Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 10170

 1                           Thursday, 2 October 2008

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The witness entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 8.31 a.m.

 5                           [The accused entered court]

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, can you call the

 7     case, please.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.

 9             This is case number IT-03-67-T, the Prosecutor versus

10     Vojislav Seselj.

11             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Registrar.

12             Today, we are in open session.  We are Thursday, the 3rd [sic] of

13     October, 2008.  Let me first of all greet the witness, as well as

14     Ms. Dahl, Mr. Mundis, and their associates and all the people giving a

15     helping hand to the OTP, as well as the Registrar and the usher.

16             We shall resume the examination-in-chief.

17             Ms. Dahl, you have one hour left, and I shall give you the floor

18     straight away.

19                           WITNESS:  WITNESS VS-038 [Resumed]

20                           [The witness answered through interpreter]

21             MS. DAHL:  Thank you, Your Honour.

22             May we move into private session?

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes.  Registrar, please.

24                           [Private session]

25   (redacted)

Page 10171











11 Pages 10171-10192 redacted. Private session.















Page 10193

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8                           [Open session]

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, we're now in open session.

10             MS. DAHL:

11        Q.   After Mr. Drazilovic gave the speech about fighting for the

12     Serbian people, did he lead the volunteers in the taking of an oath?

13        A.   Yes, he read -- I can't remember whether he read or he spoke off

14     the cuff.  He uttered the words of the oath, and then we repeated it

15     after him.

16        Q.   Were the volunteers issued membership cards?

17        A.   Yes.  We would go into an office one by one.  Now I'm speaking on

18     my own behalf.  I provided my personal details there, all of them, and

19     then I was issued with a membership card of the Serbian Chetnik Movement.

20        Q.   Did the oath pledge allegiance to the Chetnik Movement?

21        A.   Well, as far as I remember the words of the oath, the Serbian

22     people were mentioned in it, patriotism, fatherland, defence of Serbian

23     people; words to that effect, as far as I can remember, that was

24     mentioned.

25        Q.   At Mr. Drazilovic's introduction, were you given information

Page 10194

 1     about party politics?

 2        A.   No, he didn't touch upon daily politics.  He spoke about the

 3     general situation in different parts of the former Yugoslavia; that is to

 4     say, he spoke about fronts, the situation at the front and the like, but

 5     he didn't say anything about daily politics.

 6        Q.   Were you given information about the purpose of the military

 7     struggle?

 8        A.   Yes.  The purpose of our engagement was to defend the Serbian

 9     people from the opponents of the Serbian people; that is to say, the

10     Muslims specifically in this particular case.  As we were going to

11     Bosnia, it was the Muslims.

12        Q.   What information were you given about the possible deployment

13     areas?

14        A.   Well, we were given that information in an informal conversation

15     with these two volunteers who had already been engaged in Bosnia.  In

16     that conversation, they told us about the situation, what it was like and

17     what we could expect in Milici and in Gorazde.  That is to say, they

18     provided that information to us.

19        Q.   When you say "they" and "those two volunteers," who are you

20     referring to?

21        A.   There were two members of the Serbian Radical Party there who

22     were in charge of taking care of us and transporting us to our

23     destination.  These two men were specifically in charge of the group that

24     went to Milici.  I know that because I, myself, went to Milici.  They

25     were with us the entire time, and they took us to Milici.

Page 10195

 1             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam Dahl, you have 15 minutes

 2     left.

 3             MS. DAHL:  Your Honour at the outset of the examination, I

 4     thought I might need an additional half an hour, but if I may reserve

 5     that request until the end.

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] It won't be possible, given the

 7     time constraints.  We won't have enough time, because we do have

 8     housekeeping matters that Mr. Seselj wants to raise once this testimony

 9     is over.  So please do endeavour to finish within 15 minutes.

10             MS. DAHL:  Your Honour, I note the exception that I would have to

11     take about dealing with housekeeping matters in lieu of leading

12     substantive evidence on the charged crimes, and I'd request at the end of

13     the examination to reconsideration.

14             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I do agree with you, I agree.

15             MS. DAHL:

16        Q.   Did you have informal conversations with Mr. Drazilovic after the

17     ceremony?

18        A.   Yes.  After this ceremony, he stayed with us for a brief amount

19     of time.  He didn't talk to me personally, but since we were standing

20     there in a group, he talked to all of us, giving us advice for our own

21     good, as he put it.

22        Q.   And what advice did he give you and the group with which you were

23     assembled?

24        A.   He said that we need to realise that there was a war going on

25     there and that that was serious business, that we have a very serious

Page 10196

 1     enemy against us, and that we should expect no mercy from that enemy,

 2     especially us being volunteers from Serbia.  His advice was not to allow

 3     to be captured alive.  It was better to commit suicide than allow the

 4     enemy to capture us, because that was the better solution for us.  But

 5     just as nobody would have mercy towards us, we shouldn't have or we

 6     shouldn't show any mercy toward anyone else.

 7        Q.   What did you understand that to mean?

 8        A.   I took it to mean, since he didn't speak explicitly of any

 9     particular group, I thought that that meant that we shouldn't have any

10     mercy toward our enemy, the Muslims specifically, because according to

11     him everybody was enemy.

12        Q.   Did Mr. Drazilovic convey the idea that you, meaning you and the

13     group, should kill everyone on the other side?

14        A.   He didn't say that we should kill everybody.  He said, and I

15     remember that well, that we shouldn't show any mercy toward our enemies,

16     and that was said very clearly.

17        Q.   Did he say that you should take prisoners?

18        A.   As for that, there were no explicit instructions.  Once again, I

19     repeat, just as nobody would have mercy towards us, which meant that we

20     would certainly be killed, similarly we needed to do the same and not

21     show any mercy towards our enemy, just as if we would have been killed if

22     we were to be captured, they should have been killed if they were to be

23     captured.  That's what "no mercy" meant.

24        Q.   As part of the induction process, were you given any instructions

25     on the requirements of the Geneva Conventions?

Page 10197

 1        A.   No, we received no such instructions.

 2        Q.   Are you familiar with how the Radical Party was recruiting

 3     volunteers?

 4        A.   Well, there was propaganda broadcast on television.  All

 5     officials, headed by Mr. Seselj, in all of their public appearances said

 6     that every Serb patriot needed to put himself in the service of the

 7     defence of the Serbian people, and along those lines everybody knew that

 8     the Serbian Radical Party was sending out its volunteers, and it was very

 9     easy to join volunteers via them.  This took place through various of

10     their speeches and public appearances, and there was a lot of that in the

11     media.

12        Q.   Did you hear Mr. Seselj give a call to arms for Serb patriots?

13        A.   Yes, I heard that many times, that each Serbian patriot needed to

14     go and defend the Serbian people.  It was no secret that his party sent

15     volunteers to the war zones; not that it was not a secret, he was proud

16     of that, and he bragged about that; so it was no secret whatsoever.

17        Q.   And to be clear, these were Serb people in war zones outside of

18     Serbia?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   To your knowledge, was there a screening process that

21     disqualified people who had criminal charges or criminal convictions from

22     serving in the Radical Party's volunteer units?

23        A.   As far as I know, such a process did not exist.  All of us who

24     came there that day to the headquarters of the Serbian Radical Party were

25     eventually sent to the fronts, so I didn't hear of any such thing.

Page 10198

 1        Q.   Did you learn from members in your unit whether they had criminal

 2     convictions?

 3        A.   Yes, yes.  I learned from many of them, when we talked, that a

 4     lot of them had had problems in Serbia with the law, that a lot of them

 5     were to go and serve their prison sentences, that some of them were still

 6     on trial.  So there were many such cases.

 7        Q.   Did you hear of any instances where the Radical Party lawyers

 8     helped people avoid prison in favour of military service in a volunteer

 9     unit?

10        A.   Yes.  A man who was there with me had a problem with the

11     judiciary.  His mother was in contact with the people from the Serbian

12     Radical Party who were helping her to resolve the problem.

13             MS. DAHL:  If I may briefly go into private session.

14             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, please, Mr. Registrar.

15                           [Private session]

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 10199











11 Pages 10199-10208 redacted. Private session.















Page 10209

 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                           [Open session]

22             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, we are in open session.

23                           Cross-examination by Mr. Seselj:

24        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. VS-038, when did you come into contact with

25     the investigators of The Hague Tribunal for the first time?

Page 10210

 1        A.   To the best of my recollections, I think that was in 2005.

 2        Q.   How did that come about?

 3        A.   I called up the offices of The Hague Tribunal in Belgrade and

 4     asked to have a meeting with them.

 5        Q.   And that was in 2005, was it?  But what was the reason for you to

 6     ask for a meeting?

 7        A.   The reason was because I wanted to talk to them and to give a

 8     statement about my knowledge of the events in the war in

 9     Bosnia-Herzegovina in which I took part.

10        Q.   Can you look at me while you're answering my questions?  Can you

11     do that?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   It would be a great source of satisfaction, and I think we'd have

14     a better dialogue that way.

15        A.   I do apologise, and I will.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment.  Witness, are you

17     quite sure that this was in 2005 or 2003?  I have a statement that is

18     dated 3rd and 5th of July, 2003.

19             MS. DAHL:  Your Honour, I object to the accused's instruction to

20     the witness that he has to look at him.  The witness is here to provide

21     information to the Trial Chamber.

22             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, I will address this

23     afterwards.  But as far as the date is concerned, Mr. Seselj put the

24     question to you and asked you when you first contacted the OTP, and you

25     said, "2005."  I have before me a statement which is signed by you, which

Page 10211

 1     is dated 2003.  That's what's written on the document.  Are you making a

 2     mistake or not?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, it's my mistake.  I'm sorry, I

 4     didn't remember the year properly, but there is written evidence about

 5     that.  So it's 2003, and it was my mistake.

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.  You're a witness of

 7     the Court.  You may look at the Bench, you may look at Mr. Seselj, but

 8     you don't have to.  You do as you please.  It's not you who is going to

 9     ask you which way you need to turn your head.  If you wish to look at

10     him, you may look at him, but you don't have to.  And if you wish to look

11     at Ms. Dahl, you may, but you don't have to.

12             Mr. Seselj, please proceed.

13             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   You gave a general answer.  It was too general, when you

15     explained your reasons for calling up the offices of The Hague Tribunal.

16     But what was the pretext, the reason?  Now, you -- the President just

17     said that that statement was in 2003, but what was it that you remembered

18     and wanted to tell The Hague Tribunal investigators, actually?

19        A.   Well, first of all, I was on the battle front.  I had seen a

20     great deal of events and took part in many of them.  That's the first

21     reason.

22             Secondly, knowing Serbian legislation, and I don't have too much

23     confidence in that, in the laws -- in the judiciary, actually, I didn't

24     want to be tricked and be responsible for things that I had nothing to do

25     with.  I didn't want to fall into a trap, so I wanted to recount the

Page 10212

 1     things that I knew about and things that would probably be checked out

 2     from all sides; and I wanted to be sure that I was not going to be held

 3     responsible for some things that I hadn't done, nor had I taken part in

 4     them.  I didn't want to fall into that trap.

 5        Q.   If I understand you correctly, it was for preventative reasons

 6     that you contacted them, so that other people wouldn't do that.

 7        A.   Well, nobody has any reason to report me.  I did not take part in

 8     anything that was against the law in Bosnia, anything illegal.  However,

 9     I was afraid of false accusations; being abducted or things like that.

10        Q.   But you didn't have a concrete motive to be included in the trial

11     against me or the proceedings against me, since in February 2003 I was

12     already arrested on the basis of an indictment raised against me?

13        A.   Yes, that was my motive, to be part of the proceedings against

14     you, because unfortunately it was your party that I had a great deal of

15     unpleasantness and problems from.  So that was my motive for becoming

16     involved in the proceedings, to say what I knew.

17        Q.   Was that because, as you claim in 1992, the Serbian Radical Party

18     sentenced you to death?

19        A.   Yes, that's right.

20        Q.   And do you know of any other cases whereby the Serbian Radical

21     Party sentenced someone to death, apart from you?

22        A.   No, I don't know of any other case where a Serbian volunteer was

23     sentenced to death.

24        Q.   So you're the only case of that kind?

25        A.   To the best of my knowledge.

Page 10213

 1        Q.   Does that mean that throughout the war, you were the greatest

 2     problem for the Serbian Radical Party, so that the party had to pass a

 3     death sentence on you?

 4        A.   All I know is about my case.  If there were others, I have no

 5     knowledge about those others.

 6        Q.   And when you reported to the offices of The Hague Tribunal --

 7     well, actually, you called them up, is that right?  That's what you said?

 8        A.   Yes, that's right.

 9        Q.   Then they called you to come to their offices; is that right?

10        A.   Yes, they -- I left a contact telephone number, and then they

11     phoned me up after a short period of time and set up a meeting for me

12     with them in the offices of The Hague Tribunal in Belgrade.

13        Q.   How long did that first meeting last?

14        A.   The first meeting, as far as I remember, lasted for a short

15     while.  I don't remember exactly how long, I can't be precise, but not

16     long; maybe an hour at the most, an hour and a half.

17        Q.   And did you sign a statement after that?

18        A.   I gave a statement to a gentleman there who questioned me, but I

19     can't remember whether I actually signed a statement or not.  But I'm

20     sure that you have documentation about that, so you can see whether I

21     signed or not, because I don't remember.

22        Q.   In 2003, how many times did you go to the offices of The Hague

23     Tribunal in total?

24        A.   Unfortunately, I can't remember.  As far as I recollect, I was

25     there a number of times.

Page 10214

 1        Q.   How many statements did you sign in 2003?

 2        A.   I can't remember that either.  As I said, you have the

 3     statements, so you can see and check how many of them I signed, because I

 4     can't remember, myself.

 5        Q.   Well, I know how many times you were there and how many

 6     statements you signed, but I'm just verifying your memory.  If you can't

 7     remember things that happened five years ago, how can you remember things

 8     that happened fifteen years ago?  That's right, isn't it?

 9        A.   Well, that all depends.  It depends on the importance of those

10     things.  Giving a statement in the offices of The Hague Tribunal in

11     Belgrade is not the same thing as taking part in the war in Bosnia, it

12     doesn't have the same weight.

13             Secondly, at the time, I didn't give it much thought.  I didn't

14     think it was important for me to remember how many times I'd signed

15     something, or given a statement, or things like that, because I knew that

16     written traces would remain, my statements would remain.  They can't

17     disappear, so it's very easy to find out.  So I didn't make any special

18     effort.

19        Q.   What did you expect to be given once you'd made your statements

20     to The Hague Tribunal, given in return?

21        A.   I didn't ask for anything in return, nor did they offer me

22     anything.

23        Q.   Two years before that, you asked for Croatian citizenship and the

24     possibility of moving to Croatia to reside there; isn't that right?

25        A.   Yes, I did table a request for Croatian citizenship, I did make

Page 10215

 1     that request, because there was a possibility of my moving to Croatia,

 2     but that specifically has nothing to do with The Hague Tribunal.

 3        Q.   Let others decide whether it has anything to do with that or not.

 4     But your efforts to obtain Croatian citizenship were unsuccessful; right?

 5        A.   I did receive Croatian citizenship.

 6        Q.   When?

 7        A.   In 2005.

 8        Q.   So four years later.  You had to wait for four years?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   When you came into contact with The Hague investigators, you had

11     already been waiting for Croatian citizenship two years and had lost all

12     hope of being granted it?

13        A.   When I put in my request for Croatian citizenship at the Croatian

14     consulate in Belgrade, I was told, just as everybody else was told, that

15     the process was a long one and that it could last for quite a long time.

16     So the time could be as long as two, three, four years.  That would be

17     quite normal.

18        Q.   How many times did you go to the Croatian Embassy in Belgrade,

19     seeking Croatian citizenship?

20        A.   I went once to see what I needed, what papers I needed.  Then I

21     went a second time to submit those papers.  And then I went a third time

22     to pick up the decision on Croatian citizenship.

23        Q.   When did you inform the embassy that you had had contacts with

24     The Hague investigators and that you had provided them with statements

25     which would be used in the trial against me?

Page 10216

 1        A.   If you mean the Croatian Embassy, nothing like that ever

 2     happened.  I never had any contact with them, nor did I provide them any

 3     information like that.

 4        Q.   Did you ask that protective measures be provided to you by

 5     The Hague investigators, that you be anonymous, that the public should

 6     have no knowledge of your statement, and that your identity be kept

 7     secret from me, the accused, up to a month before trial?

 8        A.   When I received information that I would be a witness in your

 9     trial, I talked to the investigators and asked to be granted protective

10     measures, which I am enjoying now.

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14             MS. DAHL:  Objection.

15             Your Honour, we need to go into private session for family

16     matters, and I would ask that the last question and answer be redacted.

17             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I shall confer with my

18     colleagues.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] First of all, let me oppose that,

20     please.

21             There is absolutely no reason -- I haven't mentioned a single

22     name yet.  I am just trying to challenge the credibility of this witness,

23     and nothing else.  When we get to some names that may reveal his

24     identity, then I'm going to tell you about that.

25                           [Trial Chamber confers]

Page 10217

 1             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We shall remain in open

 2     session, (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4     Therefore, we shall redact this portion of the transcript.

 5             You may proceed.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] [Previous translation

 7     continues] ... move into closed session, because I'm going to take a

 8     while dealing with that.

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let's move to closed session,

10     please.

11                           [Private session]

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 10218











11 Pages 10218-10230 redacted. Private session.















Page 10231

 1                           [Open session]

 2             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   You said in examination-in-chief that the JNA called on

 4     television conscripts and reservists who had specialised in air defence

 5     to report to them because that was the specialty that they needed the

 6     most; correct?

 7        A.   Yes, and the call was made on radio and television.

 8        Q.   And I would like to remind you now that the JNA never issued such

 9     call via any media.  They did not call any reservists of any specialty.

10     This never happened, because the Serbian regime on purpose made the

11     mobilisation that was attempted at the time more complicated; correct?

12        A.   I don't know about that.  This was a call issued by the Novi Sad

13     Corps.

14        Q.   Well, the Novi Sad Corps could not call reservists on its own.

15     It could have been done only by the Ministry of Defence or something of

16     that sort.  And for a unit to be calling up reservists on its own, I

17     don't think that that can happen in any country in the world.  Correct?

18        A.   I don't know, but I know that this happened.

19        Q.   I know that you invented this up, because in 1991, the JNA did

20     not need reservists at all, not of the air defence specialty.  Why would

21     they need them, because Croatia, that started the rebellion, did not have

22     any aviation, so what would they need the specialty for, the air defence

23     specialty?  They needed -- they needed tank operators and artillery

24     specialties.

25        A.   Well, I was specialised to use the special anti-aircraft gun

Page 10232

 1     which had three kinds of ammunition, and that could be used by -- against

 2     different kinds of weapons.

 3        Q.   You didn't say that they needed your military specialty.  You

 4     said that they needed air defence, and --

 5             MS. DAHL:  Your Honour, this question and answer is going too

 6     fast for interpretation, and I'm noticing a degrade of the transcript,

 7     and I would ask you to ask the witness and the accused to allow for a

 8     pause.

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please go less fast.  It's

10     difficult for the interpretation and the transcript to keep up, and so we

11     have these gaps in the transcript.  So could you please slow down,

12     Mr. Seselj.

13             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   So anti-aircraft defence includes light artillery, heavy

15     anti-aircraft artillery, and rocket units.  The army did not need any of

16     those, and any machine-gun operator could be easily trained to use light

17     anti-aircraft artillery.  I personally fired from such weapons, and it

18     wasn't difficult at all.  Correct?

19        A.   Well, I had training on that gun in the duration of six months.

20        Q.   So you invented that the JNA called up people of your specialty

21     and that you reported to them, but they didn't want to take you in?  For

22     a reason totally unknown to me, you invented this up; correct?

23        A.   No, that's not correct.  I went to my military department.  I

24     reported to them.  I submitted my military booklet to them and told them

25     why I had come, and they said that they would call me.  So there must be

Page 10233

 1     some written trace concerning that.  I did not invent this.  That's how

 2     it happened.

 3        Q.   Since you gave two statements to The Hague investigators in 2003,

 4     did you provide any other statement to them later on?

 5        A.   I gave a statement in 2006, and in between I think that I had a

 6     couple of interviews in the office of The Hague Tribunal, but I can't

 7     remember.  I didn't try to remember how many times I went there and when,

 8     because I believed that there would always be some written trace and that

 9     it would be easy to trace it.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Between 2003 and 2006, Your

11     Honours, I don't have any information indicating that this witness talked

12     to The Hague investigators.  I don't know what they talked about.  No

13     notes were disclosed to me.  For some reason, this is all kept secret, if

14     there were such contacts at all.

15             Very well.  We shall now look at the documents that were provided

16     yesterday by the Prosecutor.

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)  So let's move on to closed session, and can you redact line

25     14 of page 64.

Page 10234

 1                           [Private session]

 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   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 10235











11 Pages 10235-10267 redacted. Private session.















Page 10268

 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                           [Open session]

20             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honour.

21             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   When you were arrested, all of you in Zvornik, this large group

23     allegedly under the term "paramilitaries," do you know that at the

24     beginning of August, on behalf of the Serbian Radical Party, I myself

25     held a press conference at which we supported your arrest, because we

Page 10269

 1     presented a whole series of facts and information about the crimes that

 2     you had perpetrated in Zvornik?  I don't mean you, personally, but that

 3     whole group of men who was arrested.  Are you aware of that?

 4        A.   No, I'm not aware of that.

 5        Q.   Well, I'm surprised to see that after you were set at liberty,

 6     that you went to the Serbian Radical Party and reported there as a

 7     volunteer, saying that you wanted to go to some other front, some other

 8     battlefield.  How do you explain that?

 9        A.   I've already explained that, the reason and my motives for going

10     to Zvornik.  And those same reasons hold true.  That's why I wanted to be

11     a volunteer of your party.

12        Q.   When you came to the Serbian Radical Party, did you take your

13     military booklet with you?

14        A.   I really can't remember whether I took my military booklets with

15     me or not.

16        Q.   Every volunteer --

17             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment, Mr. Seselj.  I was

18     going to put the question to you this morning, Witness, but I need to put

19     it to you.

20             You were arrested in Bijeljina.  This was part of an

21     investigation.  It seems that a decision had been taken to arrest all

22     paramilitary formations.  You explained this to us.  You say that some

23     people had been beaten up, and you must have understood at the time that

24     some individuals were accused of committing crimes of a political nature.

25     You seem to get through all of this, since you are set free.  Now, the

Page 10270

 1     first thing you do is to go to the Serbian Radical Party, knowing full

 2     well that the Serbian Radical Party might have been involved in some of

 3     these crimes via some individual.  This was not a lesson for you, since

 4     you decide to become a member of the SRS straight away.  I honestly don't

 5     understand.

 6             As soon as you were set free, you go straight to the Serbian

 7     Radical Party.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Not again.  He never was before.

 9     He went to Zvornik of his own accord.  He didn't go through the Serbian

10     Radical Party.

11             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So why do you go to the Serbian

12     Radical Party?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My motive for going was this:  I

14     went in order to prove to the people around me that I wasn't a traitor.

15     My mother was a Croat.  I had a lot of problems because of that, so I was

16     forced to choose either one side or the other.  And I spent too little

17     time in Zvornik, too short a time in Zvornik, just a few days in actual

18     fact.

19             Secondly, I was arrested and sent back.  So I had to join the

20     volunteer units again and the first chance I got to appear in my

21     environment to see -- to show them that I was a volunteer and that I was

22     on the Serb side.  So that was my logic at the time, which doesn't mean

23     that knowing everything I do today, I would do the same thing now.

24             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

25             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

Page 10271

 1        Q.   You've just invented this piece of information, that the children

 2     from mixed marriages were threatened in any way and in Pancevo anybody

 3     threatened anyone on an ethnic basis, regardless of the fact that your

 4     mother was a Croat, she couldn't have had any problems at all, especially

 5     married to a Serb; so why would somebody intimidate her or threaten her

 6     in this multiethnic community that Pancevo was?  And in Pancevo, the

 7     Serbs barely -- a little over 50 per cent of the population there are

 8     Macedonians, Romanians, Slovaks, Croats, and who knows how many other

 9     ethnicities; isn't that right?

10        A.   Unfortunately, there was pressure exerted and there were

11     provocations, and the things that I experienced and that I heard that

12     other people had experienced, too, well, they were perfidious forms of

13     intimidation, things that were very hard to prove; and my mother suffered

14     abuse and threats, so -- well, I'm not saying that in Pancevo, there was

15     any Serbian terror that reigned over other ethnicities, but that there

16     were instances of that, that's true.

17        Q.   Now, explain this to me.  I'm astounded, I must say.  When you

18     told Zoks that somebody was mistreating your family by ringing them up on

19     the phone, you said that Zoks intervened from Zvornik and that everything

20     stopped after that.  Is it possible that you actually stated that?

21        A.   Zoks knew what my situation was like.  I told him about it.  He

22     knew what situation I was in, and all he said was that he would deal with

23     the matter.  How, in what way, I don't know, but he promised to do

24     something about it.

25        Q.   That means that Zoks at that time had greater power than

Page 10272

 1     Slobodan Milosevic; wouldn't that be right then?

 2        A.   Well, it was like this:  It wasn't that the whole of Pancevo

 3     intimidated my family and troubled my family and mistreated it.  This

 4     came from certain circles that don't number thousands but perhaps a

 5     dozen, so we knew where the threats came from and who organised them.  So

 6     it wasn't very difficult to deal with the situation and solve the

 7     problem.  He probably knew who to call and who to tell that I was on the

 8     right side, if I can put it that way.

 9        Q.   That means that Zoks belonged to this circle of powerful men who

10     were able to mistreat many people throughout Serbia, the whole of Serbia;

11     right?

12        A.   Well, let me repeat, that was the situation in Pancevo.  In

13     Pancevo, there were branches of the Serbian Radical Party, for example,

14     and different parties, for that matter, boards or branches or whatever

15     they're called.  Now, whether he was a powerful man or not, I don't know;

16     probably not, because he couldn't put a stop to any mass mistreatment or

17     threats.  But sometimes all you need is a word to the wise, a phone call

18     here and there, and settle matters.

19        Q.   Do you know the president of the District Council seated in

20     Pancevo, Petar Jojic?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Do you know that he was a high-ranking police inspector, having

23     the rank of colonel, and that he worked as a lawyer later on?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   Well, I don't suppose you think that Petar Jojic was at the head

Page 10273

 1     of an organisation that would ring up people who were Croats or from a

 2     mixed Croatian-Serb marriage to intimidate them?

 3        A.   I have no knowledge about that.

 4        Q.   All right.  Now, let's take your military booklet.  Did it record

 5     your participation in the war when allegedly, in the second half of 1992,

 6     as a volunteer of the Serbian Radical Party, you took part in providing

 7     security for the bauxite mine in Milici?  Was that recorded in your

 8     military booklet?

 9        A.   No.

10        Q.   And do you know that all the volunteers of the Serb Radical Party

11     had the years they spent in war recorded in their military booklet, and

12     on some occasions they even got certificates stating that they took part

13     in the war?

14        A.   I heard a bit about it, but I don't have any direct knowledge.

15        Q.   Could you please -- could you please describe Zoran Drazilovic,

16     what he looks like physically?

17        A.   Well, he had a beard at the time.  He talked just like any other

18     person, but I really wouldn't know what the colour of his eyes was.  His

19     height was average, normal.

20        Q.   Was he taller or shorter than me?

21        A.   Well, you're a very tall man.  I don't think he's taller than you

22     are.

23        Q.   Was he as big as I am?

24        A.   Not that big.

25        Q.   Did he wear glasses?  Is there anything else you can say?

Page 10274

 1        A.   Well, at the time when I saw him, he didn't have glasses on.

 2        Q.   Never in your life did you see Zoran Drazilovic.  I've known him

 3     since 1986, and he never took glasses off, and they called him "Cica"

 4     because he looked like Draza Mihajlovic; he was almost identical to him.

 5     All volunteers, all members of the Serbian Radical Party of the Serbian

 6     Chetnik Movement know of that and even the public at large knew about it,

 7     and you're not in a position to describe what he looks like, and you said

 8     here that he had allegedly said something to him.  Never in your life did

 9     you see Zoran Drazilovic; right?

10        A.   That's not right.

11        Q.   You saw Zoran Drazilovic without glasses?  You could have only

12     seem him when he was asleep.  That's probably the only time when he took

13     off glasses.  Otherwise, no one has ever seen him without glasses.

14        A.   Well, specifically, I wear glasses, but now I have contact

15     lenses.  On days when I wear glasses and when I talk to someone,

16     sometimes I just take those glasses off and put them in my pocket for a

17     while, and then again I put them on.  I put them on, so that really

18     doesn't mean anything.

19        Q.   Well, fortunately we're in open session now.  All members of the

20     Serb Radical Party, everyone in Serbia, knows that Zoran Drazilovic can

21     never be seen without his glasses.  Everybody knows that.  But let's not

22     dwell on that any longer.

23             Please tell me, what does a membership ID of the Serbian Chetnik

24     Movement look like, the one that you allegedly got from Draskovic?

25        A.   As far as I can remember, to the best of my recollection, it

Page 10275

 1     looks like a calling card.  It's about that big [indicates].  It is

 2     white, and it said "Serb Chetnik Movement."  I think there was a coat of

 3     arms there, too, a number, and there was the name and surname.

 4        Q.   And the text, what colour was the text on that membership ID?

 5        A.   I don't know.  I don't know whether it was black or blue.

 6        Q.   And if I tell you now that already in 1992, no membership cards

 7     were being issued for the Serb Chetnik Movement, and that had been the

 8     case for quite a while, and it's only membership cards that were issued

 9     for the Serb Radical Party, what would you say to that, what would your

10     comment be?

11        A.   I never saw a membership card for the Serb Radical Party.  This

12     was a membership card for the Serb Chetnik Movement.

13        Q.   Why didn't you keep that membership card of the Serb Chetnik

14     Movement?  It really would be invaluable here in court.

15        A.   Well, at that time I did not know that I would be before this

16     kind of a court.  Otherwise, I certainly would have kept it.

17        Q.   So we don't have any evidence by way of your military booklet.

18     You don't have this membership card of the Serb Chetnik Movement.  And

19     why is your name not recorded anywhere in the records of the Serb Chetnik

20     Movement?

21             I have statements of Ljubisa Petkovic and Dusica Nikolic with

22     regard to this matter.  They checked it.

23        A.   I don't know what to say to that.  I claim that I am a member,

24     that I was recorded there at that office, and why it cannot be found, I

25     don't know.

Page 10276

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8        Q.   This written evidence was supposed to be provided to us by the

 9     Prosecution.

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We shall redact.  Reference has

11     been made here which could identify you.  Please prepare the order,

12     Registrar.  Thank you.

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 10277

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted) And the information they obtained was that it is total

 9     nonsense that the volunteers could have been receiving 300 Deutsche mark

10     per month at the end of 1992, because generals of the Army of Republika

11     Srpska did not have that in 1992.  They had 100 Deutsche mark, and

12     towards the end of 1993 it got even lower than that.

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22             Ms. Dahl.

23             MS. DAHL:  [Previous translation continues] ... that the accused

24     disclose this particular statement if he's going to use the contents to

25     cross-examine the witness.

Page 10278

 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             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] A slip of the tongue.  The last

18     time I talked to my associates was on Sunday at 4.00 in the afternoon, to

19     the best very specific.  Sunday, 4.00 in the afternoon.  You can check at

20     the Scheveningen prison.

21             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So Sunday at 4.00.

22             Yes, Ms. Dahl.

23             MS. DAHL:  Could I have a ruling on the request for the

24     disclosure of the statement, because it would appear that what he is

25     cross-examining is based on his associate's statements, not a statement

Page 10279

 1     by a witness.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] No.  According to what I've

 3     understood, this is a conversation that took place, but it's not a

 4     statement, per se.  So there is no statement.  This is information which

 5     his associates gave him verbally.  We have no document.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm convinced that they took

 7     written statements and had them verified, but I don't have it.  And since

 8     I don't have it, it cannot be disclosed.

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So he doesn't have it.

10             MS. DAHL:  May I ask, if he does get such a statement, that he

11     discloses it, and if he's going to cross-examine a witness, that he does

12     not imply that he has something that he does not, in fact, have.  He can

13     cross-examine regarding information, but attributing it to another source

14     I don't think is fair to the witness or to people who are listening to

15     the proceedings and trying to understand the basis for the information.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes.  Ms. Dahl, with this issue

17     you are raising another question.

18             During your cross-examination, when you ascertain something on

19     the basis of a statement, and in the interests of justice, this document

20     needs to be provided and disclosed.  Otherwise, you could just say

21     anything that comes into your head, "X, Y, Z saw X, Y, Z, gave him a

22     statement, and in the statement there is such-and-such a point," and then

23     you put your question.

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 10280

 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             I don't know what else to say.

14             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, you're speaking too

15     fast.

16             Ms. Dahl.

17             MS. DAHL:  Your Honour, all of this is in public session and has

18     been the subject of prior redaction orders, so perhaps we ought to redact

19     this as well and move into private session so that there can be continued

20     exchange of this information.

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 10281

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please proceed with your

 6     cross-examination, Mr. Seselj.

 7             MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.

20             Ms. Dahl.

21             MS. DAHL:  Your Honour, the information being elicited now in

22     cross-examination was in private session previously because it tends to

23     identify the witness because of the deployment of a small number of

24     people.  I would like to go into private session and have the last

25     passage, starting with "the mine in Milici," redacted.

Page 10282

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please, this really makes no sense.

 2     I am going to stop this cross-examination if you go on mistreating me

 3     this way.

 4             So a small number of people and the witness can be identified.

 5     No.  If there are more than three people present, the witness cannot be

 6     identified, let alone here, where there are 50 people present.  The

 7     witness, himself, said that 50 volunteers of the Serb Radical Party were

 8     involved.

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, I told you

10     beforehand that all you need is to have a competent journalist around and

11     he is perfectly able to identify the witness.  I'm speaking to you as a

12     professional judge, and we had better redact this portion, because it

13     doesn't prejudice you in any way.

14             Please proceed.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The only thing is that most of this

16     trial against me is taking place as a secret trial, but it seems nobody

17     cares about that anymore.

18             And I have another question.  I'm really fed up with this

19     cross-examination.  I keep being interrupted all the time.

20        Q.   Witness, you made a statement in 2003, and you refer to your

21     participation in the war operations in Ilidza.  In these two statements,

22     you do not mention Branislav Gavrilovic, Brne, at all.  And then in your

23     statement from 2006, you do mention him.  You mention that you met up

24     with him, but that this was a proper meeting during which you agreed not

25     to interfere with what it was that he was doing, and then he said that

Page 10283

 1     he'd leave you alone.

 2             Now, during the direct examination, you say that at Ilidza you

 3     had to ask him about everything.  Could you explain that to me now?  In

 4     two statements from 2003, there is no mention of him.  In 2006, a

 5     benevolent statement, a benevolent formulation.  And now it turns out

 6     that Brne was the master of Ilidza and that you had to ask him about

 7     everything.

 8             How did this development come about in your train of thought?

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Dahl.

10             MS. DAHL:  I'm sorry to interrupt, Your Honour.  This is a matter

11     that was disclosed in private session previously, so the

12     cross-examination should be in private session as well.

13             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, this issue had been raised

14     in private session.  So if we are to use the same format, Gavrilovic and

15     Brne, whom I don't know, could again, in the presence of a competent

16     journalist, provide information that could identify the witness.  We are

17     always talking about the same thing.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In that case, Mr. President, I

19     withdraw my last question.  I'm not interested at all in what kind of an

20     answer the witness is going to provide.  I insist that he give no answer,

21     and I'm going to stop this cross-examination because I believe it has

22     become senseless.

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I have a follow-up question for

24     you, Witness.

25                           Questioned by the Court:

Page 10284

 1             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj does not wish to

 2     continue putting questions to you.  Explain to me why, in the case of

 3     Gavrilovic, you didn't mention it straight away and you only mentioned it

 4     afterwards?  Why is it that you talked about this individual when

 5     initially you didn't?

 6             I shall move into private session, because I thought we were in

 7     private session.  Please redact this, Registrar, and we shall now move

 8     into private session.

 9                           [Private session]

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 10285











11 Page 10285 redacted. Private session.















Page 10286

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11                           [Open session]

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, I will give you the

13     floor, but before I give you the floor, I have a personal concern.  I'm

14     sure my colleagues will share it with me.

15             In the light of what has happened recently, I am lost when it

16     comes to your answer to the Prosecutor's request for you to have a lawyer

17     imposed on you.  I thought I understood that the request was going to be

18     put to the Court and registered, and today all I can say is I haven't

19     seen anything coming.  So will there be such a request -- or, rather, an

20     answer to the request that was made?

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I submitted my

22     response to the motion on Friday to the Detention Unit guards.  My

23     response has about 70 pages, and it has an addendum of some 150 pages or

24     so.  I can't remember.  But I gave it to the guards that were assigned to

25     the visitors' hall on Friday a.m. when my legal advisers were there, and

Page 10287

 1     I'm really surprised that you haven't received it yet because today is

 2     Thursday and it should have arrived at the Registry on Friday.

 3             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I'll ask our legal assistant to

 4     check to see what has happened with this response.  I suppose it was sent

 5     for translation.  Can you check?  At least as soon as this will be

 6     translated, the Court will be in a position to give a decision.

 7             Now, Mr. Seselj -- well, first Mr. Mundis.

 8             MR. MUNDIS:  Perhaps very briefly on this same issue,

 9     Mr. President, while an inquiry is being made as to the status of that,

10     if we could also at the same time perhaps get an indication from CLSS as

11     to when that filing might be available, in light of its roughly 220

12     pages, based on what Mr. Seselj said.  I think that might be helpful as

13     well; simply not a confirmation that it's been received and is being

14     translated, but if we could get a rough estimate from CLSS as to when

15     that might be available.  That would be extremely helpful.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Indeed, and this is why,

17     Mr. Mundis, I did say that the Court will give a decision once we have

18     received the translation.  But obviously at this point in time, we cannot

19     tell.  Maybe once our legal assistant can tell us, then we will decide.

20     I mean, 230 pages this might take some time, indeed.  So we must wait for

21     some time, and we must wait for the translation.

22             Mr. Seselj, what are the other issues?

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have announced three questions to

24     you, and I still have three questions.  I didn't complete one of the

25     questions last time -- or, rather, there are new aspects concerning it.

Page 10288

 1             First of all, Mr. President, you remember, back while you were

 2     just a Pre-Trial Judge, that on one occasion I raised the issue of

 3     discrimination against me when it comes to visits to the Detention Unit.

 4     I am the only incarcerated person, being there for almost six years, who

 5     is allowed visits only by his closest family members, closest family

 6     members.  Three legal assistants used to be able to come just for the

 7     last two years, not previously, and then in 2004 the Registry made it

 8     possible, and then again in 2006, for two chosen members of the Serbian

 9     Radical Party to be able to visit me.  Nobody else could come and see me,

10     and this is how it remains to this day.

11             All of the people whom I wanted to see were rejected, except for

12     a friend of mine from Berlin who came to see me twice, and then later on

13     his visits were banned as well.

14             Now, a few days ago, I contacted the Registry with a request to

15     change the names of the official representatives of the party who would

16     be visiting me and to have three persons visit me rather than two;

17     namely, Dragan Todorovic, Milorad Nimdjic [phoen] and Nemanja Sajovic

18     [phoen].  The Registry responded to me that only two persons can visit me

19     again.  So once again, this is a case of discrimination against me.

20             The Registry asked that these two persons file a statement that

21     they would respect all rules concerning the visits.  My wife, Jadranka

22     Seselj, brought on Monday the statements of Nincic and Masovic; and she

23     also brought whatever dailies were available when she left Belgrade, as

24     well as the latest book by Kosta Cavoski, "Chameleon."  The guards gave

25     me the newspapers and the book by Kosta Cavoski, but not the statements

Page 10289

 1     that simply vanished into thin air.  I could not inform the Registry that

 2     those were the two people that would be visiting me in the future, if

 3     they didn't allow three persons to visit me, and that they would abide by

 4     the rules concerning the visits.  Somebody confiscated these statements

 5     without informing me and without providing any receipts about the

 6     confiscated statements.

 7             I had to raise this issue with you because I am an incarcerated

 8     person and you, as the Trial Chamber, are duty-bound to take care of such

 9     matters.

10             Now, I also spoke about the search that was conducted in the

11     summer.  250 Euros were seized from my person, even though there was no

12     notification that such a thing would be done.  They did it, nevertheless.

13     That's fine, I can live without these 250 Euros.  But what I have to tell

14     you is this:  In the reply by the Registry, after I wrote to the

15     President of the Tribunal concerning this improper behaviour, the

16     Registry claims that only one computer diskette was confiscated from me,

17     saying that there were no marks on it.  And on that disk, there was some

18     information provided by the Prosecution under Rule 65 ter and so on.  I

19     have a record of the confiscation, stating that two diskettes were

20     confiscated from me.

21             One is described as a CD-ROM without any labels.  All it says is

22     "Public IT 03-67, OTP, exhibits admitted, MFI'd on the 3rd and 8th of

23     April, 2008."

24             And then it says:  "Public IT 03-67, OTP exhibits admitted or

25     MFI'd on the 3rd and 8th of April, 2008."  I received that from the

Page 10290

 1     Prosecution.  I didn't bring it in illegally into the Detention Unit.

 2     The Prosecution can confirm that.

 3             Now, the second diskette is described in the following way in the

 4     second record, because one of them was found in the extension of my cell,

 5     where I spent my time, and the other one was found in the warehouse.  So

 6     the second one is described like this:  This is handwritten:  "CD-ROM

 7     without a label.  Handwritten, case IT-03-69, Exhibit 6001 and Exhibit

 8     6057.  Who could provide this to me except the Prosecution?  Why don't

 9     you check with the Prosecution, whether they disclosed this to me.

10             Now, there are two problems there.  First of all, they are

11     confiscated from me the diskettes that I had received from the

12     Prosecution, and then they are lying and saying that they had confiscated

13     only one diskette, where I have proof showing that they had confiscated

14     two different diskettes.

15             Now, this is what the Registry and Registrar lied about.  Since

16     he is not a witness, I'm not exerting pressure or anything like that.  No

17     need to warn me.  So the Registrar lied when addressing the President of

18     the Tribunal.

19             Now, the third matter.  Last time, I spoke about the problems

20     that had happened after the decision of the Registrar based on

21     suspicions, mis-information and some other facts about denying me the

22     so-called privileged communication with my legal advisers, both during

23     their visits and on the phone.  "Privileged communication" means without

24     supervision, without wire-tapping.  That's what it means, the word

25     "privileged."

Page 10291

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5     Mr. President, you said that you would rule today on this motion by

 6     Mr. Mundis, and there is no ruling in the transcript about redacting

 7     that, and the Registrar did it on his own, and it was taken out of

 8     yesterday's broadcast of the trial.

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, I'm going to answer

10     to each individual issue you have raised, but when it comes to this last

11     comment, (redacted), I do remember that yesterday my

12     colleague said that the name should not be mentioned, and neither should

13     you have put a qualification to it.

14             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] All I wanted to say was

15     yesterday I did not say anything on this.  I said something a few days

16     ago.  It was the Prosecutor who asked that, and I do remember that the

17     Judge had said -- maybe you didn't hear what he said, but he said

18     something.  He said to redact it.

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] It was obvious to me that this

20     had to be redacted, and I was referring to what my colleague was saying,

21     and it has to be redacted.  And the same happens here, when we come to

22     line 17 on page 121.  It's got to be redacted.

23             I do not know all the ins and outs and twists of this showdown

24     with this individual.  It is not our problem.  We should not be vested

25     parties.  It's always very sad if you have an argument with someone when

Page 10292

 1     you go through life; but I believe this individual, just like you, is

 2     presumed innocent and neutral, and I don't see why we should name it as

 3     (redacted), so this has to be redacted.  And for me,

 4     there was no ambiguity on this.

 5             You can now proceed, Mr. Seselj.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But for months now, a perfidious

 7     campaign is in place against me, that I'm either threatening or

 8     endangering someone, be it protected witnesses or political figures.

 9     Well, how come I never attempted to implement any of those threats?  I

10     allegedly constantly threaten somebody, and there is not a trace of any

11     implementation of such threats.  Everybody's alive and kicking, nothing

12     is happening to anybody, and I'm constantly portrayed as a person who's

13     threatening or intimidating somebody and so on.

14             First of all, the Prosecution was saying that I was intimidating

15     protected witnesses and witnesses in general, and now we see some

16     marginal political figures -- I'm not going to mention any names, but

17     please do not redact what I said -- marginal political figures claiming

18     that I'm trying to assassinate them from The Hague.  Well, how long is

19     this campaign going to be waged against me?  How can I assassinate

20     anybody from The Hague?  All of my telephone calls are wire-tapped, all

21     of my codes had been broken into, and how am I supposed to do that now?

22     And there is this campaign against me, and I have no protection against

23     this campaign.  And none of those people that I allegedly threatened has

24     been harmed in any way.  Nobody has yet been attacked in this trial

25     against me.  It is just that some people claim that they were harassed on

Page 10293

 1     the phone, and nothing more than that.  Nobody was threatened, ever,

 2     except that we have to trust some people when they say that they received

 3     telephone threats or that somebody was inquiring about somebody.  This is

 4     really ridiculous.

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, let me come back to

 6     the issues you have raised and any details.

 7             All the problems that occur in the detention centre are for the

 8     Registry and under his authority.  This is what the Rules and Regulation

 9     tells us.  And if you want to oppose, it has got to go through the

10     Tribunal's president, and I think that, because this is what I've seen

11     myself, when those 250 Euros were taken from you, you opposed this and

12     you went to the President, and he's the one who's got to settle that

13     matter.

14             Now, when it comes to the two CD-ROMs that were taken from you,

15     and here again you blame the Registrar, this is under the Court's

16     authority, the Chamber, because these two CD-ROMs, from the figures you

17     have given us, these are CD-ROMs with papers and evidence the Prosecutor

18     gave you.  So I'm really, myself, surprised to see that the detention

19     centre staff members would take the view that they can take them away

20     from you and that they could seize them.  So we're going to question the

21     detention centre on this, because they are going into your own rights.

22             Now, when it comes to the visits, under any penitentiary system

23     across the world, and I have known many of them, there is one key

24     principle, which is to guarantee family relationships for the prisoners

25     so that they can keep high morale and they can cope and face the

Page 10294

 1     situation, and for that very reason family members are authorised to come

 2     and visit the prisoners.  In some cases, other individuals can come as

 3     well.  These could be imams, popes, and so on for spiritual support.  And

 4     then we have also other visitors who could be authorised those who come

 5     from dedicated volunteers groups, and in some cases other individuals as

 6     well.

 7             As it happens, you are a politician, and you, in your political

 8     activity, you still want to meet the people from your party.  Now, you

 9     found a first way, which was to meet your colleagues through your legal

10     assistant.  That's one way for you to meet these parliamentarians.  And

11     then there were other individuals you wanted to meet as well.

12             From what you've said, and I really listened carefully to what

13     you said, the Registrar was not opposing the fact that two would come,

14     but then at the very last moment you asked for three to be able to come

15     and visit you and suddenly that brought the whole system to a halt.

16             Now, if you take the view that your civil and civic rights cannot

17     be fully developed, well, go to the President, and this is an issue for

18     him, because for the Chamber there's no impact, no consequence of

19     politicians coming to visit you, in your Defence here.  That's a

20     different problem.  It's not for the Court here to settle that issue.

21     It's to be settled between you, the Registrar and the President.

22             I personally, I must confess, have no problem in you meeting any

23     politician who would want to come and visit you, but that's my personal

24     opinion.  I am not the President, nor am I the Registrar, and I'm not the

25     Prosecutor either, so this is my answer.  My colleagues can take the

Page 10295

 1     floor as well, if they so wish, to fulfill what I have just said.  Your

 2     key spokesperson in this case is the President, and you have to go to the

 3     President to oppose what's happening.

 4             I am not saying this because I want to shun that responsibility

 5     from me, but there is the Rules and Regulations, and according to the

 6     text it is the President that is competent in this case and not the

 7     Court.  The Court would only be -- the Judges would only be if your right

 8     for Defence were not respected.

 9             Now, since we still have a little time ahead of us, you told us

10     on Tuesday that you decided, yourself, to stop having any contact

11     whatsoever with your colleagues, and hence you were not receiving any

12     information.  I want to tell you, very officially, that the Registrar has

13     taken a measure, which is to control your communications as well as what

14     you are receiving.  Now, I have a problem with the second part, because

15     under the Regulations, this is not possible, but when I read this in

16     English, they mention "monitor," and then maybe it could be possible.

17     Now, we have to double-check this.

18             When it comes to monitoring phone conversations, you know, I

19     don't know -- I told you right from the very first day I was here, I did

20     say that the Rule and all the administrative authority to monitor phone

21     calls, I had suggested at the plenary assembly to delay that possibility,

22     not to give it to the Registrar, because I thought that this was against

23     the Defence rights and individual freedom, because this is something that

24     could only be ordered through a Judge and not an administrative

25     authority.  This was my proposal.  It was not carried, and hence,

Page 10296

 1     according to our Rule here, the Registrar, for specific reasons, can

 2     decide by himself to monitor your phone conversations.  That's all I can

 3     say.

 4             Now, as you know, you can take this to the President, you can

 5     oppose this measure.  You are telling me you're not doing it.  That's for

 6     you to decide.

 7             Mr. Seselj, I also want to say, because I'm not trying to run

 8     away from problems, the decision you have taken which is a result of a

 9     string of events, and I really deplore them and -- you know, because I

10     want you to concentrate on the witnesses, I want you thus to be dedicated

11     to the Prosecution case and not all these housekeeping peripheral issues;

12     but if you keep on saying and doing what you've just said, which is, "I

13     do not want to have any contact with my legal advisers anymore," and if

14     the Judges realise that you're no longer in a position to defend

15     yourself, then the very issue of having an attorney will come about --

16     will come again, because if we want to have a fair trial, you need to

17     have a lawyer or to have access to a defence, and if because of your

18     position you cannot defend yourself and you fall into hopelessness and

19     helplessness, then the Judges cannot stay idle and not react.

20             I hope that you will be able to seize the President of the

21     Tribunal very quickly of this matter and that we can resume our normal

22     proceedings.  It's in your own interests.  It's in the interests of this

23     trial, it's in the interests of justice to get to the truth, and in the

24     interests of all and every one.

25             So that's all I can tell you as things stand.  I don't fully

Page 10297

 1     control all the events.

 2             Would you like to add something, Mr. Seselj?

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, the latter one is really

 4     shocking, Mr. President, it appears shocking.  In the last two days, even

 5     without the assistance of legal advisers, I assume that I've managed to

 6     show you just how superior I am in relation to the Prosecution, the

 7     entire Prosecution.  You saw how the last OTP witness fared, and imagine

 8     if I had had the assistance of legal advisers and constant contact with

 9     them, and if I had received a couple of fresh statements.

10             So please don't rule in advance.  Even when I'm alone, entirely

11     alone in the universe, I'm still much more competent than the entire

12     Prosecution taken together, and you will see that for yourself in the

13     next several months that remains until the end of the Prosecution case.

14     That cannot be a reason for you to deny me the right to represent myself,

15     because there will be no Defence whatsoever if you ban me from doing

16     that, if you deny me that right.

17             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I agree entirely with the

18     witness, your cross-examination in this case, and you only need to look

19     at the transcript.  You complained at least three or four times about not

20     being able to contact your associates, so I inferred that you were

21     handicapped by this.  But now you're saying, "No, we need not worry about

22     that."  I've noted this, and if you feel that you can continue in this

23     way and represent yourself and cross-examine the witnesses with

24     everything you have at your disposal, right, but then don't turn 'round

25     every time and say, "Well, I have not been able to contact my associates

Page 10298

 1     and they were not able to send me anything," because in that case we have

 2     the feeling that you suffer from shortcomings.

 3             Now, as things -- next week, I believe, I stand to be corrected,

 4     I believe a witness is coming to testify.  I shall not mention the

 5     witness's name because I don't know whether this witness has been granted

 6     protective measures.  The Prosecutor, I think, has asked for three hours

 7     to hear this witness.  In three hours, we will hear the witness.  I think

 8     we will be able to manage that next week, since we have a three-day week.

 9             Mr. Mundis.

10             MR. MUNDIS:  Yes.  Thank you, Mr. President.  That's correct with

11     respect to the witness scheduled for next week.

12             I do, however, want to return to a couple of issues that have

13     just been raised concerning the outstanding motion concerning the

14     imposition of Defence counsel.

15             We would again reiterate our request that we be informed by the

16     Registry as to the amount of time that is expected with respect to the

17     English language version of Mr. Seselj's response, and I say that

18     because, of course, on the hearing on the 26th of August this year, at

19     pages 9814 and 9815, when the issue of the amount of the time available

20     to Mr. Seselj came up, you will recall the Prosecution didn't object to

21     Mr. Seselj being given more time; but of course we had at that point in

22     time asked for the proceedings to be adjourned due to what we thought

23     would be the length of time required for him to file his submission.  And

24     to the extent that the English version of that or the official version of

25     that from CLSS in English and/or French will require several weeks, if

Page 10299

 1     not months, to prepare; we very well may be returning to that issue, and

 2     I simply want to be as open and transparent as possible.  So we would

 3     again ask for that information as quickly as possible.

 4             Second --

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, we've known each

 6     other for a few years now, and we've had the pleasure of being with you

 7     in a number of trials.  I know that when you speak, you make a lot of

 8     sense.  I don't know if I misunderstood you, but from what I understood,

 9     given that the translation might take several weeks and maybe several

10     months, you would wish to adjourn the proceedings again?  Is that what we

11     need to understand?

12             MR. MUNDIS:  We need the information from CLSS in order to allow

13     us to make a determination as to whether or not the fact that it might

14     take several weeks or even several months very well might be considered a

15     new fact that would put us in a position where we might need, and I'm

16     stressing "might," need to revisit the issue as to the adjournment.  Our

17     concern as expressed on the hearing on the 26th of August, 2008, again

18     9814 and 9815 of the transcripts, were that the entire motion very well

19     might become moot if the trial proceeds, and --

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, as you can see, I

21     know you well and I had understood your question well.  As far as a stay

22     of proceedings is concerned, this has already been settled by the

23     Appeals Chamber.  Of course, you may file an application again, but the

24     Appeals Chamber has ruled on the matter.  As far as I'm concerned, I

25     don't see why I should change my position because CLSS will take a while,

Page 10300

 1     as I believe that they are going to speed things up.  I don't think it's

 2     going to take months, weeks or months.

 3             On the other hand, Mr. Mundis, your departments are well staffed.

 4     There is on your staff people who are conversant in B/C/S.  I believe

 5     there's someone sitting in the courtroom who is a B/C/S speaker, so ask

 6     this person to read the document, summarise it, and see what's important

 7     in it.

 8             MR. MUNDIS:  That's actually my next point, Mr. President,

 9     because of course we don't get them until they're translated; so I would

10     respectfully request that the Registry be directed to provide us with a

11     copy in the Serbian language immediately, because there again could be

12     material relating to witness issues that we need to know about as quickly

13     as possible.  So I would again ask that we be given the document in

14     Serbian and that the Registry inform both the accused as well as the

15     Trial Chamber and the Prosecution as to how long they expect CLSS to

16     take.

17             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I shall confer with my

18     colleagues, and we can determine the matter straight away.

19                           [Trial Chamber confers]

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] On an exceptional basis, so far

21     the Trial Chamber has made sure that the Prosecution has no extra time,

22     since it needs in this case to have access to B/C/S text.  The Trial

23     Chamber is bearing in mind a number of issues that relate to this

24     witness, and this is an exception.  We ask the Registrar to disclose to

25     you straight away a copy of the document in B/C/S, so through its oral

Page 10301

 1     decision today.

 2             Mr. Seselj.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, just briefly, I wanted to

 4     take up what you said a moment ago before Mr. Mundis took the floor.

 5             Mr. President, my Defence case is really handicapped with the

 6     cessation of my cooperation with my legal advisers, my associates.  Now,

 7     the fact that I'm handicapped, in the sense of resources to defend

 8     myself, doesn't mean that you need to apply euthanasia.  They cut off my

 9     right leg, so I'm hopping on my left leg.  They cut off my right hand, so

10     I'm dealing as best I can with my left hand.  But that cannot be a reason

11     for withholding my right to a proper defence.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] All right, Mr. Seselj, I've

13     listened to you well, but just give me one instance in which the Trial

14     Chamber has prevented you from defending you in any way?  For the time

15     being, I don't see any, but I stand to be corrected.

16             Mr. Mundis, what did you want to add?

17             MR. MUNDIS:  Mr. President, it comes to the point, actually, that

18     you raised a few moments ago and now which Dr. Seselj has again put onto

19     the record.  The Prosecution position is that it needs to be very, very

20     clear, in terms of potential appellate issues, the issues surrounding

21     counsel.  If the accused is unable to present his defence because of the

22     circumstances and situation which we now find ourselves in, then we

23     clearly are further in a position where counsel is warranted.  We can't

24     have it both ways, where Dr. Seselj says he's been hindered, but at the

25     same time refuses to communicate with his associates and/or says that he

Page 10302

 1     can proceed anyway.  We simply can't have it both ways, because this

 2     will -- I can assure everyone this will cause huge problems on appeal.

 3             We need to get the issue of counsel resolved as quickly as

 4     possible, and the accused cannot claim, on the one hand, that he's being

 5     hindered and hampered and, on the other hand, refuse to accept the

 6     assistance of his own associates and/or to appoint counsel to represent

 7     himself.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, I'll give you the

 9     floor.  I had anticipated this with my preliminary remarks.

10             If, on the one hand, you are saying that you cannot represent

11     yourself, then this is a door open to the following:  Everybody is going

12     to turn around and say to you that you need a counsel.  It's as simple as

13     that, and everybody understands that.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] He didn't say that I couldn't

15     defend myself.  I'm just saying that my Defence case is being made more

16     difficult with the Registrar's behaviour being the way it has been.  I've

17     been a dissident for many years, an anti-communist dissident in

18     Yugoslavia, and I was frequently imprisoned.  I was sentenced to terms of

19     imprisonment for my speeches or for what I wrote, but it never, ever

20     happened under the communist regime that I was supervised, my

21     communication with my lawyer, never.  That never, ever happened.  Perhaps

22     they did supervise me, but they did it secretly.  They didn't dare show

23     that they were actually supervising me, if they did; and I'm quite

24     certain that all my discussions with my legal associates were listened in

25     to, but they didn't dare let that be known.  Now they've told me that

Page 10303

 1     they are listening in to my conversations, so I'm not going to have any

 2     more, and they can't use any of the things that they intercepted during

 3     the time that they did this secretly.  That's what the communists did.

 4             I always had the right to unimpeded, unsupervised communication

 5     with counsel, even in the communist regime.  And in the civilised world,

 6     nowhere do you have the possibility of supervising communication between

 7     an accused and members of his Defence team, the inner circle of his

 8     Defence team.

 9             And listen to this:  This is a problem for the entire trial, in

10     actual fact, because it jeopardises the whole concept of a fair trial.

11     But it's not me that's jeopardising it, it's the Registrar.  I'm not the

12     one who has produced this situation.  It was the self-will exercised on

13     the part of the Registrar.

14             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis.

15             MR. MUNDIS:  That's incorrect, Mr. President.  Again, the

16     decision taken by the Registrar is not in the public domain and it's not

17     something that the Prosecution is privy to.  However, based on the press

18     statement that was issued, it is clear that the course of action the

19     Registrar took was due to the determination made by the Registrar that

20     the accused had abused this privilege.  So for him to stand here and

21     blame this on the Registrar is unacceptable.  The Registrar took this

22     decision because the Registrar determined independently that the accused

23     and his associates had abused the privileged communications that they

24     had.

25             The Prosecution will agree with Dr. Seselj that what's happening

Page 10304

 1     here is an impediment to a fair trial, and that extends equally to the

 2     Prosecution.  And this is why we have suggested in the past, and as I

 3     flagged up a few moments will likely do in the very near future, we will

 4     again ask that this proceeding be adjourned until the counsel issue is

 5     resolved.  And if that means through the Appeals Chamber, so be it.

 6             There is a great deal at stake in this case, and this counsel

 7     issue and the issues surrounding the problems with witnesses is a serious

 8     one, and the Prosecution is on the verge itself of making arguments or

 9     submissions that we very well might not be getting a fair trial

10     ourselves, and this issue needs to be resolved; and the trial will need

11     to stop in order to resolve it one way or the other.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, for once the

13     Prosecution agrees with you when it says that if your telephone lines are

14     being tapped, this may have an impact on the fairness of the trial.  This

15     is the Prosecutor's position.  The best thing to do would be to appoint a

16     counsel for you.  This is what the Prosecution is saying.

17             Second point.  What I'm telling you is this:  I don't have all

18     the information relating to this matter.  The Registrar did not discuss

19     this with the Chamber, did not inform the Chamber about it, and took this

20     decision without consulting us.  It seems that the Registry had

21     information coming from your former right-hand man and things mentioned

22     with the major, that when you were on the phone with him, you discussed

23     political matters.

24             In light of this, the Registry felt that this telephone line was

25     provided to you by this Tribunal to prepare your Defence and not to

Page 10305

 1     discuss any other matters.  And as far as I'm concerned, this is what led

 2     to the Registrar's decision.  But there is not only that ground, there's

 3     another ground which I had rather not address, which is connected to the

 4     witness.  The fact that your conversations are being tapped just means,

 5     from the Registrar's standpoint, that you do not use this telephone line

 6     for reasons other than your Defence.  If, for instance, you phone up

 7     Mr. Krasic to tell him that he needs to work on such-and-such a witness's

 8     testimony, then this is part of your Defence, and that is not a problem.

 9             But if you tell Mr. Krasic that during the parliamentary

10     assembly, a bill will have to be amended, then you are no longer talking

11     about the same thing, and I'm sure you understand what I mean.

12             As I see things, I don't know what the Prosecutor is going to do,

13     but I think there are going to be new motions filed, new applications,

14     new Appeals Chamber decisions.  The trial was making progress.  We've

15     heard 40 witnesses so far, and the Prosecution needs 10 or so hours to

16     finish its case.

17             Mr. Seselj, we have five minutes left before we finish.

18             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] I'd like to add something as

19     regards the decision taken by the Registrar.

20             We were advised of the fact that the Registrar sent a letter to

21     Mr. Seselj's associates, asking them to provide further explanation.

22     They responded to the letter, but did not respond to the questions, and

23     that is why the Registrar took its decision.  This is what we were

24     advised of.  This was no arbitrary decision taken by the Registrar.

25             Thank you.

Page 10306

 1             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I just want to tell you one thing

 3     briefly here at this point.

 4             David Tolbert was for years the deputy secretary of

 5     Hans Holthuis, so deputy Registrar; and in that capacity, every month

 6     over a seven-month period he -- and this was in 2004, he prohibited me

 7     from having any contacts at all with my family, with my friends, with

 8     everybody, both telephones and visits.  So for seven months, I was in a

 9     state of absolute isolation.

10             One of the explanations given was that my party, the Serbian

11     Radical Party, had achieved a very good result at the parliamentary

12     elections, and so there was the danger of me influencing the

13     establishment of the formation of a new government which wasn't in the

14     interests of peace, and this Tribunal was set up to promote peace in the

15     Balkans.  And after a certain amount of time, this same man,

16     David Tolbert, left the Registry and became the Deputy Chief Prosecutor,

17     Carla Del Ponte's Deputy Chief Prosecutor, and there you have a flagrant

18     example of this feedback relationship, a very strong one, between the

19     Secretariat and the OTP, Prosecution.  And now to have me allow the

20     Registry to intercept my communications and listen in, I'm not going to

21     do that.  Even if they do, they're not allowed to use that if they do it

22     clandestinely.

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You can perfectly well state

24     all of this and challenge this decision and submit it to the President of

25     the Tribunal.

Page 10307

 1             Yes, Mr. Mundis.

 2             MR. MUNDIS:  Two very quick points.  I'm aware of the time.

 3             First of all, I want to make it absolutely clear that when I

 4     spoke earlier about the fairness issues with respect to the trial, I was

 5     referring to the abuse of the privilege by the accused as found by the

 6     Registrar and not necessarily the monitoring of his communications that

 7     goes to the issue of fairness, and that relates to fairness from the

 8     Prosecution perspective.

 9             Secondly, in light of the fact that the Registrar's decision or

10     letter to the accused is apparently not a public document, I do want to

11     put on the record part of what was contained in the Registry's statement

12     announcing this to the press, in which it was found, quoting from the

13     Registrar's letter, that there were reasonable grounds, and I'm quoting:

14             " ... reasonable grounds to believe that the privilege is being

15     abused in an attempt to interfere with or intimidate witnesses or

16     interfere with the administration of justice."

17             Those are the publicly-stated grounds that Mr. Holthuis relied

18     upon in making the determination that the privileged communications would

19     cease, and I think it's important that that is it not necessarily relate

20     to any political activities of the accused, at least with respect to

21     what's in the public domain that's contained in this letter.  And so his

22     findings are based on reasonable grounds to believe that there's attempts

23     at interference or intimidation of witnesses and/or interference with the

24     administration of justice, and those are the publicly-stated reasons why

25     this privileged communications has been temporarily withdrawn or

Page 10308

 1     suspended by the Registrar.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Simply, to make sure that

 3     everything is clear, I had not heard of any press release which refers to

 4     one of the rules of our Rules which entitles communications to be

 5     regulated, when there is interference or intimidation of witnesses.  I

 6     have a personal question.

 7             How does the Registry know that there is a case of intimidation

 8     of witnesses?  That said, it is now time to stop.

 9             Mr. Mundis, you would like to add something?

10             MR. MUNDIS:  VWS is part of the Registry, of course, so in light

11     of the fact that the Registrar controls VWS, there very well may have

12     been independent sources of information from VWS going to the Registry

13     that supported the Registrar's decision; so that would seem to be the

14     source of that.

15             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We want everything to be quite

16     clear on the transcript.

17             To date, the Trial Chamber has not been seized of any report

18     filed by the VWS as regards witness intimidation; never, ever.  If such a

19     report is in support of the Registrar's letter, it would have been

20     important for us to see this, but we have never seen any such thing.

21             We shall resume next week, and I believe we are sitting in the

22     morning.  We shall resume on Tuesday at 8.30.

23                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3.56 p.m.,

24                           to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 7th day of

25                           October, 2008, at 8.30 a.m.