdiction, and

22 as things stand, it is not ours. I've already told you this, so please

23 do not say that we are endorsing situations. I told you that -- I even

24 told you that it's up to you to follow suit and take appropriate action.

25 I mean, you could make a motion to the other Trial Chamber, explaining

Page 7160

1 your problem. But I repeat, we are not competent in this matter.

2 As you know, just as I do, the Trial Chamber only has the

3 competence it was awarded, and in this case we are not competent to rule

4 on this potential contempt case, which may come from the fact that he

5 said that he gave another version of what he said to us in front of

6 another Trial Chamber. First thing.

7 So if your allegations of false testimony rely on this, it is not

8 sufficient.

9 Once again, regarding the words "false witnesses," we know you

10 told me openly during the pre-trial phase -- you explained at length that

11 in the Milosevic trial, according to you, some witnesses gave false

12 testimonies. You actually said that they were totally remotely

13 controlled through their headset and so on. You repeated this in your

14 pre-trial submission. We know this, so there's no need to mention this

15 again. Raising this matter again has consequences on the witnesses to

16 come, and there's quite a number of these witnesses to come.

17 We will now move to the cross-examination. You have one hour and

18 two minutes left. If you have any other item to raise, please do it now,

19 before you start with your cross-examination.

20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, very briefly.

21 Mr. President, you're quite right, this witness that we were

22 talking about testified truthfully for three days, to the satisfaction of

23 the Prosecution and of the Trial Chamber. The only person lying here was

24 me, in the cross-examination. I lied all the time, and he spoke the

25 truth and nothing but the truth. I agree with you fully. You are

Page 7161

1 completely right. But when we learned, all of us --

2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, maybe there's a

3 problem with the translation. I never said that this witness, this

4 protected witness, had said the entire truth. I only said that on the

5 specific item, if I remember well, that dealt with his military booklet,

6 he gave us explanations on this. This is what I'm saying. So, please,

7 do not -- I said one thing, and don't believe that I have -- that this

8 can be extended to his entire testimony.

9 Maybe it was a problem with the translation, but I just wanted to

10 say this.

11 JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, quickly, just to

12 make things very clear, nothing is preventing you and no one has

13 prevented you in this Trial Chamber from challenging the credibility of a

14 witness and using the correct procedure, which you have to follow. You

15 can't demonstrate that a witness is lying on a certain item, on a fact,

16 on a specific fact. However, what we cannot accept is that you make

17 general statements regarding past and future witnesses, statements that

18 would not be supported by evidence demonstrated in this courtroom during

19 your cross-examination.

20 This is extremely simple. No one is preventing you from

21 demonstrating that a witness is not credible. It's up to you. It's up

22 to you to be clever enough to do this.

23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Judges, we had in this courtroom a

24 witness for whom it had been ascertained that he had lied in another

25 case. There is an obligation on the part of every citizen to report any

Page 7162

1 crime that he or she learns of. In this courtroom, the Judges learned

2 about that, the Prosecution was aware of that, the Registry was aware of

3 that, and so was I. Each and every Judge is duty-bound to report a crime

4 if they learn that the crime has been committed. The Prosecution is

5 under the obligation to immediately prosecute the person responsible, yet

6 the Prosecution failed to do that. I'm the only one who is not under

7 this obligation. I am a convict here, and the convict does not have the

8 obligation to report crimes.

9 And I don't want to go into this issue any further, because I can

10 see that Mr. Alic is getting impatient on me.

11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, we listen to

12 everything you say, and very often what you're saying is based on legal

13 foundation, and you've just raised one item. You've said that any

14 citizen, when he is aware of an offence, must absolutely tell this to the

15 authorities. This is something that exists in all jurisdictions. You're

16 absolutely right.

17 Secondly, false testimonies are ruled by Rule 77. Rule 77 calls

18 for sanctions to be implemented by two authorities; either the

19 Prosecutor, who will write out an indictment, or the Trial Chamber

20 itself, who can write up an indictment, but only as far as it is

21 competent, it's ration immateriae competent. And I told you that this

22 Chamber is not competent in this case. The only body that can launch the

23 sanctions here is the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor can seize the other

24 Chamber, the other Trial Chamber. But yourself, as a potential victim of

25 this, could also send a submission to the other Trial Chamber.

Page 7163

1 Now, maybe there's a failing in the Rules regarding this. Maybe

2 you believe that Judges should play a role in relation to the other Trial

3 Chambers. Maybe you are correctly interpreting this loophole in the

4 Rules. But as it is, as the Rules stand now, this is not clearly stated.

5 We fully understood what you said. We will think about it

6 together on the Bench, but as the Rule stands it is up to the Prosecution

7 to draw up an indictment, possibly, or it is up to you to make a

8 submission and send this submission to the competent Chamber.

9 You said that you didn't want to waste the witness's time, so now

10 you have the floor to continue with your cross-examination.


12 [Witness answered through interpreter]

13 Cross-examination by Mr. Seselj: [Continued]

14 Q. Mr. Alic, during the war, did you receive any decorations?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. How many decorations did you receive?

17 A. Two.

18 Q. Which decorations?

19 A. In 1987, I received a decoration in Serbia, a pistol with a

20 plaque, from the Municipal Secretariat for the Interior at that time.

21 And the second decoration or commendation was in 1994, from the Federal

22 Minister of Internal Affairs, and that was a police badge, a silver

23 police badge.

24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we have the document from the

25 Centre of Research into Crimes against the Serbian People. It's document

Page 7164

1 2. We started with that yesterday, and I read out the accompanying

2 letter at the insistence of the Prosecutor, so let's take a look at that

3 document together, Mr. Alic, and I'd like to hear your views as to parts

4 of its contents.

5 I don't have to read the first paragraph again. I think I read

6 it out yesterday.

7 Q. But just tell me whether you knew about these instructions to

8 send candidates to the educational training centre of Croatia, signed by

9 Hasan Cengic, MUP of Croatia?

10 A. Could you tell me what year that was?

11 Q. I don't know what the year was exactly. They were the war years,

12 anyway. Now, which particular year, I can't say. Do you know anything

13 about that? If not, we're not going to dwell on it.

14 A. No, I don't know anything about it.

15 Q. Do you know that the cadres of the Muslim MUP of

16 Bosnia-Herzegovina were sent for training and education to Croatia?

17 A. I don't know about that, either.

18 Q. All right. Now, in paragraph 2 of this document -- do you have

19 it before you?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. It says the following about you:

22 "Sometime in the second half of March 1992, he staged an incident

23 which reverberated not only in the Tuzla region but in Bosnia-Herzegovina

24 as well. At night, he sounded the alarm as if the police station had

25 been attacked and called in only the Muslim policemen to defend it."

Page 7165

1 Did you do that in Zvornik?

2 A. No.

3 Q. Was there another alarm sounded?

4 A. There was some rally -- there was a rally, but not an alarm

5 sounding.

6 Q. Well, how come in March policemen rallied together and they

7 happened to be only the Muslim members?

8 A. There were Serbs, too.

9 Q. How many?

10 A. I didn't count them.

11 Q. And when the Serbs withdrew from the police station and went to

12 Karakaj, one Serb remained there; isn't that right?

13 A. Yes, it is.

14 Q. And you mentioned his name. What was his name?

15 A. His name was Boro Zekic.

16 Q. And then you sent him packing because you didn't need him in the

17 police station, either?

18 A. That's not true.

19 Q. Well, what happened to him, then? Did he stay on working with

20 you?

21 A. He asked to stay and work there, but we didn't stay on, either.

22 We were expelled, too, from the police station.

23 Q. You fled on the 8th of April because you were defeated --

24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, the interpreters

25 are asking you to slow down, please.

Page 7166

1 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation] Yes, I will slow down.

2 Q. You stayed on, working at the police station, until the 8th of

3 April, when you fled, because the Serb forces were stronger, there was

4 discord among your ranks, you had internal conflicts, the chief of the

5 War Staff fled, the mayor fled, and general chaos broke loose, and you

6 left too. Now, I'm not accusing you for having left. It's better that

7 you left and stayed alive, rather than being killed, because I wouldn't

8 have anyone to talk to here in the courtroom now. However, this man,

9 Boro Zekic, was forced out earlier, before the 8th of April; isn't that

10 right?

11 A. The Serb police left on the 6th of April. It separated and went

12 to Karakaj on the 8th of April. The town of Zvornik was attacked from

13 the 6th to the 8th. How long is that?

14 Q. Two days.

15 A. Right, two days.

16 Q. And why, on the six 6th of April, did you send Boro Zekic packing

17 when he wanted to work with you there?

18 A. That's not correct, that's not true.

19 Q. What is true, then?

20 A. It's true that Boro stayed alone and he wanted to see a united

21 police force. However, Boro didn't want to go to war. He didn't -- and

22 he said, "I don't belong up there. I don't want any war. Asim, I can't

23 stay here, either, because I would have been considered a traitor of the

24 Serb people." And I said, "Boro, go home. I'll write it as if you're on

25 furlough, on annual leave. You'll see if this goes on -- well, you'll

Page 7167

1 see how things develop and decide."

2 Q. And Boro went on holiday, his annual leave; right?

3 A. That's right, he went on annual leave.

4 Q. All right, fine, Mr. Alic. Now, it says here that the alarm that

5 was sounded, that caused just the Muslim section of the police force to

6 rally, although you said there were Serbs, too. My information tells me

7 that there were no Serbs and that Mr. Ivanisevic also doesn't say that

8 there were any Serbs?

9 A. Well your information is correct.

10 Q. All right. Maybe it's not, maybe your information is correct.

11 Anyway, Mr. Ivanisevic goes on to say here as to your file that this led

12 to a revolt on the part of those employed, even some Muslims, who were

13 honest and decent professionals in their job. At a heated meeting that

14 was held after that, representatives from Tuzla came and assistant

15 Minister of Internal Affairs Muharem Saric came from Sarajevo; is that

16 correct? Did Muharem Saric come from Sarajevo in March 1992 to Zvornik?

17 Did he come to Zvornik?

18 A. No, I don't know any Muharem Saric.

19 Q. Assistant Minister for internal affairs?

20 A. No, the man doesn't exist.

21 Q. And what about police officials from Tuzla, did they arrive?

22 A. Yes.

23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, I interrupted you

24 because I've noticed something.

25 When the interpreters translate what you are saying directly from

Page 7168

1 Serbian into French in realtime, I can follow what you're saying, and I

2 also get the answers of the witness. But when what you are saying is

3 translated into English and there's a time lag in the translation, as has

4 just occurred, you then continue speaking in your language, and the

5 interpreter is translating into English, which means that if I want to be

6 in realtime, I need to look at the screen and read the English, when you

7 have already addressed another topic. This is why it's difficult.

8 I've already mentioned this to the interpreters. I would like

9 you to be interpreted directly from Serbian into English. They're doing

10 their best, anyway.

11 In this particular instance today, please go more slowly so that

12 there is no time lag. You have the floor.

13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. I'll do my best to

14 speak as slowly as possible.

15 Q. It says here, Mr. Alic, that Serb policemen reacted especially in

16 a heated manner, and that was the reason that they left the police

17 station and went to Kalesija. Well, that is an assumption. Now, tell

18 me, what did those representatives of the Tuzla Centre of the Security

19 Service do, then, when they came to Zvornik with respect to this problem?

20 Do you remember?

21 A. You mentioned Kalesija?

22 Q. I didn't mention Kalesija. I meant "Karakaj." They went to

23 Karakaj, not Kalesija, although Kalesija was under Serb control for a

24 time and then the Muslims managed to seize control of it.

25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Dutertre.

Page 7169

1 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] I have an objection, as the

2 accused has mentioned himself, he's asked the witness to speculate who

3 has said, well, this is an assumption, and I object to this question.

4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Your objection is on the record

5 now.

6 Please proceed, Mr. Seselj.

7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm not asking the witness to

8 speculate. What I'm asking the witness is to explain to us, here and

9 now, to everyone, what these police representatives from Tuzla, where the

10 Security Service Centre to which Zvornik belonged, how they arrived, and

11 they arrived because of the problem that was going on there. And I read

12 out a portion from Mr. Ivanisevic's statement that Mr. Alic complained --

13 THE INTERPRETER: Sounded the alarm, interpreter's correction.

14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- and that he had not sounded any

15 alarm but that the rally was spontaneous. Then I said that only the

16 Muslim part of the police station rallied together, and then he said

17 there were Serbs, too, although he couldn't name anybody. And then he

18 said that high-ranking police representatives from the Tuzla center

19 arrived and then my question was without any cause for speculation.

20 Q. What did they do in Zvornik, once they arrived?

21 A. May I be allowed to clarify? In view of the fact that people

22 knew much earlier on, and had been checked out, we had reliable

23 information telling us that in Celopek a review of the then Serb police

24 was carried out, had been carried out, and the review had been carried

25 out by Dragan Spasojevic, the commander of the police station at the

Page 7170

1 time. The leadership in the Security Centre knew about this. We were

2 informed of that fact.

3 Now, afterwards, after we say this small incident, I called upon

4 the representatives of the Security Centre to come to Zvornik to hold a

5 joint meeting there and to try to convince the Serbs that we should

6 remain together in a united police force and that it should continue to

7 be a united police force. So that was the reason for their arrival.

8 Q. You managed to persuade them, I see.

9 A. After a day or two, unfortunately -- well, that was their

10 intention before. It was just a matter of time, when they would be

11 displaced.

12 Q. And your leadership in Sarajevo asked the European Union to

13 recognise the independence of Bosnia-Herzegovina; isn't that right?

14 A. I don't know what they asked for up there.

15 Q. Do you know that the European Union, precisely on the 6th of

16 April, recognised the independence of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

17 A. I didn't deal with things like that.

18 Q. Do you know what happened on the 6th of April, 1941?

19 A. Yes, I do.

20 Q. Well, tell us, then, so that we hear of that.

21 A. I don't want to go into that now.

22 Q. Mr. Alic, you are duty-bound to answer my questions.

23 A. And I have answered them.

24 Q. Well, you said that you knew what had happened on the 6th of

25 April, 1941, and now you have to state what it was that happened.

Page 7171

1 Otherwise, the Court will sanction you.

2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] What happened on the 6th of

3 April, 1991 [as interpreted] -- 1941? Do you know or don't you know?

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I assume it was some sort of

5 pretext for the war or cause for the war.

6 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

7 Q. Mr. Alic, I'm asking you what happened on the 6th of April, 1941.

8 A. I don't know what happened.

9 Q. You don't know what happened and you've graduated from many

10 schools. You don't know that Belgrade was bombed on that day and that is

11 how Yugoslavia was pulled into World War II? How don't you know that,

12 that Belgrade was bombed on the 6th of April? That is taught in primary

13 school.

14 A. I said that that was a cause for some sort of war. It wasn't the

15 pretext or cause, it was the beginning of the war as far as Yugoslavia

16 was concerned?

17 Q. Well then I agree. Quite obviously the European Union picked the

18 6th of April to recognise Bosnia-Herzegovina precisely because that was

19 the date of Hitler's aggression against Yugoslavia and the serious

20 bombing of Belgrade; isn't that right? That's quite obvious.

21 A. I really can't comment on that.

22 Q. All right, very well. Now, do you know where the village of

23 Rozanj is located?

24 A. Yes, I to.

25 Q. Do you know that on the 2nd of July, 1992, there was an attack by

Page 7172

1 Muslim forces against that village?

2 A. I do not know that.

3 Q. How don't you know that when you took part in that attack?

4 A. I was the chief of the civilian police force, and the civilian

5 police force had no role in any combat operations.

6 Q. Mr. Alic, at that time wasn't the 206th Brigade of the Muslim

7 Army already formed at that time or, rather, the BH Army, as you called

8 it?

9 A. It probably was.

10 Q. Didn't you, together with that brigade, with a portion of the

11 policemen who were under your control, take part in the attack village of

12 Rozanj?

13 A. No.

14 Q. Where is the village of Rozanj, where is it located?

15 A. The village of Rozanj is located in the Sapna Municipality at the

16 foot of Mount Meris [phoen].

17 Q. So as the chief of police, you were in charge of that village,

18 too?

19 A. Since there was no civilian population there, I had nothing to

20 look for there.

21 Q. So if the Serbs were there, it's the same thing as if there were

22 no civilians, but Serb civilians, Mita Rostec [phoen], Bogosav Ivic,

23 Stanko Ostojic, Goran Ostojic and Nedeljka Ostojic, were killed there,

24 and you've never heard of that, Mr. Alic; is that what you're telling us?

25 A. It was military security that dealt with things like that

Page 7173

1 exclusively.

2 Q. Ah. Well, you see, Mr. Ivanisevic says on page 3 - turn to

3 page 3 of the document, please - he says responsible for the crimes, the

4 following were mentioned: Avdo Halilovic Grahorac, do you know him?

5 A. Could you repeat that?

6 Q. Avdo Halilovic Grahorac.

7 A. Well, the name rings a bell, but I don't know who it is.

8 Q. Do you know who Huso Avdic is?

9 A. No.

10 Q. Do you know who Ismet Halilovic is?

11 A. I believe that they're all people from the area, judging by the

12 names, but I didn't know them.

13 Q. Did you know Sabit Halilovic?

14 A. No.

15 Q. Do you know Jure Juric, "Bonze" [phoen]? I suppose "Bonze" is

16 his nickname. That's a Croat, is it?

17 A. No, there are no Croats up there.

18 Q. Well, there were in Tuzla, of course, and were and there are

19 today, too. But you're not talking about Tuzla, you're talking about

20 Sapna?

21 A. I'm talking about the people that attacked that Serb village and

22 killed the civilians there.

23 MR. DUTERTRE: I object to questions being asked on this topic.

24 The witness clearly said he knew nothing about this event. When

25 questioned about a series of names, he said he didn't know these. I

Page 7174

1 don't see in what manner it is relevant to put questions about this.

2 Several times, he said he wasn't involved and knew nothing about

3 this, so how often will these questions be repeated and put to the

4 witness when he's told oftentimes -- said oftentimes that he knew nothing

5 about it.

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The witness said that he wasn't

7 there. He said he'd heard of a number of names, but the other names, he

8 doesn't know. Do you wish to pursue the matter and do you want him to

9 say, "No, no, no," every time, or are you going to move on to another

10 topic?

11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the witness denied

12 his own participation in the attack against the Serb village of Rozanj

13 and said that the village was to be found in the territory of Sapna, and

14 that he didn't know of the attack on that village on the 2nd of July,

15 1992. The witness said all that, so I'm no longer asking you about the

16 attack.

17 I have information here about people, and their names, who took

18 part in the attack and killed Serb civilians, so I have to go through the

19 names and read the names out one by one to ask the witness whether he

20 knows them. If it is established at the end that he doesn't know any of

21 these people, then that answer satisfies me to a high degree. But why

22 must I disclose the intentions of my cross-examination in advance?

23 As soon as the witness finds himself in a difficult position,

24 somebody intervenes again. Now the witness has regained his composure,

25 so I can carry on.

Page 7175

1 Q. Do you know Ismet Omerovic?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. What was he in 1992?

4 A. He was from Godus, and he was one of the local commanders.

5 Q. The commander of what?

6 A. I think he was in the battalion of the 206th Mountain Brigade.

7 Q. Do you know Zijad Omerovic, nicknamed "Joja"?

8 A. I've heard of him.

9 Q. Who was he?

10 A. Well, he performed some duty, he had some post in that battalion,

11 probably. But let me repeat again that that was a military formation,

12 they were military operations, and I have nothing to do with those

13 military operations. My work was from the remit of the civilian police

14 force.

15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, I'm not conducting

16 your trial and we are not seized for what happened in that village which

17 was under your authority, since you were in charge of the civilian

18 police, but there's one thing which I cannot overlook, and you know this

19 as well as I do. When, in Bosnia-Herzegovina, the state of war was

20 declared, the law was amended and specified that the civilians could be

21 subordinated to the military units, and the policemen who were working

22 for the Ministry of the Interior could be subordinated to military units.

23 Therefore, when you say that this is a military matter, I might

24 disagree with you. Nothing tells me that a military operation,

25 particularly at the time when the Territorial Defence existed, the ABiH

Page 7176

1 hadn't been entirely set up and formed yet, all the corps and units had

2 not been formed, but there were military operations ongoing and ordered

3 by the TO, sometimes by War Presidencies of the municipalities. And the

4 civilian police could be incorporated into a military unit. Let me

5 remind you of this.

6 Now, can you confirm that in this military operation on this

7 village, you did not take part in this?

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I know that the police

9 may be resubordinated to the army, but at that time and in that place,

10 there was no need for that, in light of the fact that Sapna Municipality

11 covers a very small territory. It's maybe 30 per cent of what used to be

12 Zvornik Municipality. And only the military was active in that area. I

13 was the police chief with maybe 35 to 40 police officers under me, and we

14 performed our normal duties; protecting people's lives and property and

15 dealing with other civilian duties and needs, as much as it could be

16 done. There was no need for us to be resubordinated because we were not

17 a major force. We did not have appropriate weapons, and we did not take

18 part in those operations. Only the army was there.

19 When Mr. Seselj mentioned some names, I know these people were

20 there, but the military was operating in that area. We had nothing to do

21 with it. We couldn't even get access to those villages because they had

22 village guards, before those villages were cleansed. We went into those

23 villages after they were cleansed in order to protect property against

24 looters, but we didn't participate in any combat actions.

25 Q. Mr. Alic, do you know who Muzijet Ramic is?

Page 7177

1 A. Well, you can keep mentioning names to me for as much as you

2 want. Some names are familiar to me, some are not, but I don't know

3 these people.

4 Q. Mr. Alic, well, the simplest thing would be to say "yes" or "no."

5 If you say, "Yes," I'll ask you more details. If you say, "No," we'll go

6 on.

7 A. Well, I think we're wasting your precious time on things that I

8 cannot really confirm.

9 Q. Why are you bothered about me wasting time? I have as much time

10 as I have, as I want. I've been here for six years. I can be here for

11 six years more.

12 A. Well, it's your decision.

13 Q. Do you know Zihad Ahmic?

14 A. No.

15 Q. Do you know who Serif Omerovic is?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Who is he?

18 A. He's a villager from the village of Godus.

19 Q. What was he in 1992?

20 A. I think he was in the civilian protection.

21 Q. So the Civilian Protection was involved in a military operation

22 and the police was not. How is that possible?

23 A. The Civilian Protection had its specific role. It was not

24 involved in military operations.

25 Q. And the Civilian Protection performed a special, specific role by

Page 7178

1 protecting the Serb civilians, by killing them?

2 A. Well, that isn't true at all.

3 Q. Do you know who Izet Jukic is?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Do you know who Alija Ramic is?

6 A. No, I really don't.

7 Q. Do you know who Ferid Kundic is?

8 A. As I said already, you can say these names for three days and I

9 don't know these people.

10 Q. Do you know who Semsudim Muminovic is?

11 A. Yes, he was the commander of the 206th Brigade.

12 Q. And you can see this is what it says in the document?

13 A. Well, I don't see it in front of me --

14 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters kindly ask the speakers to

15 slow down and make pauses between questions and answers.

16 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

17 Q. Do you know who Sejfo Nekir is?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Nekir is probably his last name.

20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, you are quoting

21 names which are not recorded on the transcript, since there is an

22 indication that the name is missing. So, please, if quote names, quote

23 them slowly so that these can be recorded on the transcript.

24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I was under the impression that I

25 did slow down in asking my questions. We are talking about Sejfo Nekir.

Page 7179

1 Sejfo is his name, Nekir is his last name.

2 Q. Mr. Alic doesn't know him?

3 A. No, I don't.

4 Q. Do you know Ferid Kajic?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Do you know Haris Begic?

7 A. No.

8 Q. Do you know Halil Smajlovic?

9 A. No.

10 Q. Do you know Hajrudin Hasanovic?

11 A. No.

12 Q. You saw your name is here in bold letters, "Asim Alic." Do you

13 see that on the document?

14 A. No, I don't.

15 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation] Could you please move it up a little

16 bit for the benefit of Mr. Alic. That's in line 4.

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can see it.

18 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation].

19 Q. On the basis of the investigations carried out by this centre

20 that is led by Mr. Milivoj Ivanisevic, the names of the people who are

21 mentioned as perpetrators as crimes are listed here, and your name is

22 here. Are you aware of that?

23 A. Yes, I can see that, and I can say with full responsibility that

24 this has nothing to do with me.

25 Q. And who is this Ivanisevic?

Page 7180

1 A. Ivanisevic is the head of the centre for the investigation of

2 crimes against the Serb people. It is an institution that studies crimes

3 against the Serbian people in the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and

4 Mr. Ivanisevic has already published the products of his research in

5 seven or eight books.

6 Q. Who appointed him and where is the headquarters? It is in

7 Belgrade?

8 A. And he in Belgrade knows what happened there in Zvornik.

9 Q. Well, he carries out research?

10 A. Well, fine, fine, but this has -- this makes no sense.

11 Q. Do you know where Rastosnica is?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Is it in the Sapna area?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Do you know about the attack on Rastosnica on the 1st of

16 September, 1992; have you heard of it?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Do you know that 38 Serb civilians were killed in this attack?

19 A. No, I don't.

20 Q. You know that there was an attack?

21 A. Yes, I do.

22 Q. But you don't know about the Serbs that were killed in the

23 attack?

24 A. I don't know about that because the military did that, and if

25 there were civilian casualties, if there were, and I cannot say either

Page 7181

1 way, then the military exchanged dead civilians on the one side for dead

2 Muslim civilians or captured -- or prisoners of war for prisoners of war.

3 It was all within their purview. We didn't have anything to do with

4 that.

5 Q. But, Mr. Alic, you said in your statement that you took part in

6 the exchange of Serbs under your control for Muslims held by Serbs; is

7 that correct?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. How big was this exchange?

10 A. That was just one case where an old lady with a child remained

11 there. At first, I was able to provide police protection, but she

12 expressed a wish to go to Zvornik, and we did it, we met her wishes.

13 Q. Mr. Alic, do you know about the attack at Rastosnica? You do.

14 In the course of this attack carried out by the Muslim Army, a certain

15 number of Serbs were captured. What happened to them?

16 A. Well, I've told you already that this was all done by the army.

17 They captured people, they exchanged people. They did that. We had

18 nothing to do with that, no knowledge of that.

19 Q. Well, they brought them to Sapna when they picked them up in

20 Rastosnica; is that correct? You were able to see them in the street as

21 they were being led by?

22 A. Well, Sapna, there is the rural population there, and everything

23 that happened was arranged in private homes.

24 Q. 23 people, 23 Serbs, were killed in Rastosnica, according to this

25 information here, and 15 more were captured and went missing. They were

Page 7182

1 killed somewhere; in camps, prisons, who knows where. They were alive

2 when they were taken away from Rastosnica, and their fate is unknown.

3 They are still considered missing, although there is no possibility for

4 them to be alive. You can see that there are women among them. The last

5 one listed here, Dusanka Djokic, born in 1937, do you see that?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. I don't have this information, but further down in this document

8 there is a list of persons responsible for the crimes that Mr. Ivanisevic

9 was able to obtain, and in the last line again we see your name,

10 "Asim Alic." Do you see that? It's in bold letters.

11 A. Yes, I can see that among all the other names, only my name is

12 bolded.

13 Q. Well, that's because --

14 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] The witness, regarding these two

15 events, mentioned that Mr. Seselj said he was not there, he was not

16 involved. He stated this very clearly. He knows nothing about all this,

17 so I raise an objection because he's been repeating over and over the

18 same question as to his involvement in these events.

19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, given this objection,

20 you told us that you did not participate very well, this is what you're

21 saying, but, remember, we have not been seized of this case. However, at

22 the time, you were in charge of the police at Sapna?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [No interpretation]

24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So if the army captured

25 prisoners and if these prisoners went through Sapna, you had to see them;

Page 7183

1 yes or no?

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They did not bring them to the

3 police station premises at all, so those who were brought, they were

4 recorded, and I can talk about it. Everything else is just rumours.

5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. I wanted to know

6 the following: I want to know whether these people walked through the

7 streets, you know, guarded by soldiers of the ABiH.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't see them.

9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] But you do not deny the fact

10 that the army, with its prisoners, passed through the town?

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not denying that there were

12 prisoners, but I don't know what happened to them, what was done to them.

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

14 Mr. Seselj, to save time, I'm not talking to the accused but to

15 the counsel representing the accused. It happens to be the same person.

16 There are two events, which according to you and according to this study,

17 where Serbs were killed, and you even added that among the victims, there

18 were civilians. To your knowledge, were there any legal follow-ups after

19 these crimes? Did the competent judicial -- was the competent judicial

20 authority seized? Were there any trials, yes or no?

21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, these places are

22 still under Muslim control. They are part of the BH Federation, and to

23 my knowledge no investigations have ever been carried out and no one has

24 been prosecuted for the murder of Serbs in Rozanj and Rastosnica. You

25 know that only the Serb accused are tried before the Tribunal, and there

Page 7184

1 are just a couple of Croats, Muslims, or Albanians as a sort of

2 objectivity. And if you see who is acquitted or sentenced to mild

3 sentences, that's again Croats, Muslims and Albanians, while Serbs are

4 sentenced to very harsh sentences, up to life sentence. So this really

5 speaks nothing about that.

6 Q. Mr. Alic, do you know where Baljkovica is?

7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, I duly noted what

8 you have said, but the families of these victims may lodge a protest with

9 the competent authority. I believe that in Sarajevo, there is a court in

10 charge of this. Did they make a criminal complaint, was there a

11 follow-up; yes or no?

12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, you ask really incredible

13 questions. How should I know? I present the data obtained by this

14 centre, headed by Mr. Ivanisevic, and he publishes his information.

15 There are tens of thousands of testimonies by witnesses, victims,

16 victims' family members, and as for who will prosecute whom, this is

17 something that is really not my concern.

18 JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, you know that

19 regarding the path of personal jurisdiction, Belgrade could very well be

20 a competent authority, so if there are searches made, this could lead to

21 something. This could have an impact on procedures, and this is what we

22 are referring to.

23 Were there any protests lodged or criminal reports lodged by the

24 relatives of these missing persons in Belgrade?

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Madame Judge, Madame Judge, this

Page 7185

1 question should have been asked to the Prosecution. If anyone should

2 have this kind of information, it's them, not me. I never dealt with

3 those topics before I came here to The Hague, and the Prosecution should

4 know that. They should have an overview of all the crimes that happened

5 against Serbs, against Muslims, against Croats, against Albanians, and so

6 on. The Prosecution should have that, but their methods of selection are

7 obviously very strange. They work in mysterious ways.

8 JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] You have -- it's you who brought

9 the document where there is reference to this, so one could think that

10 there was additional information in this document. But this document is

11 just like any other. We will not take it into account, as such, but we

12 will only take into account the witnesses [as interpreted] given by the

13 witness.

14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, to supplement what

15 has just said and what my fellow Judge has just told you, you seem to put

16 the blame on the fact that there has been no prosecution on the

17 Prosecutor, himself. Maybe he did nothing. I don't know. I'm not in

18 his office, I don't discuss with him, so I don't know anything about

19 this. But if this Prosecutor here does nothing, if the prosecutor in

20 Sarajevo does nothing, and if the prosecutor in Belgrade does nothing

21 also, the families -- the relatives of these victims, as my fellow Judge

22 just said, or this person who is heading an association dealing with the

23 fate of Serbian victims, well, all these people can write to the

24 Prosecutor and ask for some proceedings to be engaged. This is what I'm

25 saying.

Page 7186

1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, all right. Since this is

2 being publicly broadcast, I think the victims will hear what you've just

3 said and see what they can do about it.

4 Mr. President, in Belgrade, quite by chance recently, one of the

5 killers was arrested of the column of 200 soldiers who were leaving

6 Tuzla, and I don't think the trial has started yet, but I think it is

7 being prepared in Belgrade. And the West -- there's a great outcry in

8 the West as to why Serbia's doing that, and there's a lot of pressure on

9 them to have him returned to -- returned. And the High Representative

10 Lajcak is even exerting pressure on Belgrade for this criminal to be set

11 free.

12 And now you're asking me about crimes in remote villages, for

13 these matters might not have come out at all had not Mr. Ivanisevic not

14 researched into them. So this is a crime against 200 soldiers who wanted

15 to leave Tuzla, and they were killed in an ambush, and just one man was

16 arrested because he was recognised as being a perpetrator.

17 Now, there's enormous pressure exerted on Belgrade for him to be

18 set free and returned to Tuzla.

19 Shall I continue?

20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please proceed.

21 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

22 Q. You omitted to tell me, Mr. Alic, whether you know where

23 Baljkovica is?

24 A. You didn't allow me to answer that. I said I knew.

25 Q. Well, the Judges didn't let you, not me.

Page 7187

1 A. Baljkovica and all these other places you mentioned earlier, I

2 say with full responsibility here that the Serbs did return to those

3 places, there was a return, and that they live there, and that your

4 informers, the people who informed you, can ask them best, because they

5 knew who did what.

6 Q. Mr. Alic, it doesn't say that you took part in the killing in

7 this village, just for the previous two. That's what the witness

8 statements say. But you must know what had gone on in those villages,

9 because you were the top-ranking police official in Sapna, so that's why

10 I'm asking you those questions.

11 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Your Honour, unless the

12 credibility of the witness -- I don't know why we have all these

13 questions about what's happening in this village in this case. If we're

14 dealing with the credibility of the witness, fine, the accused can ask

15 these questions, but it is becoming really tedious and repetitive. But I

16 really don't see the relevance here.

17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, these questions are

18 based on two themes, either credibility or relevance. As far as

19 relevance is concerned, this is not in the indictment, this is a backdrop

20 and it's not challenged. Fine. So are you asking all these questions in

21 order to test the credibility of this witness?

22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] They relate to both credibility of

23 the witness and relevance, to both, and I think that the members of the

24 Trial Chamber and the Prosecutor have informed this witness sufficiently

25 that he is believed on all counts and that I'm not believed at any time,

Page 7188

1 so there's no point in commenting on that further.

2 May I complete my cross-examination? And the witness seems to be

3 completely relaxed today, compared to the state he was in yesterday.

4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, the Trial Chamber

5 did not say that everything the witness is saying is true. Absolutely

6 not. You are asking questions, and the Prosecutor raised to his feet to

7 raise an objection. And I'm asking you the following question, because

8 the objection was saying that you should stop your question, so I was

9 asking you: What was the purpose of your question? You said,

10 "Credibility." And I said, "Please continue." So don't say I'm

11 preventing you from talking. I told you to proceed.

12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, all these villages

13 are in Zvornik Municipality, and it is my objective to show there were

14 not only crimes on the Serb side, there were crimes on the Muslim sides

15 as well, and that there was a bloody civil war going on in which many

16 crimes were perpetrated.

17 Now, the fact that The Hague Tribunal gives a false picture of

18 this to the world, that it was the Serbs who were the main criminals in

19 this war, that's something else, but I am showing that in all the

20 localities mentioned in my indictment - I did this with Vukovar and

21 Western Slavonia - that there were crimes on the other side, too, and

22 sometimes far more crimes on the other side rather than on the Serb side.

23 And we saw that with the example of Western Slavonia.

24 So that is the crux of the matter and that's my right, that's my

25 Defence case. So why are you interrupting me all the time? You warned

Page 7189

1 me at least once that I was objecting too much while the Prosecutor was

2 conducting his examination-in-chief. Now look at what's going on now,

3 and you've never issued that caution to the Prosecutor.

4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor, what's your

5 objection?

6 Before you take the floor, let me tell you that I am here in this

7 function as Judge to assess the evidence, procedural problems, all these

8 objections that seem to be a waste of time. All this seems to be

9 completely unreasonable. We must assess the credibility of a witness,

10 the relevance of what he is saying.

11 Now, any Prosecutor can raise to his feet to challenging the

12 Defence's case, just like the Defence can do exactly the same thing and

13 raise endless objections, but in doing so, instead of looking at the

14 merits of the case, you waste time -- we waste time in procedural

15 matters. Each and everyone wanted to put forth his own opinion and his

16 own point of view. We are here to render justice. It is not a

17 justice -- justice in itself, not the justice of either of the parties.

18 And all these procedural things are slowing things down. So you're going

19 to raise another objection, and I assume it will be on the tu quoque.

20 You have the floor.

21 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Yes, I fully understand what you

22 have said, Mr. President, but if I raise an objection, it is because

23 there is something to object to.

24 Paradoxically, my objection is trying to save time and not waste

25 time on matters. The tu quoque, I'm not going to go into details on

Page 7190

1 this, but we're not going to waste time on irrelevant issues. This is

2 why I made an objection. These questions are not relevant.

3 There's an armed conflict. What one party is doing doesn't

4 justify what the other party is doing, and we are wasting time here,

5 which is why I'm raising an objection. I believe we should move on to

6 something that is more relevant.

7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, to answer what you

8 told us, you said earlier that in this conflict, not only the Serbs were

9 involved, but the other parties also committed crimes. You said this.

10 You mentioned two examples, gave us the examples of two villages. Fine,

11 but please move on. You could list all the crimes which were committed

12 in Bosnia-Herzegovina and we could spend hours on this. So please try

13 and move forward.

14 Please continue with this witness and move on. This witness

15 could prove very useful to your case, possibly.

16 If you want this witness to confirm crimes were committed, fine,

17 I don't know, but ask him the question directly. And if he says, "Yes,

18 there were crimes," then you can move on to something else. But it's

19 always the same thing. You address a topic, the Prosecutor raises an

20 objection, the Chamber must rule on the objection, and then you take the

21 floor again, saying, "Look at this, the Trial Chamber and the Prosecution

22 are hand in hand." You keep repeating this over and over again, but this

23 is not true. This is not the way things work here.

24 The Prosecutor rose to his feet several times, and you noted,

25 through what he said and through what I said, that here we're trying to

Page 7191

1 save time. So please, Mr. Seselj, continue.

2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, it is correct that

3 the crimes of one side cannot be justified by the crimes of the other

4 side, because for each crime there is individual responsibility.

5 However, in addition to the fact that the principle of collective

6 responsibility for a crime has been introduced here, even national

7 responsible for crimes, as far as I'm concerned, it is important for me

8 to present, through the cross-examination, the general historical context

9 of it all, because when somebody is held responsible for the crimes of

10 one side, for example, if you have someone here who personally killed ten

11 people and you're trying him, it is important for you the context in

12 which he killed those people, the circumstances, whether some of his

13 relatives had been killed, or people around him had been killed, or

14 whether he killed just like that. That will -- the degree of criminal

15 responsibility depends on that.

16 So you can't prevent me from looking at the historical context of

17 Zvornik in this case, and I'm just limiting myself to Zvornik. It was

18 just a moment ago that I mentioned the killing of the 200 soldiers in

19 Tuzla on the 15th of May, after which the Zvornik crimes happened,

20 because almost all of them happened after the -- this date in May, the

21 15th of May, not before. So it was after the 15th of May that these

22 atrocious crimes begin, and it is obvious that one of the reasons for

23 those crimes being committed was the massacre of the column of soldiers

24 who wanted to leave Tuzla.

25 So please allow me to round this subject off. What can I do? I

Page 7192

1 have my Defence case and the concept of my Defence case, and I insist

2 upon it. I can't help it that time is running out.

3 Now, you say here that the two parties are equal in the

4 proceedings. In principle, that is true. The Defence and the

5 Prosecution are, in principle, equal. However, if the Trial Chamber has

6 to be biased and side with one party at a given moment, then it has to

7 side with the accused and not with the Prosecutor. I assume you know

8 that basic principle of law, and I'm just fighting here for the

9 possibility of presenting my Defence case. It might be the worst Defence

10 case and concept of a Defence case, but I know no better, so I'm doing my

11 best, to the best of my ability.

12 Now, the fact that the Trial Chamber and the Prosecution doesn't

13 like the way I have conceived my Defence case, what can I do about that?

14 Nothing. My Defence case is as I have conceived it, and I will bear the

15 consequences of my Defence, so nobody should instruct me to defend myself

16 in any way. Perhaps I'm doing it all wrong, but point a finger at any

17 lawyer in this Tribunal who is conducting a Defence case better than I am

18 conducting mine, and I will guarantee that you will find no such lawyer,

19 there is no such person that does it better than me.

20 May I be allowed to continue now, please, so that we can deal

21 with this document before the first break?

22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, you may proceed.

23 But in your explanation you gave us, an indication you could have told us

24 in the first place. You just said that by proving that crimes were

25 committed by the ABiH, this helps you lay the historical foundation to

Page 7193

1 your case. Very well, so please proceed.

2 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

3 Q. I hope you'll now be able to tell me, Mr. Alic, since you're so

4 relaxed, where Baljkovica is.

5 A. Well, I've already answered that question.

6 Q. Well I didn't hear the answer.

7 A. Well, you can't hear when you don't listen to anybody here.

8 Q. So you're criticising me now, just like the Judges are

9 criticising me and the Prosecutor, and now you are criticising me. So

10 when you see a group of people in the street, as a policeman, people

11 beating somebody who is innocent, instead of defending him, you get your

12 baton out and start beating him too?

13 A. Well, that's your observation, your conclusion.

14 Q. All right. Go on, tell me again, where is Baljkovica?

15 A. Baljkovica is on the territory of the present municipality of

16 Sapna.

17 Q. Did you know that on the 9th of May, 1992, the Muslim Army

18 attacked that village and killed 13 Serbs?

19 A. No, I don't.

20 Q. Do you know where Vitnica is?

21 A. Yes, I do.

22 Q. Do you know that on the 20th of June, 1992, the Muslim Army

23 attacked Vitnica and killed ten Serb civilians?

24 A. Well, the Muslim Army cannot have attacked Vitnica when Vitnica

25 is a village inhabited by Muslims. You don't assume they're going to

Page 7194

1 attack themselves.

2 Q. How many Serbs lived in that village?

3 A. Not a single one.

4 Q. Not a single one, after these ten had been killed?

5 A. Well, the Serbs never lived there.

6 Q. Well, how come they were killed, then, in that village?

7 A. Probably as the aggressors who attacked the village.

8 Q. So they were captured as aggressors and killed in the village?

9 A. I don't believe that that's how it was.

10 Q. There's just one thing that is certain, and it is this: They

11 weren't killed in combat?

12 A. There's one point that I'd like to make clear. The Serbs never

13 inhabited Vitnica.

14 Q. However, on the 20th of June, ten Serbs were killed there. Do

15 you know about that?

16 A. Perhaps in some attack on Vitnica.

17 Q. Who attacked Vitnica then?

18 A. The Serbs.

19 Q. The Serbs attacked?

20 A. Well, yes.

21 Q. Do you know where Kamenica is, Gornja Kamenica?

22 A. Yes, I do, Zvornik Municipality.

23 Q. Do you know that on the 24th of August, 1992, four Serb civilians

24 were killed there?

25 A. I don't know that.

Page 7195

1 Q. Do you know where Crni Vrh is?

2 A. I do.

3 Q. Do you know that on the 10th of September, 1992, the Muslim Army

4 organised an ambush, and they ambushed civilians, Serbs, in motor

5 vehicles and killed seven people?

6 A. I don't think that is the right information, because Crni Vrh was

7 always under Serb control and the Muslims couldn't have set up an ambush

8 there.

9 Q. Did the Muslims infiltrate a group there who killed civilians and

10 then fled?

11 A. I don't know about that.

12 Q. Do you know where Kocanje is?

13 A. What did you say?

14 Q. Kocanje?

15 A. [No verbal response]

16 Q. Do you know where Novo Selo is?

17 A. Yes, I do.

18 Q. Well it's mostly a Muslim village, isn't it?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Well Novo Selo has a hamlet, a Serb hamlet called Kocanje.

21 A. Quite possible.

22 Q. Do you know that on the 17th of September there, seven Serb

23 civilians were killed there?

24 A. I don't know.

25 Q. Do you know where Setici are?

Page 7196

1 A. No.

2 Q. Do you know that on the 8th of October, 1992, eight Serb

3 civilians were killed there, mostly women?

4 A. I do know where Setici are -- where Setici is, and I know from

5 that area a group of 700 or 800 Muslims were taken away by the Serbs, and

6 no trace of them was ever found, not their graves, nothing.

7 Q. Do you know that on the 8th of October Cvijeta Pantic was born

8 there, a woman born in 1910?

9 A. I don't know.

10 Q. Then we have Desa Pantic. She was born in 1924. Then we have

11 Bosika Lukic, born in 1927, then Ljubica Pantic, another woman born in

12 1946, and Sava Pantic, she was born in 1920. Do you know about that?

13 A. Well, I assume somebody entered the cemetery and picked up these

14 dates from the grave stones there, because you see, by those dates of

15 birth, it seems absurd.

16 Q. Are you ashamed of the fact that the Muslim Army killed these old

17 Serb women?

18 A. Well, if that were true, I would be ashamed.

19 Q. Well, I'm ashamed, too, Mr. Alic, whenever I hear that the Serbs

20 killed some Muslim civilians, for instance. And you, as the chief of

21 police, must know about this event, whereas you claim that you don't and

22 this is all invented?

23 A. The place you mentioned was under the control of the Army of

24 Republika Srpska, and it is still on the territory of Republika Srpska.

25 Q. On the 8th of October, did a Muslim group of soldiers storm the

Page 7197

1 place?

2 A. I really don't know when the army stormed anything or when it

3 launched operations, coordinated its work or anything like that. I

4 didn't take part in it.

5 Q. Well, Mr. Alic, you were aware of all the events in Zvornik

6 Municipality. It is impossible that you didn't know about what was going

7 on.

8 A. I thought that you were going to ask me questions about October

9 1991 until the 8th of April, 1992, that period of time when I worked in

10 Zvornik and lived in Zvornik, and when I had duties there. But you're

11 asking me something that I have absolutely nothing to do with.

12 Q. You were in Sapna, and Sapna was in Zvornik, too, until it was

13 proclaimed a separate municipality, which was after the war; isn't that

14 right?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Do you know where Malesici is located?

17 A. Yes, I do, I've heard of that.

18 Q. Have you heard that on the 8th of October, seven Serb locals were

19 killed there in 1992?

20 A. I didn't hear about that, and I doubt that that information is

21 correct.

22 Q. Do you know about Kamenica, Kamenica Donje?

23 A. I've heard about it.

24 Q. Do you know that on the 6th of November, at least 110 were killed

25 there, and there are estimates that that figure could go as high as 250?

Page 7198

1 They were killed with cold steel. These were prisoners. Only three of

2 the prisoners were killed with firearms. Do you know about that?

3 A. I don't.

4 Q. How can you not know when seven mass graves were exhumed on the

5 16th of February and the 15th of March, 1993?

6 A. Well, I haven't been following those events at all.

7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, the Registrar has

8 just told me that you've had two hours. Your time is up, therefore. If

9 you have one last question to put to the witness, put it to him, and then

10 we will have the break.

11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I have two and a

12 half hours at my disposal, just as much as the Prosecution had. Please

13 don't reduce my time.

14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, I've made a mistake. You

15 have two and a half hours, but I would like the Registrar to confirm

16 this. You have 30 minutes left.

17 We will have a 20-minute break and resume. The Registrar needs

18 to confirm this. You will have 30 minutes after that, and I hope there

19 will be no further objections, and I hope that we can run through these

20 30 minutes without any objections.

21 Thank you.

22 --- Recess taken at 10.02 a.m.

23 --- On resuming at 10.25 a.m.

24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, during the break

25 did you check whether Zuco was interviewed as a suspect?

Page 7199

1 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.

2 I believe my colleague, Mr. Dutertre, could answer that question.

3 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

4 I wanted to mention this, since we have resumed. The Tribunal

5 has not interviewed Mr. Zuco -- Vuckovic. There is no ICTY statement of

6 Vojin Vuckovic, but the Tribunal does have a series of documents,

7 interviews and transcripts provided by the person in question to the

8 local authorities. Some of these documents have been disclosed. Others

9 have not. I am still conducting my search to see whether we have a

10 comprehensive list.

11 As things stand today, those documents that have not been

12 disclosed yet will be disclosed very soon.

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, the Prosecutor has

14 just told us that there has been no interview as a suspect of the person

15 in question, but the Prosecution does have documents that have been

16 provided by other legal authorities, other than the Tribunal. Some of

17 these have been disclosed to you. Others have not been disclosed to you.

18 They are currently drawing up a list, and this will be disclosed to you

19 as soon as possible.

20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the Prosecution has

21 disclosed to me Vojin Vuckovic, Zuco's, evidence at the Belgrade trial,

22 where he testified in open session as the commander of the unit that

23 comprised some of the accused.

24 The Prosecution has also disclosed several documents related to

25 the Sabac trial of Vojin Vuckovic, Zuco, and Dusan Vuckovic, aka, Repic,

Page 7200

1 his brother. But if you look at the statement that Vojin Vuckovic gave

2 yesterday, it says in the third paragraph:

3 "The truth about my arrest, the arrest of my brother, Dusan, and

4 Miroslav Bogdanovic and Semic Ulemek ..." It should read "Cema." That's

5 Ulemek's first nickname. He was nicknamed "Legija" later on. I

6 presented this truth on several occasions to the District Court in Sabac

7 in 1993, the representatives of the OTP in Belgrade, in the presence of

8 Defence counsel Dragoljub Djordjevic. So he says this lawyer was

9 present. And then the Special Department for War Crimes of the District

10 Court in Belgrade, the investigating judge for war crimes, Olimpic

11 [phoen], and as a witness at the trial of the so-called Zvornik group in

12 2006 before the Trial Chamber with Judge Tatjana Vukovic presiding. I

13 only received the last testimony and some documents relating to the Sabac

14 trial.

15 This interview with the representatives of the OTP, I don't know

16 what the status of Mr. Vuckovic was, whether he was a witness or a

17 suspect. That's not what I received, and I did not receive his statement

18 given to the Investigating Judge. This has never been disclosed to me,

19 and you can see that I did not receive the statement that Mr. Alic gave

20 to the investigating judge in Sarajevo before his testimony at the

21 Belgrade trial, and this would have been of interest to me, because the

22 transcript of Mr. Alic's testimony in Belgrade shows that his statement

23 to the investigating judge in Sarajevo was much more comprehensive than

24 what he said in Belgrade in answer to the questions that were asked.

25 That's what you can see from the transcript.

Page 7201

1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In the list provided by the

2 Prosecution, make sure that you give as many documents as possible to

3 Mr. Seselj.

4 But there's one question you haven't answered. It seems that in

5 1993, in Belgrade, on the premises of the Belgrade tribunal, in the

6 presence of a lawyer, the lawyer of the person in question, the OTP did

7 have an interview, so this raises a question: Were there any notes? Is

8 there an interview off the record, is there a record of this interview

9 anywhere? And what was the status of this interview, please?

10 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Your Honour, as far as I know, we

11 have not put -- questioned this person. In light of the new information

12 provided by Mr. Seselj, I can conduct further researches. To the best of

13 my knowledge today, I can say that I am not aware of an interview having

14 been conducted by someone of this Tribunal.

15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, one other point.

16 You told us before the break that by putting your questions to

17 the witness, you wanted to highlight the fact that crimes had been

18 committed by people other than Serbs, and that this was part of your

19 defence. The Trial Chamber would like to tell you, as regards this

20 particular point, i.e., tu quoque, the elements that are part of the tu

21 quoque are not assessed in terms of your responsibility. It's not

22 because crimes were committed by others that you are exonerated from your

23 own responsibility. This is what has been ruled by the Appeals Chamber,

24 and this is -- remains constant. I would like to remind you of this.

25 Personally, I feel that to shed some light on events which

Page 7202

1 unfolded in a chronological order, you can, by way of information, put

2 questions to the witness to highlight some factors which could explain

3 people's behaviour, which could explain certain situations, and the

4 aftermath to certain events. This is a possibility you have. This is,

5 nonetheless, not tu quoque. You must make a distinction between tu

6 quoque, which is a procedure likely to exonerate someone from his or her

7 responsibility, from the information provided to a Chamber on

8 circumstantial evidence, military, political situations, situations in

9 the police, in the command of the army, and on the basis of these

10 elements we can forge an opinion.

11 Mr. Seselj, however, if, with the remaining time you have left,

12 you only want to do tu quoque, then it's at your own risk, because you

13 are then wasting time.

14 In its discretion, the Trial Chamber can shorten the

15 cross-examination of a witness if it feels that it is not relevant and if

16 it feels that it is wasting time. I'm telling you this because I would

17 like to understand what it is you want to demonstrate to us. I think it

18 would be wise for you to give us some information beforehand. This would

19 mean that the Prosecution would not get to his feet all the time. So it

20 might be a good idea if you could tell us beforehand, "With such-and-such

21 a witness, I will address such-and-such a factor and I will emphasise

22 such-and-such an element," and then maybe we will be able to better

23 understand your strategy.

24 Mr. Dutertre.

25 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Could Mr. Seselj be kind enough to

Page 7203

1 tell me when, in 1993, an ICTY investigator was present, since the ICTY

2 was created in mid-1993. This means I could streamline my research.

3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, if you have any

4 information about this meeting which took place in Belgrade between the

5 OTP and Zuco, could you give us the date, unless you don't know the date,

6 which is perfectly understandable, of course.

7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, there is no date for

8 this interview, just information that this was done in the presence of a

9 lawyer, Dragoljub Djordjevic. And you mentioned -- and you made a

10 mistake when you mentioned 1993, because the 1993, that's the year when

11 the trial before the District Court in Sabac took place, and that's what

12 it says in the document. And now the Prosecutor is sticking to this

13 date, 1993.

14 I think that the best thing to do, because there have been so

15 many problems about statements that have not been disclosed to me, for

16 instance, the statement by General Zivota Panic and

17 Aleksandar Vasiljevic, I think that the best course of action would be

18 for the Prosecution to provide me with a list of all the statements it

19 took from persons in the capacity of suspects and from all persons who

20 were interviewed as potential witnesses, and then I could go through all

21 those names and their basic personal details and decide what might have

22 something to do with the indictment issued against me and what might not.

23 I think that would be a good solution, but I'm not optimistic enough to

24 expect that this would, in fact, happen.

25 Regarding this caution that you've just given me, I am prepared

Page 7204

1 to -- everything, I'm prepared that you would not only reduce my time for

2 cross-examination, but that you would prevent me from cross-examining at

3 all. You are asking me to indicate what my cross-examination would be

4 based on, and why is it that nobody explains to me, the Prosecution or

5 the Judges, this is the 20th witness to appear here, what has the

6 Prosecution managed to gain, to corroborate, the charges in the

7 indictment through the testimony of the 20 witnesses? Perhaps I am the

8 stupidest person here because I don't see it, but I fail to see what the

9 Prosecution has proven about my guilt. And we have heard 20 witnesses

10 here. Where is my guilt? You are attacking me because of my Defence

11 case, and I'm completely relaxed because I can see any -- I cannot see

12 any shred of guilt that has been proven through the testimony of all

13 those witnesses. And now it is my fault that I'm wasting time. I'm

14 wasting only the time that you have given me, and I am entitled to decide

15 how I want to spend this time, whether I should devote it to challenge

16 the credibility of the witness, or casting a light on relevant events, or

17 on explaining the historical context. I have full freedom to decide on

18 that, and I don't have to explain to anyone why it is that I decided

19 this.

20 Historical context is important for each and every trial. The

21 fact that I am not exonerated from my guilt by the fact that other people

22 committed crimes, this is not relevant for me, because I can't see what

23 is the crime that I committed so that I could say, "Oh, well, somebody

24 else did that, and you can see he got away with it, and I am here."

25 Perhaps you are aware of that, but I am not, and that is why my Defence

Page 7205

1 case is as it is.

2 If you want to take my time away from me, that's up to you. You

3 cannot spring any surprises on me. I've been through lots of things in

4 these six years, and nothing can surprise me.

5 And I am not tense in any way. I am prepared for every option.

6 And to tell you the truth, the best thing for me would be the worst

7 option. That's the one that I'm really ready to tackle.

8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Nobody wishes to take your time

9 away from you. You have the same time as the Prosecution. That is not

10 the issue, but the Trial Chamber is here to make sure that the rights of

11 the Defence are respected. And we could actually point out to you a

12 Defence strategy that may seem suicidal. If you do tu quoque all the

13 time, this will have no impact whatsoever on the facts to be considered

14 by the Bench. This is what I wanted to tell you.

15 As far as the historical context is concerned, of course you can

16 highlight this, but don't spend the best part of your time discussing the

17 historical context, since we have been seized of the indictment, with

18 paragraph 6 of the indictment with joint criminal enterprise, and the

19 list of crimes and your responsibility therein listed in paragraphs 7, 8

20 and 9 of the indictment, and paragraph 10 also; i.e., the way in which

21 you participated in the joint criminal enterprise in a number of acts.

22 So you could purposefully reread these paragraphs. Contrary to

23 what you may believe, and this is something which I wanted to tell you, I

24 was waiting for the right time and now I have an opportunity to discuss

25 this with you now, as far as the Yellow Wasps are concerned and the

Page 7206

1 volunteers of the SRS, of course, if it is established that those people

2 who committed the crimes were not people whom you sent out in the field

3 to commit these crimes, this may be a problem. But as far as -- or in

4 terms of the case law of this Tribunal and the submissions of the

5 Prosecutor, you are held liable for the crimes, including the crimes

6 committed by the Yellow Wasps and the White Bees, who were not under your

7 control. This is how one can read the indictment.

8 So I beseech you to reread these paragraphs of the indictment so

9 that you do not omit this.

10 You have 30 minutes left to cross-examine this witness. You have

11 the floor.

12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, as far as I'm

13 concerned, I would not be surprised if I were to be charged with the

14 murder of John Kennedy. Well, they could put that in the indictment with

15 the same arguments that they used for all the other charges.

16 I am not concerned about the joint criminal enterprise charges,

17 because it's always the Serbs who are responsible for that. Serbs are

18 criminals because they oppose the world powers, the European Union, Great

19 Britain, the United States. That's why we're criminals. And we oppose

20 them because we stand for universal justice, and might is in the hands of

21 injustice. This Tribunal is in the hands of injustice, and that is my

22 approach to this trial.

23 As my own Defence counsel, I am entitled to have a specific

24 philosophical approach to my Defence. There is no need for me to be

25 cautioned by you, because I understand everything. I am completely aware

Page 7207

1 about the background of this trial, and I can't see why you keep

2 expressing your dissatisfaction with the way that I'm proceeding with my

3 Defence case. It's no skin off your teeth. I decided what is the best

4 way to do it, and I am sticking by my concept, and I'm quite successful,

5 I have been successful so far. I tore down practically all of the

6 witnesses, I razed them to the ground, including three major experts. If

7 you think that I haven't been successful, well, you can deliver the

8 judgement. You can just mail the judgement to me, I don't have to come

9 here, because this is really -- I'm being really mistreated during the

10 transportation.

11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, your statement of

12 principle which you have just exposed to us is nothing new. You have

13 already mentioned this, so just please resume your cross-examination.

14 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

15 Q. Mr. Alic, you were shown this document yesterday. That's the

16 statement by Vojin Vuckovic, aka Zuco. So to save some time, let us move

17 on to paragraph 4 in the statement. In the first paragraph, he presents

18 his personal details. In the second, he gives the general view of your

19 testimony. We talked about it yesterday. I hope that I managed to use

20 the third paragraph -- that I discussed it with the Prosecution and the

21 Judges, not wasting my time.

22 In paragraph 4, he says:

23 "Claims that Asim Alic made on several occasions that he

24 questioned four capture Serbs until late in the afternoon, I being one of

25 them, are notorious lies, because all the interrogations ended by 8.15

Page 7208

1 a.m., and after that we were subjected to horrible torture and physical

2 abuse, injuries that were inflicted on us were visible with the naked

3 eye, and they were inflicted by rifle-butts."

4 Is what Mr. Vuckovic is saying true?

5 A. No, it's not.

6 Q. Well, Mr. Alic, Mr. Vuckovic says here -- well, I'm referring to

7 both you, using the title "Mr." As a courtesy. The fourth man listed

8 here, he identifies him as Miroslav Bogdanovic. In your statements of

9 1996 and 1997, you spoke about Stojanovic, and then at your testimony at

10 the Belgrade trial, you mention Zvezdan Jovanovic, and here again in your

11 examination-in-chief, you said the fourth one was Zvezdan Jovanovic, and

12 you knew full well that this was a man who was accused of murdering

13 Djindjic. I think this was a false accusation. Had it been the case, he

14 would hold the same place in the Hall of Fame of the Serb people as

15 Gavrilo Princip. But I wanted to ask you, why did you use the name

16 Zvezdan Jovanovic, for what purpose?

17 A. First of all, I would like to ask you, is this the man that we

18 were talking about yesterday, one of the Vuckovic brothers that you said

19 was a psychopath, mentally deranged? Is that the one you're talking

20 about?

21 Q. Well, you, Mr. Alic, should know about that. Let's not play like

22 little kids. The guy who was a psychopath, he hanged himself in prison.

23 This Vojin Vuckovic, aka, Zuco, the commander of the volunteer

24 detachment, Igor Markovic, which was part of the Zvornik Territorial

25 Defence, and that unit was later renamed Yellow Wasps. At first it was

Page 7209

1 part of the Territorial Defence, and then it became a renegade unit. You

2 know that full well.

3 A. Whose Territorial Defence?

4 Q. The Territorial Defence of the Serb municipality of Zvornik?

5 A. Well, how could they be in the Serb municipality of Zvornik when

6 they came from Serbia and the surrounding parts of Belgrade?

7 Q. Well, that's easy. They relocate to Zvornik, and there you have

8 it. And you saw yesterday a document from the Serb police, that it was

9 in fact a unit that rallied 80 locals from Zvornik and just 20 from

10 Serbia. That's a document dating to 1992. But don't ask questions of

11 me, you answer my questions, and my question is: Why did you use the

12 name of Zvezdan Jovanovic?

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, avoid putting

14 questions to the accused, please, because it is for the accused to put

15 questions to you. This is part of the cross-examination.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well, thank you. Yes.

17 On that day when we had people arrested in the police station,

18 from their ID cards, the ones they had on them -- well, that's what it

19 said in their ID cards. I could not, with certainty, remember all the

20 names, but judging by the descriptions given by the citizens who were in

21 the camps, who were in the camps, as I said, I came to the conclusion

22 that it was those people, because that's how they called them -- or,

23 rather, they called each other -- they addressed each other that way.

24 Q. Mr. Alic, not a single victim witness mentions anyone by the name

25 of Zvezdan.

Page 7210

1 A. You didn't talk to the victims. I took statements from the

2 victims.

3 Q. But many of those statements have been disclosed to me here, and

4 Zvezdan is mentioned nowhere. So you invented the mention of Zvezdan?

5 A. Many of those statements are to be found in the Cantonal

6 Prosecutor's Office at Tuzla.

7 Q. Well, I assume the OTP should have disclosed that to us on time

8 so we could see how Mr. Alic invented that.

9 I'm now going to read a more lengthy paragraph, where

10 Mr. Vuckovic goes on to explain the situation over the arrest of these

11 four men, and he says:

12 "We were arrested in the night between the 7th and 8th of April,

13 1992, at 1.00 a.m. at the entrance to Zvornik by a hamlet called Mekarica

14 [phoen]. We were stopped there by a group of some 20 Muslims, without

15 any markings or insignia, with no uniforms, armed with automatic weapons

16 of Hungarian manufacture, so-called Kalashnikovs. In that group, there

17 was Zvornik criminals organised by Asim Alic, and they were

18 Siman Karamaric [phoen] and the brothers Mustafa and Benjamin Halilovic.

19 We were then tied up and taken at knife-point to the fire brigade in

20 Zvornik, where the Crisis Staff was located for the Party of Democratic

21 Action, which was controlled by Asim Alic, with members of the OUP, that

22 is to say, the police, which was made up of Muslims exclusively. Between

23 2.30 hours and 4.15 hours, we were at the fire brigade building when

24 Asim Alic arrived and took us prisoners off to the police station in

25 Zvornik. In the morning hours, somewhere at around 7.00 a.m., from the

Page 7211

1 discussion between Asim Alic and Fadil Mujic, we heard their

2 conversation. In front of the police station, there were over --"

3 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] I'd actually like to know what the

4 question is. There's so many questions, if the question comes at the

5 end, it will obviously be a compounded question.

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, Mr. Seselj will put a

7 question after having read what Zuco tells about the circumstances in

8 which he was arrested and detained, so let him finish reading the

9 paragraph, since we don't have a translation of this document.

10 Please continue, Mr. Seselj.

11 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation] "In front of the station, there were

12 over 300 Muslims extremists who demanded the leadership of MUP to take us

13 outside so that they could drink the blood of young Serbs. Then

14 Fadil Mujic took over responsibility for us prisoners and took us to his

15 office on the second floor. He took the handcuffs off us, locked the

16 door, and said, 'Don't make any trouble for me. I'll do everything in my

17 power to prevent the worst from happening and to see that you're returned

18 home and that no blood is shed, as many of those present in the police

19 station would like to see. I'll try and effect an exchange.'

20 Fadil Mujic was the only man who came to visit us during the conflict on

21 the 8th of April 1992. At around 1830 hours, he took us out of the

22 police station in Zvornik, towards Divic, and handed us over to the

23 border units of the JNA Army at the hydro electric power plant at

24 Mali Zvornik. He was assisted by Mustafa Zekic, and I, to pay him back,

25 put his family up in my house at Umka, where he stayed until the end of

Page 7212

1 the war. Mustafa Zakic is a driving instructor in Austria, and I have

2 contact with him over the phone."

3 Do you know Mustafa Zakic.

4 A. Yes, I do.

5 Q. Is what Mr. Vuckovic says here true?

6 A. That is not true.

7 Q. None of it?

8 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] [Previous translation continues]

9 ... compound question. There's so many information in this question,

10 I've already said this earlier, it's totally impossible to ask a question

11 in such a fashion, read a paragraph for five minutes and then say whether

12 it's the truth. You have to refer to the first sentence, second

13 sentence, third sentence. This is not an appropriate way of asking

14 questions.

15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

16 Mr. Seselj, you have heard the objection raised by the

17 Prosecutor. I don't personally share his opinion, with a witness who is

18 not here and who made this statement, this document. So please try and

19 put short questions in order to highlight what you would want to

20 highlight for your case.

21 We talked about Mustafa Jakic, so please proceed. Otherwise, the

22 Prosecutor will say there were so many elements in your question that we

23 will not know where to start. So please proceed step by step.

24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I am conscious of the fact that it

25 is the Prosecution's aim for me to lose as much time as possible and not

Page 7213

1 to be able to complete an analysis of Mr. Vuckovic's statement, so I give

2 up on the previous question and am going to move on.

3 Q. Mr. Alic, do you know where the village of Rastosnica is located?

4 A. Yes, I do.

5 Q. It's in the area of the Zvornik Municipality; isn't that right?

6 A. Yes, and I answered that in my previous answer.

7 Q. Do you know a man by the name of Milan Petrovic, who was a

8 tradesman in Rastosnica?

9 A. Was his nickname Pusula?

10 Q. Yes.

11 A. Then I've heard of him.

12 Q. Did you know he was trafficking in weapons?

13 A. I heard about that.

14 Q. Did you hear that he was selling weapons to both the Serbs and

15 the Muslims?

16 A. Yes, I did hear about that.

17 Q. Do you know what the price of a Kalashnikov was, how much he was

18 selling Kalashnikovs for?

19 A. I don't want to make guesses.

20 Q. Shall I remind you? Was it around 500 Deutsche marks or more

21 expensive than that?

22 A. I think it was more expensive.

23 Q. Around a thousand marks, would you say?

24 A. Thereabouts, even more.

25 Q. More; right. Now, it's very important for me that you were able

Page 7214

1 to identify that man and say you knew him. Now we'll see from the next

2 paragraph on page 2 what Dusan Vuckovic says about the reasons for their

3 arrival in Zvornik:

4 "I, my brother, Dusan Vuckovic, Miroslav Bogdanovic and

5 Semic Ulemek," and it should say "Cema Ulemek there," that was Ulemek's

6 nickname at the time, "Came into Zvornik at our own initiative on the 4th

7 of April 1992 in order to take -- because of the investigation that

8 Bogdanovic and Semic were conducting because of weapons sales,

9 long-barrel and short-barrel rifles conducted by self-appointed colonel

10 Pusula from a place called Rastosnica, near Zvornik, both with the Serbs

11 and with the Muslims. We announced our arrival for the 7th of April,

12 1992, and the leadership of the SDS, and they were supposed to tell us

13 where Pusula was located. I arrived in Zvornik as personal security

14 detail for Miroslav Bogdanovic, who worked for the Military Security

15 Service, and my brother was with us just by chance."

16 Now, my question for you is this: Did you know that this man,

17 Pusula, was a self-appointed colonel?

18 A. No, I didn't know that.

19 Q. Did you know that he had a group of armed people as an escort,

20 that he moved around with this group of people?

21 A. I did know that he engaged in trafficking. He had his own buses

22 driving from Belgrade to Zvornik.

23 Q. Now, I reminded you of the fact that Fadil Mujic, in the Belgrade

24 trial, said, and we have this in the transcript, that he -- that Colonel

25 Boskovic personally from Belgrade intervened because of these four men

Page 7215

1 who had been arrested. Do you remember that?

2 A. I don't know. Fadil said that, so he is the one who can confirm

3 it.

4 Q. Well, I hope we are going to hear Fadil Mujic in the courtroom as

5 well in due course. Now, does this coincide with what Mr. Vuckovic says,

6 and does it coincide with what we heard from Fadil Mujic?

7 A. No, it doesn't coincide, because Vuckovic -- well, I'm thinking

8 along these lines: I don't think they were authorised or capacitated to

9 conduct any investigations in the territory of another state, where the

10 official police force was in existence, a legal police force. I think

11 that's absurd.

12 Q. Well, is it obvious to you that the Military Security Service

13 here had no other way of getting to self-appointed Colonel Pusula,

14 because we're dealing with the first days of April here? Was there

15 anyone else who could have arrested him there?

16 A. Since Pusula was a civilian, it came under our authority and we

17 should have done that, if that's how it was.

18 Q. Well, why, when you learned that Pusula was trafficking in

19 weapons, did you not arrest him straight away?

20 A. He wasn't at his residence.

21 Q. He was at his village all the time, but it didn't enter your mind

22 to entering that village because you were afraid of entering that

23 village; is that right?

24 A. We were afraid of no one.

25 Q. Well, why did you flee, then, on the 8th of April, why did you

Page 7216

1 take to your legs so fast?

2 A. Because we were shelled with grenades, we were shelled, and there

3 were tanks.

4 Q. But this man says that nobody -- that the -- there were certain

5 targets, but there were no victims as a result of the firing?

6 A. I don't know what Mr. Mujic said, and I don't want to comment on

7 his statements.

8 Q. Is all right. Mr. Vuckovic goes on to say in paragraph 2 on

9 page 2 the following; that you lied when you claimed that he had long

10 hair. He always had short hair and a receding hairline, and he said:

11 "He recognised me in a lineup under number 8, and on it you can

12 see that my hair is short."

13 So Zuco claims he never had long hair, whereas in

14 examination-in-chief you said he had long hair, too?

15 A. That's what he looked like at the time. He could have cut his

16 hair the very next day, couldn't he, and then it would have been

17 different.

18 Q. How could he have cut his hair when he was in your hands?

19 A. Well, on the 8th of April, towards -- in the afternoon, he was

20 under our control, but already in the evening he was in Serbia.

21 Q. All right, I see. Let's move on to paragraph 3. Mr. Vuckovic

22 says as follows:

23 "As far as the identification cards are concerned which were

24 allegedly found on us, the truth of the matter is that I had an ID card

25 of the Serbian Chetnik Movement issued on the 12th of June, 1991, for

Page 7217

1 that year."

2 And he reminded me of something here that I had forgotten. When

3 the Serbian Chetnik Movement existed and the ID was issued only within

4 1991, they were ID cards issued for only one year, and, Judges, from the

5 piece of evidence that the Prosecutor supplied, with the list of the ID

6 cards, it said for the year, and the year entered there was "1991," as

7 far as I remember. So the IDs of the Serbian Chetnik Movement were

8 issued for just one year, they were valid for just one year.

9 And then he goes on to say the following:

10 "I left the Serbian Chetnik Movement officially on the 3rd of

11 September, 1991. The other card that Alic mentions is one that I

12 received from Zjelko Raznjatovic, Arkan, in October 1991, when I handed

13 over the family weapons belonging to Mirko Livadinovic from the Serbian

14 Volunteer guard who was killed in Rostovo, and it related to fuel taken

15 at his petrol pump in Belgrade."

16 Do you remember any ID card on the -- or, rather, any card on the

17 basis of which you could tank up with fuel at Arkan's petrol pump in

18 Belgrade?

19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor.

20 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the text is being

21 read paragraph by paragraph. Afterward, whether this is tendered into

22 evidence or not, it will end up being in the -- on the record, it will be

23 in the file, because it will be on the transcript. I believe that

24 Rules 92 ter, 92 quater and 92 bis are bypassed here, because he is

25 reading everything. In the Rule, there are a number of conditions, a

Page 7218

1 number of criteria, that are not met here.

2 Mr. Seselj is doing exactly the same as he was doing yesterday,

3 he is reading verbatim documents, and normally there are specific rules

4 to tender these documents. He's not asking formally for these documents

5 to be tendered into evidence, but they end up being on the transcript.

6 And because of that, they end up being on the record and in evidence.

7 This is why I object.

8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. It's on the

9 transcript.

10 Mr. Seselj, I'm sure that you have taken due note of what the

11 Prosecutor has said. Would you like to answer?

12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I think this is intentionally

13 time being wasted by the Prosecutor, because, Judge, on several occasions

14 you said that you were interested in the -- in hearing the answers of the

15 witness to my questions. Now, what I'm going to base my questions on,

16 well, I have to base them on something every time, or I'll say, "Somebody

17 told me or somebody phoned me up and said ... ," or I'm going to show a

18 document, a piece of paper. This is a bit more convincing rather than me

19 saying to Mr. Alic, "I heard such-and-such had taken place." At least

20 I think so.

21 Now, you can do what you will. I have to ask questions based on

22 something, because the witness has the advantage. He was a participant

23 in all the events, whereas I was far away from these events. So how can

24 I tackle the problem unless I talk to people and gather information?

25 And the Prosecutor is intentionally wasting time.

Page 7219

1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Proceed.

2 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

3 Q. Furthermore, Mr. Vuckovic goes on to say the following:

4 "I wish to stress that I was never a member of the Serbian

5 Radical Party."

6 And if I tell you that nowhere in the records of the Serbian

7 Radical Party will you find the name of Mr. Vuckovic, this particular

8 Dusan Vuckovic with this CV, what can you say to that, Mr. Alic, what do

9 you have to say to that?

10 A. I don't keep your records and the records of your membership.

11 This person said himself that he had an ID and confirmed what I asserted,

12 the ID of the Serbian Chetnik Movement.

13 Q. Well, I didn't challenge that, either. He probably had that. He

14 could have had it.

15 Now, he goes on to say here of what parties he was a member after

16 1998, and not to make those parties angry and it's not relevant, I won't

17 mention them. But he goes on to say:

18 "I put forward this information because I wish to explain that

19 Professor Dr. Vojislav Seselj had no points in common with the unit that

20 I was in command of, nor did that unit have anything at all to do with

21 the Serbian Chetnik Movement or the Serbian Radical Party."

22 What do you think about that?

23 A. I have no comment to make there.

24 Q. Very well. Now, he mentions the killing of Serbian taxi driver

25 that you mention in your statement as well. You say there that it was

Page 7220

1 never established who killed this Serbian taxi driver, isn't that right,

2 and the Serbs claim that he was killed by a Muslim, by Muslims, and the

3 Muslims claim that it was the Serbs who killed him, to throw the onus on

4 the Muslims, and the taxi driver's throat was slit; is that right?

5 A. That's what my information says.

6 Q. Now, Mr. Vuckovic goes on to say the brutal killing of the taxi

7 driver, whose name was Sasa, the Muslims recorded on videotape because

8 they had to substantiate their loyalty to the Muslim authorities in that

9 way:

10 "Asim Alic was duty-bound to send on the tape to the Federal

11 Ministry of the Interior."

12 Now, did you ever have that tape in your hands, Mr. Alic?

13 A. No. This event had already happened before I moved from Belgrade

14 to Zvornik, to work in Zvornik.

15 Q. I'm not accusing you of -- I'm not accusing you of you having

16 killed anyone or having persuaded anyone to kill anyone, but have you

17 heard of the existence of that tape?

18 A. No, never. Now, who could at that time have recorded all this on

19 videotape without being identified?

20 Q. Now he goes on to speak about the killing of the JNA warrant

21 officer in Sapna and the investigation conducted by the JNA investigative

22 authorities, and I don't want to dwell on that, but just to say that he

23 claims that all the information is today to be found in the Military

24 Security archives and that the documents have not been destroyed.

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

Page 7221

1 Earlier, you addressed the issue of the ID cards, and then you

2 moved on to something else, but this is extremely important as far as the

3 credibility of this witness is concerned.

4 Witness, let's go back a little. We have a witness of a person

5 that is not here in front of us, but who made a formal statement, a

6 written statement. I asked Mr. Seselj yesterday whether, by law, when

7 you make a formal written statement, you could be prosecuted for false

8 testimony, yes, and the one who is using it could be charged with being

9 an accomplice also. But this being said, the outcome of what Mr. Seselj

10 read and to which Mr. Prosecutor objected, that this person was arrested

11 under a number of conditions, and that this person had two IDs. The

12 first ID card was for the Chetnik Movement and had been delivered in

13 1991, issued in 1991. Mr. Seselj highlighted that there are years

14 mentioned in these -- on these cards. Zvornik happened in 1992, so

15 theoretically you should have had a card by the Chetnik Movement dated

16 1992. The Serbian Radical Party happened to have been created on

17 February 23rd, 1991, and because of this, he could have had a card also

18 from the Serbian Radical Party. But the problem, what you're saying, is

19 that according to Mr. Seselj, this person was not a member of the Serbian

20 Radical Party. They had to check the lists.

21 Furthermore, the second ID card, as it exists and as is not

22 contested by Zuco, is an ID card that was handed over and issued by

23 Arkan, which has nothing to do with the ID card of the Serbian Radical

24 Party, unless Arkan would be an agent of the Serbian Radical Party. It

25 seems that there is something that does not -- that doesn't correspond to

Page 7222

1 the written statement that we have, the written statement of this Zuco

2 witness who testified in writing. Maybe he's lying, I don't know, but

3 this is one element, and I must assess this element. I can't just set it

4 aside and say it's of no interest. This would not be professional. As a

5 professional judge, I must assess all the elements and all the elements

6 that are brought up during the cross-examination.

7 To sum up, the witness says there are two ID cards, one from the

8 Chetnik Movement and the second one is a card that was issued by Arkan.

9 Secondly, the Serbian Radical Party, according to its president, who is

10 here with us in this courtroom, says that this person was not a member of

11 the Serbian Radical Party at the time.

12 Are you absolutely, 100 per cent sure of having seen a card of

13 the Serbian Radical Party in the hands of these people that you arrested?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do not expect this gentleman to

15 tell the truth. It is in his interests to lie. It is not in my

16 interests to lie. I have come here. I was summoned by you to tell the

17 truth, and nothing else. What I have said, I'm still maintaining. I

18 still stick by what I have said.

19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

20 Let's proceed with the cross-examination.

21 Mr. Dutertre.

22 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] I believe that in the meantime, we

23 have received the translation in French and English of the passage that

24 you asked to be translated yesterday. I don't know if you want to go

25 into this. I just obtained this translation.

Page 7223

1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Please proceed,

2 and, Mr. Registrar, I'd like to know how much time Mr. Seselj has. I

3 believe time is almost up.

4 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You have ten minutes left,

6 Mr. Seselj.

7 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

8 Q. Mr. Alic, you say that it is not in your interests to lie, but on

9 the 10th of May, 2006, when you testified in Belgrade, you were caught in

10 a lie at page 41 and page 42 of the transcript, and you refused to answer

11 the questions that pertained to the contradictions. Do you recall that?

12 A. I was instructed there that I need not respond to questions that

13 I was not sure about or any questions that might incriminate me or

14 discredit me.

15 Q. Well, fine, Mr. Alic. I'm not going to ask you any questions

16 that might discredit you or compromise you.

17 A. You can't do that, anyway.

18 Q. Well, I think you're mistaken there, but I have also testimony

19 from Dusan Vuckovic, Zuco, at the Belgrade trial, the 16th of December.

20 This was disclosed to me by the Prosecution. At page 5 and at page 7 of

21 transcripts of his testimony, he again mentions Colonel Nedzo Boskovic as

22 he was then, and the task to capture Busal [phoen] and the fact that

23 Nedzo Boskovic intervened by phone called the Zvornik police station to

24 secure the release of the four arrested persons.

25 The Prosecution can check that at pages 5 and 7 of the Belgrade

Page 7224

1 transcripts, since I'm running out of time.

2 Mr. Vuckovic goes on to say, about how the video recording that

3 we watched here was made up, but I'm not going to go into that.

4 I would like to move on to document number 6. That's a statement

5 by Colonel Radomir Tacic. He says here that he followed the -- my trial

6 and that he was outraged by the lies presented by Witness Asim Alic, and

7 that he wanted to clear up some things about areas where my name was

8 mentioned. You can see that Colonel Tacic says:

9 "I claim --"

10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor.

11 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Your Honour, obviously here the

12 accused is just reading documents without putting any questions, and this

13 is not acceptable.

14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor, on several

15 occasions I explained things to you, but I think you find it hard to

16 understand. In order to ask questions, he must first lay the foundations

17 for the questions. Some statements are handed to him. Colonel Tacic,

18 who we already mentioned yesterday. I note that this trial is closely

19 monitored, because we have spontaneous witnesses that spring up and make

20 spontaneous statements, just like this colonel who has just sent a

21 document to the Defence. I do not know what is included in this document

22 because it's written in Serbian. So in order to try and understand the

23 document, we have to have the passages read to us. So he must absolutely

24 read those passages and put the question. He can't ask the question

25 without us knowing what the contents of this document is. Just put

Page 7225

1 yourself in our shoes.

2 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] I'm just talking --

3 [In English] " ... recording that we watch here was made up, but

4 I'm not going into that."

5 [Interpretation] So he's talking about things, he's reading the

6 statement, actually, he's not putting any question, and this is not an

7 appropriate way of cross-examining a witness.

8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Maybe this escaped me because

9 things are going extremely fast. Obviously, you've read a passage and

10 forgot to ask a question. Maybe you didn't ask a question after what

11 you've read. So, please, read a passage, but then ask a question.

12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That's not true, Mr. President. In

13 one sentence, I explained why I didn't want to read the passage, because

14 it concerned a video recording, and I didn't have time. If I had time, I

15 would deal with that. Mr. Vuckovic explains how the video recording was

16 made, the recording that was shown here in court, the recording where we

17 hear him say a couple of words. We saw it in examination-in-chief. I

18 don't want to waste my ten minutes on this. Other things are more

19 important to me.

20 And I just briefly explained why I wanted to skip that, and the

21 Prosecution wants me to waste as much time as possible.

22 May I continue? I do hope that I still have my ten minutes left.

23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ten minutes, yes.

24 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

25 Q. Mr. Tacic says, relating to what you said in your statement and

Page 7226

1 repeated here, how you escorted him to Zvornik and attended the meeting

2 at the police station:

3 "I claim that I never met Mr. Alic. The first time that I saw

4 him was on TV, while he testified in the trial of Professor

5 Dr. Vojislav Seselj. At the time that Mr. Asim Alic testified about, I

6 was the chief of staff of the 4th Armoured Brigade, and in this capacity

7 I talked with representatives of Serbs and representatives of the Muslims

8 in the territory of the municipality of Zvornik. The civilian police

9 never helped me pass through any roadblocks. I did not ask for any such

10 assistance, nor did I need it. Alic is lying through his teeth when he

11 says that he knew me, that he would give me a lift and take me across the

12 roadblocks. Throughout my stay in the area, I had my personal driver,

13 whose name was Radinko Matic. I repeat, once again, I claim that apart

14 from my driver, Matic, I was never driven by anyone else during my stay

15 in Zvornik. I give this statement voluntarily under no duress, and I

16 agree that Professor Dr. Vojislav Seselj used this in the trial before

17 the Tribunal in The Hague."

18 So what do you say to that? This is completely contrary to what

19 you said in your statement in 1996 and in your examination-in-chief.

20 A. I can say the following: I didn't drive Colonel Tacic, I

21 followed him in my police car. I was ordered by my chief to wait for him

22 just before the roadblock that was located at the factory. I couldn't go

23 there. I didn't even approach that area, because I couldn't do that.

24 Colonel Tacic passed through that roadblock in his own car, and I was

25 waiting there for him, and I followed him in the official police car to

Page 7227

1 the municipality building.

2 After the meeting was over, I again escorted him or followed him

3 from the municipality building to the area where he had come from, but I

4 did not approach the roadblock was that posed a danger to me.

5 Q. Mr. Alic, in your statement, you said that you, yourself,

6 attended the meeting, and he claims that you did not. And you talked

7 about the contents of the meeting?

8 A. That's not what I said. The meeting was held at the municipality

9 building. My chief, the chief of the Public Security Station, was there.

10 Q. Mr. Alic, you said that, yourself, was present there.

11 A. That's not true.

12 Q. Let me find this. I will find that, Mr. Alic, even if I have to

13 spend all my remaining time for that. That's your statement, the 1997

14 statement, page 5. It says here that you went to an area just in front

15 of the roadblock to receive Colonel Tacic, and then you say:

16 "When I followed Colonel Tacic back to the police station in

17 Zvornik, he had a meeting with my chief, and I was present there."

18 Now we go on to page 6:

19 "During the meeting, Colonel Tacic told us that he had

20 information that 5.000 members of the Green Berets were in Zvornik and

21 that he had 70 tanks in Celopek. He threatened that Zvornik would come

22 under an attack if we did not cooperate with him. Nothing was agreed at

23 the meeting, so I escorted Colonel Tacic to the same location where I had

24 picked him up."

25 So when did you lie, when you gave the statement or here in the

Page 7228

1 courtroom, because you had to have lied at one point?

2 A. Well, I am not telling any lies.

3 Q. Are there any such people?

4 A. I did not lie in the courtroom, I did not lie before. I said

5 that I escorted him to the municipality building and that a meeting with

6 the political leaders was held there, attended by Osman Mustafic, chief

7 of the Public Security Station, and that later on Mustafic had a meeting

8 with us and he told us what had happened at the previous meeting. And

9 after that, I again escorted Colonel Tacic in an official car to the

10 roadblock, and the same thing that I'm saying now, I said the first time.

11 And earlier, I don't know what the interpretation was.

12 Q. Mr. Alic, you signed it with your own hand in 1996, 1997. There

13 were still some honest people in the Prosecution. You signed this in

14 your own hand. You did not make any corrections. I caught you lying

15 again.

16 A. I didn't lie at all. There may be an error in translation. I

17 made the same statement then and I make the same statement now.

18 Q. I'm sure that you managed to convince the Judges and the

19 Prosecution that you did not tell a lie, but the public is also following

20 this, and I am relying on the public.

21 Mr. Alic, let us go on. You heard about Milivoj Dukic?

22 A. No, I don't know who that man is.

23 Q. How can that be, Mr. Alic? He was a colleague of yours in the

24 police brigade in Belgrade.

25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, I can't let this be

Page 7229

1 said. This is insulting for the Judges, and I shall tell you why.

2 You've just said, concerning what the witness might have said,

3 that what he's saying, well, the Prosecution and the Trial Chamber

4 believe what he has said. You anticipate the assessment we are going to

5 make, and you are saying this publicly. And I would like to state

6 publicly that this does not work, and this is a very serious matter.

7 It's a travesty of the truth that you are presenting us with. The

8 witness makes statements, written statements, the witness testifies. You

9 show a document which could establish that this does not coincide with

10 what Mr. Tacic has said. Very well. We will see afterwards what

11 conclusions we need to draw, but you are anticipating conclusions and you

12 are saying that these are the same as the findings of the Prosecution.

13 And this is not right, and I wish to tell you so publicly.

14 Mr. Seselj, please proceed.

15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, if that is insulting

16 for the Judges, then I withdraw that part of my statement.

17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] He has withdrawn this, so no

18 more will be said about it.

19 Mr. Mundis.

20 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, the Prosecution also objects to that

21 part of the accused's statement, where he indicates he's relying on the

22 public. It's unclear. Relying on the public to do what? But again we

23 raise issues concerning intimidation to future witnesses, and that

24 statement could be perceived by members of the public in that light, and

25 we would put that object on the record.

Page 7230

1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

2 Mr. Seselj, you have withdrawn what you have just said, and this

3 has been noted. But once again, the Bench is totally independent from

4 the Prosecution. The Prosecution is like you. The OTP presents its

5 case, you present your case, and the Bench will assess it. This is how

6 it works. You may have a different opinion about this, but this is how

7 it works, and the Trial Chamber has demonstrated many a time that we did

8 not agree with the OTP at all.

9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I hope that you and

10 your colleagues, because of your anger to my words, did not fail to hear

11 what Mr. Mundis has just said. Mr. Mundis is wondering what public it is

12 that I'm counting on, but he is forgetting that the principle of the

13 public character in a criminal trial is the most important principle,

14 that without this principle of the public counting on the trial can you

15 have a regular trial.

16 And, secondly, how is it that he thinks that I'm instilling fear

17 into future witnesses by cross-examining present witnesses? I assume

18 that any witness that appears in this courtroom knows in advance that he

19 has to face a monster here that is going to completely refute his

20 testimony, and all the other lawyers appearing before the Tribunal ought

21 to behave the same way. They wouldn't try and make up to the Prosecutor,

22 but they would be governed by the rules of cross-examination applied in

23 the Anglo-Saxon legal system. So the witness must be aware that he will

24 be subject to cross-examination and challenging of his credibility and

25 reliability, and that if he has something to hide, I will find it out.

Page 7231

1 If there's anything that can compromise him, I will find it out and

2 present it to him.

3 JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, the fact that the

4 proceedings are public is one thing, but when we are talking about --

5 when we are talking about legal proceedings, but you told us yourself

6 this morning that you were speaking to the public, and not because this

7 was part of legal proceedings. Do you remember having said that this

8 morning? You said you were particularly keen on making sure that the

9 public at large would know that crimes had been committed and the Serbs

10 fell victims to these crimes committed by Croats and Muslims, and you

11 clearly said this. This was intended for the public, but these are legal

12 proceedings, and both parties take the floor and make their submissions

13 so that the Bench can draw its own conclusions on the allegations put

14 forward.

15 And as regards your alleged responsibility, we are not talking to

16 the public at large. What we are interested in are the legal

17 proceedings. This is not a political platform.

18 MR. MUNDIS: Again, with all due respect, I want to make the

19 objection that I raised or the point that I raised absolutely clear.

20 I'm not necessarily at this point talking about the public versus

21 non-public nature of what's happening in this courtroom. I completely

22 agree and the Prosecution completely agrees with the notion that trials

23 must be open to the maximum extent possible. What I'm objected to is

24 reflected on lines 14 through 16 of page 77, where there's a reference to

25 Dr. Seselj relying on the public. In the context of what he said, and

Page 7232

1 I think it should be repeated, he said:

2 "I'm sure that you managed to convince the Judges and the

3 Prosecution that you did not tell a lie, but the public is also following

4 this, and I am relying on the public."

5 And to the extent that might have certain implications, we put on

6 the record our objection that that could cause intimidation of this or

7 other witnesses whom this accused has asserted are less than truthful. A

8 public statement that he will rely on the public with respect to what he

9 calls false witnesses or witnesses who are less than truthful is a point

10 to which we will object and place that objection on the record, and I

11 want to make it very clear that that's what we're objecting to.

12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, Mr. Mundis. Your

13 concern is now on the record.

14 Mr. Seselj, would you like to take the floor again. And finish

15 your cross-examination, because you have two minutes, maximum, left.

16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have to react to what Mr. Mundis

17 said first and to what Judge Lattanzi said as well. I have to rely on

18 the public, because I don't have anybody else to rely upon, and it is my

19 right to rely upon the public, and the public nature of these proceedings

20 is guaranteed precisely so that I can rely on public opinion, because

21 you're trying me but the public is trying you, Judges, and that's why I

22 rely upon the public, and that's why the public is very important, as far

23 as I'm concerned, very important to me, so that I'm not just at your beck

24 and call and your will, I don't rely on your will, because if I depended

25 on that, I wouldn't defend myself at all, I absolutely would not. But as

Page 7233

1 the public is a mighty defender of me, not only the Serb public but the

2 international public as well because many legal circles are attending

3 this trial with great attention, I feel far better than I would if you

4 were to try me somewhere else in the dark.

5 Now, what Mr. Mundis has just said, that my statements and

6 relying on the public represents intimidation of future witnesses, well,

7 that's just nonsensical, that's ludicrous. That I'm intimidating a

8 future witness? I am, by telling him that if he lies, I'm going to

9 dispel those lies in the courtroom, I'm going to uncover them, and this

10 is because the Prosecution has had an easy job of it in other trials,

11 where lies were just put out and the Defence counsel didn't even try to

12 find them out, because witnesses have a hard time here, whereas in other

13 trials they were sovereign in presenting their testimony. But after me,

14 the witnesses totter out of the courtroom. One got lost going to the

15 toilet. Many things happen in this courtroom. And now you want me not

16 to rely on the public. Who am I to rely on, if it is not the public,

17 because the voice of the public is God's voice, as far as I am concerned,

18 because it is that public that will make the final judgement, both of me

19 and of all the rest of you who are taking part in this trial, and you

20 have to count on that.

21 Perhaps Mr. Mundis comes from a system where the philosophy of

22 law is not taught, whereas in the European system the philosophy of law

23 is one of the most important subjects taught at the Faculty of Law.

24 Without the philosophy of law, Mr. Mundis, you can't embark upon any

25 serious trial. If did you just think it's enough to collect witness

Page 7234

1 statements and an enormous amount of documents and that is enough. Why

2 don't you take a look around you, and you'll see that the Prosecutor

3 never conducted any kind of investigation, no investigation at all. All

4 it does is collect up witness statements, many of which are contradictory

5 amongst themselves, you bring in a witness to testify one way, another in

6 another one and another in a third way, and they are all Prosecution

7 witnesses. So why did you not conduct an investigation? It's

8 investigations exist in continental law and in the Anglo-Saxon type of

9 law, and the Prosecution, the OTP of this Tribunal is conducting no

10 investigation, there isn't any kind of investigation. It's just a

11 hodge-podge of different statements and heaps of documents, 90 per cent

12 of which are irrelevant.

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In these proceedings, on the

14 fact that these are made public, we know that they are public, and that

15 is not called into question. You have explained to us that you were

16 cross-examining the witnesses and this was intended for the public.

17 That's your problem. But as far as the Judges are concerned, and my

18 colleague has told you this also, the cross-examination must unfold as

19 part of the legal proceedings, because this is what will be assessed at

20 the end of the trial in an adversarial system, where we have the

21 Prosecution, the witness and the Defence. The public is one thing; the

22 legal proceedings are another. You have told us that for you it's all

23 the same. That's your position. You are free to think what you like,

24 and I shall certainly not stand in the way of that.

25 However, there is a trial ongoing, there is evidence that is

Page 7235

1 being presented, and during your cross-examination you are entitled to

2 highlight contradictions. There can be contradictions, but does this

3 mean that the contradictions lead to false testimonies? We can only

4 assess this matter right at the end. We don't know anything about it.

5 Perhaps you will call Colonel Tacic yourself. Perhaps you will call the

6 famous Zuco to testify. In that case, we will assess this under oath and

7 we will assess their words under oath and draw our own conclusions. For

8 the time being, we cannot draw any conclusions.

9 Mr. Mundis is concerned, and he has mentioned this and it's on

10 the record. The public at large is listening, is looking on. Among the

11 public, there might be potential witnesses. There might be Prosecution

12 witnesses, but there might also be Defence witnesses, who, seeing what is

13 happening during the cross-examination, might wonder what their own

14 testimony would mean, and understand that this might be a difficult

15 moment for them and this could have an impact. This is what Mr. Mundis

16 wanted to convey to us. This is something which you can listen to, even

17 if you don't agree.

18 Perhaps some witnesses might not want to come in the future, for

19 they may be worried about the way in which the cross-examination will

20 take place. That is how this could have an impact on the trial.

21 We have lost a lot of time with these kinds of issues.

22 Mr. Seselj, I'll give you the floor back, and I'd like to remind you that

23 you have two minutes left to finish your cross-examination.

24 Mr. Seselj.

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please allow me to respond briefly

Page 7236

1 to the last thing you said, just that.

2 You said that potential future witnesses might be afraid to come

3 into the courtroom, and I have to react to that. May I be given

4 permission to? If you don't allow me, I won't.

5 You are giving me permission. All right. You see, I say "thank

6 you" to you quite frequently of late.

7 Mr. President, every witness can be afraid of coming into a

8 courtroom, especially if they're in the courtroom for the first time in

9 their lives. It's not always pleasant. They come into an atmosphere

10 which does give rise to a certain amount of fear. However, what can the

11 witness or a witness be afraid of here, when I do the cross-examination?

12 I'm not going to attack any witness physically, so that fear can be

13 excluded. I'm not going to be rude to the witness, except to say perhaps

14 that he's lying or something like that. And you know that I had

15 different criteria for different witnesses. I was harshest towards the

16 Prosecution's expert witnesses. I was most lenient to victims, even when

17 it was quite obvious that the victim did tell a lie. They were telling

18 the truth and then put in a little lie suggested by someone. Then

19 Prosecution, witnesses of the other side, I am more lenient than I am to

20 Serbs that tell blatant lies here, come in and tell blatant lies. So I

21 have different criteria, and what do they testify to? That I am very

22 cool and calm in approaching everything, I'm not governed by passions of

23 any kind here. I am quite calm, and all my cross-examination is well

24 thought out, and I try and achieve the best results. I opt for the most

25 fruitful road.

Page 7237

1 So what can the witness be afraid of? That I will be stronger

2 than them verbally? Certainly, I will. I will show a far greater degree

3 of professionality than all the Prosecutors put together in this

4 Tribunal, so the witness needn't be afraid of that. All the witness

5 should be afraid of is that I am going to disclose any lies told in the

6 court, and that is why people are dropping off the Prosecution witness

7 list. That is one of the reasons.

8 The Prosecution would have found it far easier had I been forced

9 to have Defence counsel, and they would have got through the proceedings

10 far quicker, to the general satisfaction of one and all. However, that

11 desire did not -- that desire was not fulfilled, so they have a problem.

12 Of course, if counsel were imposed, the witnesses would have been in a

13 different situation. Now that they know that I do the cross-examination,

14 it's not easy for them, not because they tell the truth and I subject

15 them to unpleasantness, but because they are aware of the lies they had

16 previously told for different reasons, either because the Prosecution had

17 made promises to them, saying that they would be send to third countries,

18 that their families would be given a flat, a house, or whatever, or for

19 whatever other reasons and inducements. But now we see that they are

20 stripped bare, the methods of the Prosecution have been stripped bare.

21 Everything is made public. The witnesses have spoken out. You see, the

22 witnesses that the Prosecution counted on now give interviews in the

23 papers, their interviews are published, they have spoken out, so there

24 was none of this initial fare and it had to happen. And it's just by

25 chance that it happened in this particular trial and not in another

Page 7238

1 trial, but it had to come out, an end had to be put to it.

2 And, you see, once people speak out about the accused who entered

3 into plea agreements and agreed to testify falsely in trials, to diminish

4 their prison terms, those lies will come out, too, and --

5 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter didn't catch the next bit, it

6 was just too fast.

7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] ... but I shall continue. If

8 there's nothing else, I shall continue with the cross-examination.

9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You have two minutes left. I'd

10 like to check with the Registrar. You have two minutes left.

11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] [Previous translation

12 continues] ... that was mentioned saying the truth will out.

13 Please place this document on the overhead projector. Mr. Alic

14 said he didn't know Milivoj Dukic, but Milivoj Dukic was a colleague from

15 work while Mr. Alic was in Belgrade, and he makes a statement here about

16 his knowledge about Mr. Alic.

17 Q. And briefly, Mr. Alic, since he says that you performed your

18 duties conscientiously, and he praises you, and you were the only one

19 that was remunerated for successful work in Kosovo Metohija in 1992, he's

20 praising you there - I don't know what the Albanians would have to say

21 about that praise - but then he goes on to say --

22 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers kindly be asked to slow

23 down. It is absolutely impossible to translate this fast.

24 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

25 Q. Is it true that they left in late 1991 to go and work in

Page 7239

1 Bosnia-Herzegovina? How can I slow down now when I have only two minutes

2 left? Do you know that they left for Bosnia in late 1991?

3 A. Yes, I do.

4 Q. And do you know who Hajrudin Mujkic is?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. He didn't want to heed this call; is that correct?

7 A. I left the brigade because at that time there was a lot of

8 tension aimed at us Muslims, and preparations were made for us to be sent

9 to the frontlines in Croatia. I didn't want to go there, to fight there,

10 because most of the police officers from Croatia were only on the list of

11 the police brigade. I was a superior officer for some of them, but that

12 was a fictitious list, and they were simply sent to Croatia to fight.

13 Q. You're wasting my time. I asked you who Hajrudin Mujkic was.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Did he not refuse this call to go to Bosnia, to transfer to

16 Bosnia?

17 A. Hajrudin Mujkic had his apartment and he had his family up there.

18 The rest of us, we didn't have housing up there. We lived in hotels for

19 single people, and we travelled all the time from Belgrade back to our

20 place of residence.

21 Q. But you were given an apartment, a small apartment, but you were

22 given an apartment, Mr. Alic?

23 A. I never was given an apartment.

24 Q. When Hajrudin Mujkic refused to go to Bosnia, was he threatened

25 in any way that either he or his family members would be killed?

Page 7240

1 A. I don't know that.

2 Q. After that, Hajrudin Mujkic went to Germany because of that

3 stress. Do you know he went to Germany?

4 A. He went to Switzerland.

5 Q. First to Germany and later on maybe to Switzerland. Do you now

6 recall now recall Milivoj Dukic?

7 A. I think I did.

8 Q. Just one more question for the last minute. When you questioned

9 the four men --

10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, this is now your

11 last question, because your time is up. Just ask your last question.

12 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

13 Q. Last question: When you questioned the four men, in accordance

14 to the rules, you had to make an official note; is that correct?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Did you fax this official note or record to Sarajevo and to

17 Tuzla?

18 A. I did not.

19 Q. What did you send to Sarajevo and Tuzla?

20 A. A notice that on that day, four people had been brought into

21 custody in the police station, with their personal details. At that

22 time, we didn't know what kind of people we were dealing with, and we of

23 course asked for instructions from our superiors as to what to do.

24 Q. Did you ever receive those instructions?

25 A. Not in writing, but they told us by phone to fully investigate

Page 7241

1 this, to determine who these people were, and to document everything.

2 Q. Did you not send any reports to them during the day?

3 A. We didn't have any time.

4 Q. The fax was operational?

5 A. Yes, but the shells were falling.

6 Q. But the shells never killed anyone. You said that those

7 dispatches were burned because they are not kept for longer than ten

8 years?

9 A. I think that's the rule for the archive-keeping.

10 Q. And when the Prosecution first talked to you, that was in 1996.

11 Four years had passed. Why did you not mention that to the Prosecution

12 so that the Prosecution could perhaps find it in the archives?

13 A. Well, perhaps at that time nobody asked me about that.

14 Q. It never occurred to them to ask for that. Well enough.

15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, your time is

16 definitely up. I said you could put one last question, but you put

17 several questions to the witness. Maybe there's some confusion between a

18 question and an issue you would like to spell out.

19 Mr. Dutertre, any redirect?

20 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Yes, there is some redirect, just

21 a few questions.

22 Re-examination by Mr. Dutertre:

23 Q. Mr. Alic, Mr. Seselj asked you whether you had attended this

24 meeting together with Mr. Tacic. Do you remember having been proofed on

25 the 13th of May, 2008; namely, last week?

Page 7242

1 A. I remember.

2 Q. Do you remember whether you corrected this paragraph on page 4 in

3 English? This was your written transcript of the interview. Did you

4 correct this paragraph and state that you had not attended that meeting?

5 A. Yes, I remember that.

6 Q. And in your interview which took place in 1996, what did you say

7 about the meeting? Did you say that you had attended or that you hadn't

8 attended?

9 A. I did not attend the meeting in the municipal building, but we

10 had a meeting at the Public Security Station, where the chief of the

11 Public Security Station told us about the course of the discussion that

12 was held up there.

13 Q. I would now like to move on to another issue. We are still

14 talking about the 1997 statement.

15 You were questioned by Mr. Seselj on page 7056 of the transcript.

16 This relates to the Commander Aleksandar Bozovic. Do you also remember,

17 when you were proofed on the 13th of May, having corrected this paragraph

18 to say that Aleksandar Bozovic was your former commander and not the new

19 commander who had ordered that all the policemen in Belgrade should be

20 Serbs?

21 A. I remember that's how it was.

22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Objection. What is re-examination

23 on the basis of the proofing session? Procedurally speaking, what does

24 it mean? A proofing session is a private, internal matter of the

25 Prosecution. We have official statements that have been certified and

Page 7243

1 signed in 1996 and 1997, and now the proofing session cannot be used as a

2 means to maintain the credibility of the witness by reconfirming that

3 something that was said was true. Mr. Alic signed both statements, and

4 had a Defence counsel been imposed on me, we would have not been going

5 through this.

6 The proofing session of this witness lasted for three or four

7 days, and the Prosecution is now trying to get the witness to contradict

8 what he had falsely stated earlier. Twelve years have passed since his

9 first interview with the OTP. In 1996, his memory was much clearer,

10 because only four years had passed from the events, and now it's 16

11 years.

12 Could you please explain to me why the re-examination now is

13 based on the proofing sessions?

14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor, the additional

15 questions must be in direct connection with the cross-examination, so you

16 must say witness and ask during the question this is what you said, "I

17 have here with me at the OTP elements that contradict this." This is the

18 scope in redirect regarding your questions.

19 Secondly, you're referring to the proofing session. As far as

20 the Statute and the Rules are concerned, this proofing session has no

21 legal existence. This is a practice which personally I don't agree with,

22 but, well, it is a practice that is in use. It may be useful as far as

23 Rule 92 ter is concerned when, after proofing, a new written statement is

24 issued, but here in this case, the 1996 and 1997 statements, written

25 statements, are not produced. So you're referring to a statement that

Page 7244

1 has not been produced.

2 What I am interested in is the following: In connection to this

3 proofing session, could you tell us exactly what is the nature of this

4 new element which may possibly contradict what was said during the

5 cross-examination? Mr. Seselj's objection seems -- could be granted.

6 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj talked at length about

7 what Aleksandar Bozovic might have said or might not have said. For

8 reasons of time, I tried not to quote everything, and I apologise for

9 that.

10 Secondly, the proofing note is signed by the witness, so to a

11 certain extent it is somewhat the same thing as an interview. And in

12 this proofing note, he corrected an element. That's the whole purpose of

13 the proofing session, an element in a hearing made in 1997, in his

14 interview in 1997. And regarding -- in the 1996 statements, very

15 specific things are said about whether he participated or not in the

16 meeting, and this is what I tried to elicit from the witness.

17 So there are relevant elements in connection to a question that

18 had been raised by the accused, himself, and this is absolutely in line

19 with what Mr. Seselj wanted to obtain from the witness.

20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Then, very well, please put

21 your question to the witness so we can see the light regarding this

22 problem, which seems very minor, as far as I'm concerned.

23 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] I don't know if you would like to

24 have a break now.

25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] No, let's finish with the

Page 7245

1 redirect before the break.

2 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Very well. Let's move on to

3 something more important.

4 Q. On page 7070 and 7082 in the transcript, you were asked about

5 weapons that could have been distributed in Zvornik. Mr. Seselj

6 mentioned that the Serbs felt insecure and that this is why they left the

7 town. Issues to address, did the Serbs, according to you, leave the city

8 voluntarily or not, in 1992, before Zvornik was attacked?

9 A. They went there of their own volition or, rather, on somebody's

10 orders.

11 Q. When the attack started on April 8, how long did it take for the

12 Serbs to capture Zvornik?

13 A. Since there was no resistance, there was -- it didn't take long

14 for them to capture Zvornik.

15 Q. Could you assess how -- the extent with which the Muslims

16 resisted in the city?

17 A. To a very small extent.

18 Q. A minor point, but I believe it needs to be corrected. On

19 page 6995 of the transcript, you said that Colonel Tacic arrived on April

20 7th, 1992, and then on page 7069 in the transcript, Mr. Seselj asked you

21 whether on April 6th, Colonel Tacic had been to -- had come to Zvornik,

22 and you say that he came. The question is the following: Was it on the

23 6th of April or the 7th of April that Colonel Tacic went to Zvornik?

24 A. I know that the threats were implemented quite soon. I can't now

25 say whether it was on the 6th or on the 7th, but everything happened in

Page 7246

1 one of those two days. I know that I escorted him to the municipal

2 building and that I then escorted him back.

3 Q. Then a document was mentioned, a document produced by

4 [indiscernible]. This document was used at length. I would like to know

5 whether you know whether Mr. Ivanisevic participated in the Law Faculty

6 in Belgrade to a symposium called "Truth about Srebrenica," in which the

7 reality of the genocide in Srebrenica was actually denied.

8 A. I don't know that. I did not follow this.

9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Objection. The Prosecutor

10 introduces elements that were not dealt with in the examination-in-chief

11 and in the cross-examination, and he is not entitled to do that. That's

12 impermissible.

13 Secondly, no eminent lawyer in the world accepts the claim that

14 genocide was committed in Srebrenica, because according to the definition

15 from the convention of genocide, there was no genocide there. There was

16 a mass execution by a firing squad of prisoners there, but no eminent

17 lawyers in the world accept the argument that this was a genocide. Only

18 those who don't have the required expertise or moral scrupples agree that

19 this was genocide. Unfortunately some of them sit in the international

20 court of justice so there was no genocide. There will be time to deal

21 with this issue.

22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor, the issue of

23 Srebrenica is not in our indictment, was not mentioned during the

24 examination-in-chief and was not addressed, either, during the

25 cross-examination, so raising this question of course led to the

Page 7247

1 objection raised by the accused. Once again, we're wasting time. What

2 was your point?

3 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this is to shed light

4 on the reliability of the document that was extensively presented to the

5 witness. And just to give you the background of the person who actually

6 wrote this document.

7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Line 25, page 94, the witness

8 said in English -- or in his own language, but he says: "I don't know

9 that." So he knows nothing of it.

10 Move on.

11 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation].

12 Q. One last thing. On page --

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please go very fast, because

14 the Registrar is desperately asking for a break.

15 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Yes. On a page of the transcript,

16 there was a question of the cards of the Chetnik Movement, Serbian

17 Chetnik Movement.

18 Q. And you said that it was a document that could be opened, and

19 that Mr. Seselj talked about a simple document that does not fold in two.

20 You said last week that you had held cards from the Serbian Chetnik

21 Movement on several occasions, so can you tell us whether all these cards

22 were similar or whether they were different formats?

23 A. The cards of the Serbian Chetnik Movement looked the way that I

24 have described them. It was possible to open them. There was a picture

25 there with personal details and the stamp inside.

Page 7248

1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Objection. Mr. President, well, we

2 should not leave it at that. The Prosecution is under an obligation to

3 locate, by any means at their disposal, a card issued by the Serbian

4 Chetnik Movement. Thousands of them were issued, and the Prosecution

5 should be able to find it, just as it was able to find the other one, a

6 small card that could not open up. The Prosecution should therefore be

7 able to find the one that the witness has just described. Otherwise, we

8 would consider that the -- we will see the Prosecution in an unpleasant

9 moral light.

10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor, regarding the

11 evidence that you have, I don't know whether you have a copy of such an

12 ID card of the Serbian Chetnik Movement. If you had one, this was the

13 perfect time, in the redirect, to tell the witness, "Here's a card. Is

14 this the one you had in hand, yes or no," and we would have avoided the

15 problem.

16 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I've -- I'm searching

17 and I don't have the results yet, but I wanted to ask the question as to

18 what the witness remembered on this. As things stand now, this is the

19 only thing I could do.

20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Are you done?

21 Witness, now, on behalf of my fellow Judges and myself, thank you

22 for coming to The Hague. It was very long, you spent almost two weeks

23 here, and I wish you the best upon your return home much.

24 And now we will break, and we will resume in 20 minutes.

25 [The witness withdrew]

Page 7249

1 --- Recess taken at 12.10 p.m.

2 --- On resuming at 12.30 p.m.

3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] First and foremost, I would

4 like to ask Mr. Registrar to ask the administration to check our

5 armchairs, because our robes keep getting stuck in the armchairs, and

6 either we have to make the robes shorter or you have to do something

7 about the armchairs. The Registry has a number of options to solve this

8 problem.

9 Secondly, I believe that Mr. Mundis would like to take the floor.

10 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President:

11 I would at this point in time just briefly like to rectify an

12 error which appears in a recent filing submitted provided by the Office

13 of the Prosecutor in this case.

14 On 24 April 2008, the Trial Chamber rendered a decision on the

15 Stanisic motion for access to confidential materials in this case

16 pursuant to Rule 75(G)(i). By way of that decision, the Prosecutor was

17 instructed to identify confidential material from this case to be

18 disclosed in the Stanisic case according to the criteria set forth in

19 that decision.

20 On 14 May 2008, the Prosecution filed its notification of

21 compliance with that decision, and in the Prosecution notification, there

22 was a list of exhibits and page references to the transcript which the

23 Prosecution submits should be disclosed by the Registrar to Mr. Stanisic.

24 There were two errors in that filing, and I would like to publicly

25 correct those at this point in time to make the work of the Registry move

Page 7250

1 as efficiently as possible.

2 First of all, in the fourth row under the column: "Exhibits

3 under seal," the Prosecution erroneously indicated one exhibit, which was

4 P00690. We would ask that that exhibit be stricken off the list of

5 material to be provided to Mr. Stanisic.

6 And secondly, with respect to transcript reference, there was

7 also an error, and the correct information with respect to the page that

8 should be disclosed is page 5529, line 1, through page 5230, line 1. The

9 remainder of page 5230 is in open session. So I would ask that those

10 corrections be noted, and the Registry at this point in time can proceed

11 as expeditiously as possible to make that material available to the

12 Stanisic Defence team.

13 And I simply wanted to do that at this point in time to make sure

14 that everything moves as efficiently as possible.

15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, thank you.

16 Any other item you would like to raise, Mr. Mundis?

17 MR. MUNDIS: Not from the Prosecution, Mr. President. We're

18 prepared to lead the examination-in-chief of the expert,

19 Andras Riedlmayer.

20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

21 I would like to read, in private session, an oral decision.

22 Mr. Registrar, can you please move to private session.

23 [Private session]

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 7251











11 Pages 7251-7257 redacted. Private session.















Page 7258

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 [Open session]

4 Yes, Mr. Seselj.

5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I just want to tell you, very

6 frankly, that the proceedings are never a stress. I feel quite at home

7 in these circumstances. So the legal proceedings are never stressful.

8 What is stressful is that hour that I'm kept waiting when I can't wait to

9 get back to my cell and get on with things. And as I say here, I feel

10 fine. I can't say that I enjoy it, but something close to that. I like

11 being in this role. Please believe me when I say that. I'm in my

12 element.

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, that is reassuring. I am

14 happy to learn that blood pressure does not rise at the end of the

15 hearing, but after that.

16 Let's move into open session now, please, and we shall bring the

17 witness into the courtroom.

18 Let me remind all and everyone that the Prosecution has two

19 hours, Mr. Seselj has two hours, but I fear that if there are objections,

20 we will not be able to finish tomorrow.

21 Mr. Mundis, can the witness stay over until next week?

22 MR. MUNDIS: There is the possibility for the witness to stay

23 over until next week, but of course we do have a special hearing

24 scheduled for Tuesday and we do have another witness lined up immediately

25 after that witness. Perhaps let's see how we make out. If need be,

Page 7259

1 I think Mr. Riedlmayer would be prepared to come back at some future

2 point in order to finish. Obviously, everyone would prefer him to

3 finish, but I think we do have a relatively full schedule next week, and

4 Mr. Riedlmayer has already been here since Friday of last week, he flew

5 here, so he's been here a number of days already. Let's just see how we

6 make out. It is possible. I will certainly move as quickly as I can

7 with the direct examination.

8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Seselj.

9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, it's a good thing that

10 Mr. Mundis reminded me, because that's what I wanted to request with

11 respect to this special session. I think that I have justified interest

12 in being present at that special hearing, if the hearing takes place,

13 since that special hearing has to do in a way with my defence; and it

14 will be before the same Trial Chamber, I assume. So I don't think I need

15 to explain to you my special interest in attending that hearing. I'm an

16 interested party in a way.

17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a minute. This special

18 hearing you have alluded to, I shall not quote any names. Let's move

19 back into private session, please.

20 [Private session]

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 7260











11 Pages 7260-7261 redacted. Private session.















Page 7262

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 [Open session]

25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're now in open session.

Page 7263

1 [The witness entered court]

2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, sir.

3 If you can hear the translation of what I am saying, please let

4 me know.

5 THE WITNESS: Yes, I hear you, Mr. President.

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Can you give me your first

7 name, last name, and date of birth, please.

8 THE WITNESS: Andras Riedlmayer, born on 28th November, 1947.

9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] What is your current

10 occupation?

11 THE WITNESS: I am currently director of the Documentation Centre

12 for Islamic Architecture at Harvard University.

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] That is in the United States, I

14 presume.

15 THE WITNESS: Yes. It is in Cambridge.

16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Sir, have you already testified

17 before a court of law about the events that unfolded in the former

18 Yugoslavia? If that is the case, please list all the cases in which you

19 have already testified.

20 THE WITNESS: I have testified in the Milosevic Kosovo case, in

21 the Milosevic Bosnia case, in the case Prosecutor versus

22 Momcilo Krajisnik, in the case brought before the International Court of

23 Justice by Bosnia-Herzegovina against Serbia-Montenegro, in the Kosovo 6

24 case called Milutinovic, Ojdanic, Sainovic, and now in the current case.

25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Will you be testifying in other

Page 7264

1 cases in the future or not?

2 THE WITNESS: I expect I will.

3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] May I ask you to take the

4 solemn declaration, please.

5 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the

6 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.


8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. You may sit down.

9 Sir, I would like to apologise because you had to wait. There

10 was a witness here before you, and because of the time it took to hear

11 him, we have been running late. The Prosecution will have two hours to

12 lead the evidence. Maybe it will need less time than that. The accused,

13 who is sitting to your left, will have two hours to cross-examine you.

14 Since you come from a common-law country, you know that sometimes

15 expert statements give rise to objections and procedural issues, so we

16 run the risk of not being able to finish tomorrow, and our next hearing

17 will be next Tuesday, next Tuesday afternoon.

18 I know that you've been here for a few days already. Would it be

19 possible for you to stay on until next Tuesday? That will be, of course,

20 if we can't finish tomorrow.

21 THE WITNESS: Yes, I am prepared to wait, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. So that is a

23 possibility.

24 To tell you the truth, I think it's better to be transparent. We

25 have planned to hear another witness next Tuesday, but we are still

Page 7265

1 awaiting further information on this. Whatever the case may be, we will

2 see where things stand tomorrow.

3 It's just about time to stop this hearing, since we stop today at

4 a quarter past 1.00 and we started at 8.30, and I am sitting in another

5 case very soon. I shall make it very short.

6 You are accustomed to the workings of this Tribunal. You have

7 testified already. You are here as an expert witness. The Prosecution,

8 as part of examination-in-chief, will put questions to you on the basis

9 of your report which you have prepared and which we have here in two

10 binders. A number of questions will be put to you. Please try and

11 answer as accurately as you can. From what I understood, there is a map

12 which is behind you, and this map will enable us to locate those areas

13 where the destruction took place. This is why we have this map here in

14 the courtroom. And the Judges before you can also put questions to you.

15 Of course, Mr. Seselj, when it is time for the cross-examination,

16 will put questions to you as to your credibility, your expert

17 qualifications, and some of the questions of substance you have addressed

18 in your report.

19 As you know, we have a break every hour and a half. These are

20 20-minute breaks, but if tomorrow at in point in time you do not feel

21 well for whatever reason, do not hesitate to interrupt us for us to

22 adjourn the hearing.

23 We are here to answer all the questions you feel you might want

24 to ask us.

25 I've summed this up, but it is important to move fast, because

Page 7266

1 while I was talking to you, I was watching the clock and the transcript,

2 and it is 14 minutes past 1.00 and a few odd seconds.

3 Sir, we shall meet again tomorrow morning. We will start at

4 8.30, because I am sitting in another case. That is why we need to start

5 at 8.30. And very often I am here until 7.00 at night. This is why you

6 will be asked to come tomorrow at 8.30.

7 I wish you all a good afternoon, and we shall meet again tomorrow

8 morning to start off with the examination-in-chief.

9 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.14 p.m.,

10 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 22nd day of

11 May, 2008, at 8.30 a.m.