Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 5838

1 Thursday, 14 February 2002

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 2.28 p.m.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Please call the case.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Case number

8 IT-95-9-T, the Prosecutor versus Blagoje Simic, Milan Simic, Miroslav

9 Tadic, and Simo Zaric.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: The Trial Chamber wishes to explain that it hasn't

11 been possible to start the proceedings for the afternoon as scheduled at

12 1415 hours because the sittings for the morning sessions go beyond 1345,

13 so it takes time to clear the courtroom. That's why we're not able to sit

14 on time. So until that improves, I'm afraid we may be running a little

15 late.

16 The Trial Chamber wants to explain to the witness that it is no

17 longer necessary for the witness to produce any photographs of his house

18 or any other house where he used to live at the material time, because the

19 Trial Chamber did get a full explanation through their questions and

20 through the explanations given by the witness using the photograph D16/4.

21 So the witness should not be concerned with bringing any other

22 photographs. The matter has been cleared. So the cross-examination can

23 continue.


25 [Witness answered through interpreter]

Page 5839

1 MR. LAZAREVIC: Thank you, Your Honours. This also helps in my

2 cross-examination, so I won't have to go back to this topic again.

3 Cross-examined by Mr. Lazarevic: [Continued]

4 Q. [Interpretation] Good day, Mr. Dagovic. I will continue where we

5 left off yesterday. While I was going over the transcript, I've noticed

6 some mistakes which occurred primarily in the translation of a question

7 that I put to you. So I would like to clarify that by asking this

8 question of you again. It's a question relating to the time up until the

9 4th Detachment existed. So on the transcript on page 5835, line 5, I saw

10 that it was in the transcript that I asked you, "Do you know of the fact

11 that the 4th Detachment ceased to exist on the 12th of May, 1992, when it

12 joined -- became part of the units of the army of Republika Srpska." And

13 I asked you whether it had become the 5th Battalion of the army of

14 Republika Srpska. And I had asked you whether this was possible.

15 So now, now that you see how I've formulated this question, I

16 wanted to ask you whether that was the time that the 5th Battalion of the

17 army of Republika Srpska came into being and if this is something that you

18 know.

19 A. As far as I know, the same people were in the town and in the

20 camp. What the name of that army was or the battalion, I don't know, or

21 when this change took place, I don't know that either.

22 Q. Well, thank you. I just wanted to correct this technical

23 question.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: [Previous translation continues] ... respecting our

25 rules to pause, please, after the witness has given an answer, because the

Page 5840

1 interpreter has to complete the answer of the witness.

2 MR. LAZAREVIC: I apologise, Your Honour. I'll have this in

3 mind.

4 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Dagovic, I also noticed some other things

5 while I was carefully reading the transcript of yesterday's session. This

6 concerns the moment when, according to your testimony, you saw Mr. Zaric

7 and Mr. Tadic for the first time. Yesterday you stated, transcript page

8 5823, lines 12 and 13, that you saw them practically -- the two of them

9 together for the first time some three or four metres away. And will

10 now quote the transcript in English and you will get a translation.

11 [In English] "Four metres, the street and my yard, and that's when

12 I saw them."

13 [Interpretation] So that means you practically saw them from the

14 gate of your courtyard as they were standing with the gun pointed towards

15 your house, the barrel. That was the first time that you saw Tadic and

16 Zaric; is this true?

17 A. Well, I wouldn't agree with that. I said that I saw him for the

18 first time from the window of my house, so not from the gate of my

19 house, that was the second time. So let's not mix those two things up.

20 The first time I saw them was from the window of my house, and it was more

21 than 3 or 4 metres away. It was a distance of some 10 metres, if I'm not

22 mistaken. And then the second time, it was like you said, from 3 to 4

23 metres away.

24 Q. Well, I'm asking you that precisely in order to clarify things

25 that are already in the transcript. The question was: When you first saw

Page 5841

1 it, that was the question, and what I read out to you, what I quoted, was

2 your answer, the way it was recorded in the transcript. So now I'm

3 talking about Zaric and Tadic. So did you see them when the tank was

4 already standing in front of your house and they were standing on the

5 caterpillar of the tank, or did you see them before that?

6 A. Well, I'm giving you the same answer again. That was the second

7 time. We clarified this yesterday. But if you remember yesterday, you

8 asked me whether the barrel was already turned towards the house for the

9 first time. And I said no, because that was when they were still moving.

10 Once they stopped in front of my house, that was the second time, not the

11 first time, but the second time, then it was from 3 or 4 metres away, the

12 second time. I don't know what's in the transcript, but I know what I

13 said.

14 Q. Well, this is precisely what we are trying to clarify so that the

15 transcript would reflect what you actually said. So in relation to the

16 first time that you saw them, could you please tell me whether they were

17 walking or going behind the tank, next to the tank, in front of the tank.

18 Where were they?

19 A. If you listen to me carefully, I responded in my previous answer.

20 Next to the tank.

21 Q. Thank you very much.

22 And one more clarification, please, for the transcript. I

23 carefully listened to what you said. So when you got to the gate of your

24 yard, the barrel was already turned, is that true, towards your house?

25 A. Yes.

Page 5842

1 Q. Could you please tell me, on that occasion how was Mr. Zaric

2 dressed? What kind of a uniform was he wearing?

3 A. Mr. Zaric had a camouflage uniform, which was different from the

4 uniforms of regular soldiers. As opposed to uniforms of regular soldiers,

5 he was wearing an officer's camouflage uniform, which was of a lighter

6 shade of green than the normal uniform.

7 Q. The uniform, the camouflage uniform of a lighter shade of green,

8 you also mentioned during the examination-in-chief by the Prosecution when

9 you were talking about Mr. Zaric. So on that occasion, when he was

10 collecting the weapons, was he wearing the same uniform that you were

11 describing then?

12 A. Yes. He always had the same uniform. Sometimes he also had a

13 officer's bag with him, and sometimes I also saw that he was carrying an

14 automatic weapon.

15 Q. Yes. That is what I was going to ask you now. We are still now

16 with the situation of the collection of weapons, and this is precisely

17 what I wanted to ask you, whether Mr. Zaric had any weapons on that

18 occasion. So I'm talking about this event of the collection of weapons.

19 A. Yes. He had an automatic weapon.

20 Q. Automatic weapon. Can you tell us what kind of an automatic

21 weapon?

22 A. As far as I was able to see, it was either a Kalashnikov or a

23 Zastava automatic rifle. But he did have an automatic weapon in his

24 hand.

25 Q. Thank you. Now I would like to go back -- excuse me, I will do

Page 5843

1 that later. I have just one more question relating to this issue, and

2 then we will go on to another topic. After you handed over your pistol

3 which was in the cellar of your house, the soldiers left; is that true?

4 A. Yes, that's true.

5 Q. And --

6 A. Well, I remained.

7 Q. Where?

8 A. In the yard, and then later I went inside the house.

9 Q. How long did you stay in the yard?

10 A. I don't know exactly how long, but long enough to see the

11 direction that they left in.

12 Q. I would like to present to you now a few specific details from

13 your statement that you provided on the 9th of November before this

14 Tribunal. It's on page 3915. I will read this in English. And it states

15 there, as follows: [In English] "... going along the street, and Mr. Simo

16 Zaric and Mr. Miroslav Tadic were standing on this tank."

17 [Interpretation] You told us today that they were walking next to

18 the tank. So which of these two is true?

19 A. I don't know if you're trying to confuse me or you don't

20 understand. I said yesterday -- and let's go back to that -- that the

21 first time that they were walking, they were not on the tank, because the

22 tank was moving. And the second time that I saw them standing on the

23 tank -- well, so please read that to the end and then ...

24 Q. Mr. Dagovic, I am reading in English what it states in the

25 transcript from the 9th of November, 2001, where it state that the tank

Page 5844

1 was moving and that they were standing on it. And in view of their age

2 and the situation, it didn't seem logical to me for them to be standing on

3 the tank as the tank was moving.

4 MR. WEINER: Objection.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Weiner.

6 MR. WEINER: That question is argumentative. Could they rephrase

7 the question, please. He's making an argument that's not a question.

8 MR. LAZAREVIC: I will do that.

9 Q. [Interpretation] Sir, it states here in the transcript that the

10 tank was moving and that Mr. Zaric and Mr. Tadic were standing on it; is

11 this true?

12 A. I don't know. As I told you, I abide by what I have said

13 yesterday and today. So perhaps if this was a mistake in the writing,

14 just like the ones that you pointed out, well, I don't know. I don't

15 know what I said. As long as the tank was moving, they couldn't have been

16 standing on its caterpillars. Even a small child knows that.

17 Q. So they were not standing on the tank that was moving. Can we

18 conclude that now?

19 A. No, they were not standing on the moving tank. But once it

20 stopped, they were standing on it then.

21 Q. Can we say that they were standing on the caterpillars of the

22 tank?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Mr. Dagovic, you talked about some shelling and how your relative

25 was killed by a shell, and you stated that while you were questioned by

Page 5845

1 my colleague, Mr. Krgovic. Are you familiar with the fact that there was

2 an attack by the Croatian Air Force against Samac and that bombs were

3 dropped on the town of Samac on that occasion?

4 A. Yes. I know that. And if you remember, and if you've read that,

5 and I stated that yesterday they were targeting the post office, and they

6 hit a private house.

7 Q. Perhaps we didn't clarify that precisely at that time. Now we're

8 speaking about an attack by the Air Force when bombs were dropped from the

9 air. So are we talking about the same event?

10 A. When you say, "the Air Force," I wouldn't call it that, because it

11 was an agricultural airplane. So it was one airplane and not the Air

12 Force. But just one agricultural airplane.

13 Q. Did you see that plane?

14 A. I didn't see the plane at that time, since I was in the camp, but

15 I heard the noise it was making, its sound. And this sound is different

16 from the sound of a fighter plane.

17 Q. When you say, "an Air Force plane," you mean a jet -- you mean the

18 sound of a jet plane; is that right?

19 A. I don't -- I'm not thinking of a jet plane, I'm thinking of a

20 military plane. So it would not be only -- or just a jet plane. It would

21 also be a bomber.

22 Q. When this happened, could you please tell me what the bombs that

23 were dropped then, what did they hit in Samac, which targets?

24 A. I know about one target because it happened to be in my street,

25 just across from my house, and it hit the house of Jusuf Arnautovic. And

Page 5846

1 if other bombs fell, I don't know. But I know that there was talks that

2 they were trying to hit the post office and the waterworks, and they must

3 have missed them.

4 Q. And this is as much as you know about this?

5 A. Yes, this is as much as I know. But I know this about the house

6 of Arnautovic because I also have photographs of that event.

7 Q. Mr. Dagovic, in your statement, you spoke about the looting of the

8 pizzeria of the Bicic brothers, and you said this because you were

9 involved with this against your will, and you said that police officers,

10 as well as occasionally soldiers from the 4th Detachment, participated in

11 this. And this is on page 3957 of the transcript. So now I'm interested

12 whether you could precisely state which soldiers of the 4th Detachment

13 took part in this. Could you tell us their names, perhaps.

14 A. Yes. I can tell you that amongst others - and I will tell you

15 their nicknames - Tubonje, i.e. Tubonjic. Also Neven, the son of Boris

16 Markovic was there. I don't know his last name. I've forgotten it. This

17 is his younger son, and I think his name is Neven. But I'm sure it was

18 his younger son, he was there.

19 Q. I think that based on that, we would be able to know which persons

20 you are talking about.

21 During the questioning yesterday by Mr. Krgovic, you said that

22 even before the outbreak of the conflict, you used to see soldiers of the

23 4th Detachment on patrol in uniform. Could you please tell me whether you

24 saw Simo Zaric before this event while he was patrolling in uniform in

25 Samac. And we're talking about the period before the 16th of April, 1992.

Page 5847

1 A. Yes. I saw him in uniform, but I don't know if he was on patrol

2 or whether he was just moving around. But I know that he was in uniform.

3 And if I may be allowed to add, I can provide photographs of this, dated

4 photographs.

5 Q. Can you tell me the exact occasions that you saw him before the

6 17th of April, 1992.

7 A. Well, it happened on several occasions.

8 Q. Well, can you remember any such occasions? And if you can

9 remember, could you please tell us so.

10 A. I wouldn't go into the dates, but I can obtain photographs and

11 then you will be able to see the dates on these photographs. But on

12 several occasions during the war, i.e., immediately prior to the outbreak

13 of hostilities.

14 Q. So right now you are not able to give us a specific date.

15 A. Well, I wouldn't commit to a specific date, but I did see him

16 several days, two, three, four, five days. And it was not only Simo

17 Zaric. There were several more soldiers.

18 Q. Mr. Dagovic, you never saw any kind of official list of the

19 members of the 4th Detachment?

20 A. No, I didn't see any such list.

21 Q. And you never saw them lined up at all, the entire 4th Detachment

22 all lined up?

23 A. No, I didn't see them like that. No.

24 Q. I would like to move to a different topic now, and I assume this

25 topic is more unpleasant for you, because it's the period of your -- when

Page 5848

1 you were detained in the MUP building. So we will just go over that

2 briefly, and we won't go into too much detail.

3 You spent about five months there; is that correct?

4 A. Yes, it is. I agree.

5 Q. During that time, you were taken on labour duty in Samac, in

6 several villages in the outskirts of Samac, and then also for a while,

7 you worked in a garage.

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Could you please tell us - and I assume that you cannot say that

10 in every case, but on average - when were you usually taken for this work

11 duty? When did this take place?

12 A. This wasn't only in the morning. Sometimes it was for a half day,

13 it was in the morning, sometimes it was in the evening. It depends. I

14 cannot give you a specific time.

15 Q. So can you tell me most frequently when you were taken out. Or

16 perhaps there is no particular rule about that.

17 A. There was no sense to it nor any kind of rule, so it wasn't any

18 kind of set practice.

19 Q. During those five months, you spent some of that time in hospital,

20 receiving treatment for your injuries; is that true?

21 A. No, that's not it. I spent about six months in the camp. And out

22 of that, I was in the camp for five months and I was in the hospital for

23 one month.

24 Q. During your stay in the camp, in the MUP building where the

25 garages were, did you used to see this person Tubonjic there, whom you

Page 5849

1 said had taken part in the robbery of the Bicic pizzeria? Is that where

2 you saw him?

3 A. Yes. I did see him at that time, and he had transferred from the

4 4th Detachment to the police forces. So before that, he was in the 4th

5 Detachment.

6 Q. When did he formally transfer from the 4th Detachment to the

7 police? What date was that?

8 A. I don't know. He wasn't kind enough to tell me that, and I wasn't

9 interested either.

10 Q. My colleague now provided me with information about this other man

11 which took part in the robbery of the Bicic pizzeria. I've been told that

12 his name is Nino Markovic. Is that the person?

13 A. Yes, Your Honour, right, Nino Markovic, the younger son of

14 Borislav Markovic, nicknamed Smudj.

15 Q. Well, now that we've identified that person --

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. -- did you also see him?

18 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel repeat the last part of his

19 question?

20 A. Yes, I did happen to see him because he was driving my car which

21 was confiscated by the army, the paramilitary forces.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: There was one part where the interpreter didn't

23 catch the end of your question, if you look at the end of the transcript

24 in line 13, I think, where you said, "Well, now that we've identified that

25 person --" you did say something else which the interpreters didn't

Page 5850

1 catch. So they ask that you repeat your sentence.

2 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]

3 Q. Yes. We seem to have overlapped again with the interpreters. I

4 said, "We finally now identified that person." Is that Nino Markovic, is

5 that that same person?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And so you used to see him in the MUP building as well at that

8 time during your period there at the camp. And you said that you

9 remembered him because he used to drive your car around.

10 A. Yes. I saw him just like I saw all the other members of the 4th

11 Detachment who used to come to the police station probably in order to

12 abuse the people who were being kept there or the like. And I can also

13 name them, if necessary.

14 Q. The difference between -- you differentiate between a police

15 officer and a soldier on the basis of the uniform that they wore, I

16 assume.

17 A. Not only on that basis, but also we were guarded by the police

18 officers and we were beaten by the soldiers together with the police

19 officers. Meaning, if the soldiers hadn't had a good day on the front or

20 somebody was killed, then they would come and beat us, and they would take

21 it out on us, or when they were having meetings with the chief of police.

22 Q. Mr. Dagovic, I have very few questions left for you. In your

23 testimony, you said that the soldiers greeted Simo Zaric with respect.

24 It's on page 3991 of the transcript. When you say "with respect," do you

25 mean a military salute with their hand touching their heads? Is that what

Page 5851

1 you meant?

2 A. When I said "with respect," that's what I meant, regardless of

3 whether it was a handshake of a military salute. I can't remember exactly

4 what it looked like. But I remember that they respected him, and that's

5 how they treated him when they greeted him.

6 Q. I may have got the wrong impression. You know, this is being

7 interpreted into English, and then we interpret it back into our

8 language. So I understood you to mean a military salute, standing at

9 attention and raising one's hand to one's head. Is that what you meant?

10 A. Among other things, yes.

11 Q. You served in the JNA. You spent quite a lot of time there. And

12 I trust that you are familiar with the rules of the service, as they

13 existed at the time when you were there. Do you know what I'm talking

14 about?

15 A. Yes, I do. But these soldiers had nothing to do with the Yugoslav

16 army.

17 Q. Let me put the following question to you: In the rules of the

18 service, were soldiers of a lower rank duty-bound to give a military

19 salute to a higher-ranking soldier, standing at attention and raising

20 their hand to their head?

21 A. Yes, that's correct. But that was not former army, in the army of

22 Republika Srpska, I don't know how it was. Probably.

23 Q. Mr. Dagovic, I think I am not revealing anything new when I say

24 that this way of saluting is common to all the armies in the world,

25 everywhere, and that it's not at all unusual for a lower-ranking soldier

Page 5852

1 to greet a higher-ranking one with a military salute.

2 MR. WEINER: Objection, Your Honour.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Weiner.

4 MR. WEINER: I think we're getting off track here on relevance, if

5 we could just move on. We're just getting off track. The witness

6 previously indicated that there was some saluting. He remembered some

7 sort of respect. He couldn't recall the different actions, whether it was

8 shaking hands, standing at attention out of respect. We're moving way off

9 track.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Weiner.

11 Counsel, I hope you have understood what Mr. Weiner is objecting

12 to.

13 MR. LAZAREVIC: I won't insist on this line of examination. I

14 mean, I was talking about fact of some common knowledge about how military

15 officers salute each other, and that was basically what I was thinking.

16 Just a few more questions in regard to one topic, and I will

17 finish with my cross-examination.

18 Q. [Interpretation] Let me put just one more question to you in

19 connection with something you mentioned in your testimony before this

20 Tribunal, and you mentioned it again today. This is the bag that

21 Mr. Zaric carried on his right shoulder. You said earlier that you

22 thought it contained important documents. Is that correct? Is that what

23 you said?

24 A. Yes, that's what I said. But I said also that I thought they were

25 important documents because he was going to see the chief of police. So

Page 5853

1 I'm sure he wasn't carrying biscuits to him.

2 Q. He never opened the bag in front of you.

3 A. No.

4 Q. Did the bag open by accident? Maybe something fell out that you

5 could see?

6 A. No.

7 Q. He could have been carrying a newspaper, a notebook, his

8 breakfast; is that correct?

9 A. No.

10 Q. But you don't actually know what was in the bag, do you?

11 A. I know very well, but it seems that you don't know. I said an

12 officer's bag. When I said "an officer's bag," I meant a bag for

13 documents. It's three, four, maybe five centimetres thick, and about 25

14 or 30 centimetres long at the most. So neither a newspaper nor his

15 breakfast nor cakes or biscuits could fit in there.

16 Q. Mr. Dagovic, I will ask you again -- and this is really my last

17 question. But you can only assume what was in the bag.

18 A. Yes. In view of the fact that I stated.

19 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, for one second I would like to ...

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. You can go ahead.

21 MR. LAZAREVIC: With the permission of the Honourable Trial

22 Chamber --


24 MR. LAZAREVIC: -- I would like my client to show his bag to the

25 witness.

Page 5854

1 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no. You should collect the bag.


3 JUDGE MUMBA: And show it to the witness, because we are not

4 allowing direct dealings between the witness and the accused person.

5 MR. LAZAREVIC: This is why I asked for permission. Yes, thank

6 you.

7 Your Honours, I would kindly ask for instruction at this moment.

8 I hope that I won't have to tender this bag into evidence because it would

9 cause a serious problem with my client.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Because -- especially that we don't wish to

11 know the contents.

12 Mr. Weiner.

13 MR. WEINER: It's okay.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Because I was going to find out from you the

15 status of the bag. How would you describe --

16 Yes.

17 MR. WEINER: I think he first has to ask the witness if this is

18 the bag or if he recognises the bag. Otherwise we can't have Mr. Zaric

19 coming to testify to the bag at this time.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, counsel, you can go ahead.

21 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. Mr. Dagovic, is this the bag?

23 A. No.

24 Q. The bag you talked about, was it approximately this size?

25 A. Well, maybe the height was the same or a little less, but not the

Page 5855

1 width, not the depth. If you read the transcript carefully, you will see

2 that I told you the width, the height, and the depth. And the height was

3 different. I would not call this bag an officer's bag. I never saw a bag

4 like this. This looks like the kind of bag you take on vacation.

5 Q. Can we be precise, then. Was that an officer's bag of the former

6 JNA, the bag that you saw Mr. Zaric carrying?

7 A. Yes, it was the sort of bag carried by officers in the former

8 JNA. That's correct.

9 Q. Very well. I have no further questions.

10 A. May I just add, to avoid another error, I don't know whether there

11 were other officers' bags. I'm not saying that this is not an officer's

12 bag. It's not the bag that he carried. Yes, that's what I meant. I

13 didn't mean this particular bag.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Counsel, before you take back the bag, maybe we can

15 have a description of the bag for the record.

16 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, the record may reflect, I have shown

17 to the witness a man's leather bag --

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Maybe we can --

19 Yes, Mr. Weiner.

20 MR. WEINER: I was just going to add, could we photocopy it at the

21 break?

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Actually I was going to ask that, because I

23 was thinking whether we should have it shown on the ELMO --

24 MR. WEINER: That would be fine.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Because then it would be contained in the

Page 5856

1 record.

2 Yes, the usher can put it on the ELMO, front and back.


4 JUDGE MUMBA: And then -- yes, turn it over. The other side, the

5 back side.

6 We are all agreed that it's a brown colour.

7 MR. LAZAREVIC: I believe that we have a picture. And as soon as

8 we get a photocopy of this, I will ask for the identification or some

9 other number for this evidence.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: I think just a photograph will do, so that we don't

11 inconvenience the owner of the bag by retaining the bag on the record.

12 Yes, except to show that the bag showed on the ELMO is not,

13 according to the witness, the bag that he saw the accused carrying.

14 MR. LAZAREVIC: That's clear enough.

15 And I have finished with my cross-examination of this witness.

16 Thank you.

17 JUDGE SINGH: Mr. Esad Dagovic, I just need a clarification here.

18 The bag that you saw and which you say was an officer's bag, 3, 4, 5

19 centimetres thick and 25 to 35 centimetres long, what colour -- can you

20 remember what colour it was?

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was a dark red/brown -- reddish

22 brown, kind of burgundy.

23 JUDGE WILLIAMS: And if I could also ask you a question. Was it a

24 leather bag or a canvas bag? Did it have a handle and a shoulder strap?

25 Any other details that might assist us?

Page 5857

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. The bag I saw here is that --

2 it has a plastic handle. The other bag had a leather strap. And like

3 this bag, it could be carried over the shoulder on a strap. And it was

4 made of leather.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: I have been advised by the technical people that

6 actually if the usher goes back and stands with the bag to show it on the

7 ELMO, they can actually take photographs of it right now so that we don't

8 have to wait for the photographs. Maybe we can do that right away and

9 then proceed with the cross-examination.

10 I hope it's securely closed so we don't see the contents. I hope

11 we can follow the same language with the technical booth.

12 Can you phone them and give the instructions if we need to -- the

13 usher needs to be told how he should place the bag.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: I take it we are through?


16 Your Honours, there is only one issue in regard to this bag. I

17 would like that the record reflects --

18 JUDGE MUMBA: That ...?

19 MR. LAZAREVIC: Actually, that the handle of this bag is actually

20 leather.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: That the what?

22 MR. LAZAREVIC: That the handle of this bag is actually made of

23 leather.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: The strap or the short --

25 MR. LAZAREVIC: Is leather, yes, this.

Page 5858

1 JUDGE MUMBA: We can't see the handle from here.

2 MR. LAZAREVIC: Please, I -- yes, I would like it to be --

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Because we've got it on record.

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I can see, it is covered

5 with leather.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Do we agree, counsel, that the handle is covered

7 with leather?

8 MR. DI FAZIO: May I just see the bag.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Oh, the Prosecution haven't seen the bag.

10 MR. DI FAZIO: I don't think there's any dispute that it's

11 leather.

12 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Yes. I think I would totally agree with you,

13 Mr. Di Fazio.

14 MR. LAZAREVIC: Thank you, my learned colleagues.

15 JUDGE SINGH: If I might just seek another clarification from the

16 witness, Mr. Esad Dagovic.

17 You saw this bag, what, some ten years ago, long ago. It's been

18 quite a time now -- quite a long time. Well, we all know that hides are

19 tanned coloured. When you saw it, it was reddish brown. It's a kind of

20 brown now. Would you like to comment on whether with the reflection of

21 time, the colour may become faded as the bag gets older. So would you

22 have any knowledge of that, because I believe you may, yourself, have been

23 having such bags or ...

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, it's possible for it to fade.

25 But I don't think it can shrink, and I don't think it can change its

Page 5859












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 5860

1 handle. But of course it's possible that it could fade. I agree. When I

2 was in the army, I was a squad leader and I carried a bag of that kind.

3 When we had exercises, and I used to use it to carry the plans for the

4 exercises and documents, so I know very well what sort of bag it was and

5 how it's made. When I said it had a plastic handle, I hadn't held it in

6 my hand, I only saw it from a distance. But that bag had a leather handle

7 which was about half a centimetre thick. And at the sides, there were two

8 rings or hooks attaching this. So it did not look at all like this bag.

9 JUDGE SINGH: Thank you.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Next counsel to cross-examine.

11 Or Mr. Lazarevic.

12 MR. LAZAREVIC: Just one more issue. After I noticed that this is

13 going to be photographed on the ELMO, maybe we should have an ID number

14 for the photograph that we are going to receive from the ELMO.

15 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. When it comes, yes.

16 MR. LAZAREVIC: When it comes. Thank you, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Mr. Zecevic.

18 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes. Your Honours, I wonder, before I start, I just

19 have received the translation of some ten documents which are IDed with

20 the Registry.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: The ones we -- we had dealt with before, the ones

22 that we're awaiting translation.

23 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, that we are waiting for. And if you want me, I

24 can tender them at the evidence at this time, because those are just the

25 translation. The documents are already registered. These are the D22

Page 5861

1 A/2 until D22 I/2. So these are the English translation, official

2 translations of these documents.

3 I have given them to the -- to my learned colleagues from the

4 Prosecution already a couple of days ago, and with ERN numbers and all.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay. I think what we should do -- you can hand

6 them over. And because some of the documents the Prosecution were not

7 sure because of lack of translation, I think we will deal with that

8 later.

9 MR. ZECEVIC: Okay. Your Honours. I understand.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: So that we don't waste any time with the witness.

11 MR. ZECEVIC: I will hand it to the usher and we will proceed with

12 them later.


14 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.

15 Your Honours, may I start with my cross-examination?

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. You can go ahead.

17 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you so much.

18 Cross-examined by Mr. Zecevic:

19 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Dagovic, my name is Slobodan Zecevic. Tell

20 me, Mr. Dagovic, in the course of your testimony yesterday, on page 5804

21 of the transcript of the 13th of February, 2002, which was yesterday, in

22 line 9 and the subsequent lines, you said in answer to a question put by

23 my colleague:

24 [In English]

25 "Q. Just mentioned Muhamed and Hasan Bicic. So I just wanted

Page 5862

1 to ask you something about their families. Were they in

2 Samac at that time?

3 A. No.

4 Q. Do you know perhaps when they left Samac, the families of

5 Hasan and Muhamed Bicic?

6 A. They left immediately before the outbreak of the war.

7 But I don't know exactly when."

8 Is this correct?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. You remember, then, that the families of Mr. Muhamed and Hasan

11 Bicic left Samac before the war?

12 A. Immediately before the outbreak of the war, as far as I can

13 remember.

14 Q. You should know this well, because you were employed at the

15 Rendezvous and you saw them on a daily basis; is that correct?

16 A. Yes, that's correct. But these are family matters. I need not

17 know everything that went on in their families. I agree. So I only knew

18 what went on in the pizzeria, if you agree with that.

19 Q. The house on Muhamed and Hasan Bicic is about 50 metres away from

20 your house; is that correct?

21 A. Yes, that's correct.

22 Q. When you went to work at the pizzeria, did you usually pass by

23 their house?

24 A. Yes, mostly.

25 Q. So I assume that their wives and their mother, had they been

Page 5863

1 there, you would have seen them just before the war, assuming that they

2 were there, you would have seen them, wouldn't you?

3 A. Well, even when they were there, I didn't see them every day. And

4 let me correct you. Hasan Bicic was not married; he didn't have a wife.

5 There was only one wife, and she belonged to Muhamed Bicic.

6 Q. Thank you.

7 A. You're welcome.

8 Q. Let me remind you of your statement of the 8th of November, 2001.

9 On page 3911, and that was an interview conducted by the Prosecution, in

10 response to a question put by my learned friend:

11 [In English]

12 "Q. Where was the Bicic home in relation to your home?

13 A. It was halfway from my house to the pizzeria, that is to

14 say, 50 metres away from my house.

15 Q. After you gave the Bicics the money, did you return

16 home?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And did you see the Bicics again later that morning?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. How did you come to see them?

21 A. Since their mother and the wives of Hasan and Muhamed

22 Bicic, they came to my mother's for breakfast and coffee."

23 [Interpretation] Let me remind you, you spoke here about the

24 morning immediately after the outbreak of hostilities in Bosanski Samac,

25 that is, the 17th of April, 1992. It follows from this that the mother

Page 5864

1 and wives - that's what it says here, in the plural - of Muhamed and

2 Hasan Bicic came to your mother's for breakfast and coffee. Tell me, sir,

3 what is correct, what you said yesterday or what you said on Thursday, the

4 8th of November, 2001?

5 A. If you read my first statement carefully, you will see clearly

6 that I said that Hasan and Muhamed came to have breakfast and coffee with

7 me, and not their wives and mother, because Hasan is not married at all.

8 So that's absurd. I couldn't have said that. He's not married. He has a

9 child with a woman who lives in Croatia.

10 MR. WEINER: I'd object at this time. Because if you look at that

11 sentence, the sentence doesn't make sense grammatically. But the rest of

12 the sentence, it's obvious that there are words missing in that sentence

13 in the transcript. And too, he's taking the mean that wives came to the

14 Bicics' house. It's -- I remember the testimony. The sentence as it is

15 in the transcript is incorrect, and it doesn't make any sense. The

16 sentence is "Since their mother and the wives of Hasan Bicic, they came to

17 my mother's for breakfast and coffee," I think it should have been since

18 they were away. But even as it stands here, it doesn't make any

19 grammatical sense. And I think it's incorrect or wrong to try to impeach

20 him with a sentence that doesn't make any sense. Obviously, it's a

21 transcription error.

22 MR. ZECEVIC: May I respond, Your Honours?

23 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

24 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm just asking the clarification at this time. I'm

25 not impeaching the witness. I'm just asking the clarification at this

Page 5865

1 time. And I was reading exactly from the transcript. It's the page 3911,

2 8th November 2001. This is actually the row 10 and 11. "A. Since their

3 mother and the wives of Hasan and Muhamed Bicic, they came to my

4 mother's for breakfast and coffee."


6 MR. ZECEVIC: I have understood it to refer to the mothers and the

7 wives of this other gentleman.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. So as you say, you are seeking clarification

9 from the witness.

10 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, Your Honour.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: You are not challenging him.

12 MR. WEINER: Okay. As long as he is not challenging. Because, as

13 I said, we maintain the transcript is incorrect.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, because we all know sometimes there are

15 mistake so he wants to seek clarification, as he has stated.

16 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry. I'm not challenging witness at this

17 time. It depends on his answer, of course.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, that is understood.

19 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please. Could counsel please

20 indicate, is it clarification of numbers of wives that we are seeking?

21 JUDGE MUMBA: No. Clarification of the whole sentence, of the

22 evidence.

23 MR. DI FAZIO: I see.

24 MR. ZECEVIC: If you were following me, my dear colleague, the

25 first thing I asked was about the statement of the same witness given

Page 5866

1 yesterday, where he said that the family of Hasan and Muhamed Bicic was

2 away before the outbreak of hostilities. And that is the only reason I'm

3 asking this.

4 MR. WEINER: No problem.

5 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.

6 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Dagovic, not to dwell on this. You've heard

7 what I've read out and what it states in the transcript, the official

8 transcript. Could you please tell me which version is true? Is it true

9 what it says in the transcript or what you told us yesterday?

10 A. As you said yourself, this was my questioning by the Prosecution,

11 and we were talking about the first statement. If you take the first

12 statement and the statement from yesterday, you will come -- you will

13 arrive at an answer by yourself. I cannot make such a mistake. You could

14 make such a mistake because you don't know Hasan. Mr. Pisarevic knows

15 Hasan. Hasan wasn't married. So it's absurd to talk about two wives.

16 Q. Are you finished?

17 A. Yes. And I hope you are finished.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, no. Mr. Zecevic, let me warn the witness.

19 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, please, Your Honour. Thank you.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Counsel is asking questions on behalf of his

21 client and he's also asking questions on behalf of the Trial Chamber,

22 because we are all searching for the truth. So please do not be rude to

23 him. Just answer the questions as he puts them. And you're not

24 supposed to ask counsel any questions.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I will do so. But in view of

Page 5867

1 the fact that he arrogantly asked me if I had finished -- and I hadn't

2 finished. What I said yesterday was true. And what I said the first time

3 is also true. If there was some mistakes in the translation, this is not

4 my fault, so I would kindly ask that such mistakes do not be ascribed to

5 me.

6 JUDGE SINGH: Mr. Dagovic, I don't think you need to be

7 argumentative. Just listen to the question quietly and calmly and just

8 answer it again. If there's a mistake, just say so.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, counsel. Proceed.

10 MR. ZECEVIC: May I proceed?

11 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Dagovic, I hope that you've understood the

12 instructions from the Trial Chamber, and I would ask you kindly the

13 following: My objective is just to clarify what is true and what is not

14 true. I've already said twice that nobody -- or I'm not -- that I'm not

15 trying to say that you lied. I would just like to clarify which -- what

16 is true of these two things. Therefore, if I understood you properly,

17 it's true what you said yesterday, that you know that the family of Hasan

18 and Muhamed Bicic left Samac immediately prior or at some point before the

19 17th of April, 1992. Is this true?

20 A. Yes, that's true.

21 Q. Thank you, sir.

22 A. You're welcome.

23 Q. Mr. Dagovic, you are familiar with the fact that you are on the

24 list of the self-organised citizens of Bosanski Samac?

25 A. In what sense do you mean?

Page 5868

1 Q. I am talking about the list from 1992 titled "The List of

2 Self-Organised Citizens of Bosanski Samac for the Purpose of Defending

3 the City."

4 A. I don't know anything about that. I am not familiar with that

5 list, and I wasn't there in any capacity. If I were, I would have had

6 weapons or been there on behalf of some organisation.

7 Q. So you are not aware of the fact that your name is on this list?

8 A. No, I'm not.

9 Q. Are you hearing about this list for the first time now?

10 A. When I was in the camp, they mentioned some lists, I don't know,

11 of the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina, of the Ustashas, the Zenga, amongst

12 others, perhaps. They were talking about that list. But I don't know,

13 and I've never heard of any list with that title.

14 Q. Yesterday you told us that you gave three statements, I think, at

15 the police station; is this true?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. The two inspectors - and I'm thinking of Sarkanovic and Sadic, the

18 ones who questioned you - did they ever mention the fact to you that you

19 are in fact on this list?

20 A. Yes. Sarkanovic did mention a list. But I don't know which list

21 he meant.

22 Q. During that questioning, did Inspector Sarkanovic show you that

23 list?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Does that mean that you never saw that list?

Page 5869

1 A. You mean that list in front of you?

2 Q. Well, I don't know. I will show you the list in front of me. But

3 I'm thinking of the list entitled "The List of Self-Organised Citizens in

4 Bosanski Samac in the Capacity of the Defence of the Town"?

5 A. No. I've never seen that list.

6 MR. ZECEVIC: May the usher please show to the witness -- it's

7 D14/4 ter ID. Just for the purposes, it's a list of self-organised people

8 of Bosanski Samac, just in order that we clarify whether the witness has

9 actually seen that or not. Oh, I'm sorry, I was advised that the

10 transcript doesn't show it. It's D14/4 ter ID. "4," "/4."

11 A. May I turn the page? I don't see myself on this list.

12 Q. [Interpretation] I will ask the questions. Just kindly place the

13 list on the ELMO, please.

14 Mr. Dagovic, did you ever see this list, this document, before?

15 A. No.

16 Q. The title states "The List of Self-Organised Citizens of Bosanski

17 Samac in the Capacity of Defence of the Town"; is that true?

18 A. Yes, it is.

19 Q. Could you please look at page 5, number 155 and 156. Did you take

20 a look?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. That your same -- your first and last name, under number 156?

23 A. Yes. But there is no title of the list. The title of the list is

24 not there. So Mr. Sarkanovic could have shown me this list, but without

25 showing me the title. But it's true that my first and last name and my

Page 5870

1 address are on this list. This is something that is well known.

2 Q. If I've understood you properly, you claim that this page 5,

3 perhaps, is from some other document and was placed there. Did I

4 understand you correctly?

5 A. I don't know. But there is no title that you mentioned there. I

6 can see my name and my address, but I don't see the name of the house.

7 There is no number of the house. So this list doesn't say anything. It

8 doesn't mean anything to me. Perhaps this is a list of people that should

9 be -- who should be arrested. Perhaps that's what it is. So the name,

10 first and last name, address.

11 Q. Yes, yes. I've heard you. But please allow me to put my question

12 to you.

13 A. I apologise.

14 Q. Under number 155 is the name of your brother and the name of

15 the street that you lived in; is that right?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Mr. Dagovic, will you please take this document that's on the ELMO

18 again, and would you please look at it from page 1 until the end.

19 A. Yes, I will.

20 Q. Thank you.

21 A. What am I supposed to be looking at? Just the names or ...? As

22 far as I can see, mostly the lists contains the names of people who were

23 detained, mostly those names.

24 Q. Could you please tell me -- take your time. Take a look.

25 A. No, no. There's no need. It's clear to me.

Page 5871

1 Q. Could you please tell me, except for the first page which bears

2 the title, is the same title on the rest of the pages, on the other pages

3 of that same document? Would you please look.

4 A. No. There is no title or stamp either.

5 Q. It's interested that you're saying that. Why did you say that

6 there is no signature and no stamp either?

7 A. We are trying to say that there was some kind of order there. So

8 if that's what you are saying, then perhaps there should be some kind of

9 official stamp or signature. Otherwise, this is something that could have

10 been written yesterday.

11 If I may also be permitted, may I say something?

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Witness, can you just wait for the questions.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, please excuse me.

14 MR. ZECEVIC: [Previous translation continues] ... that the

15 witness give his remark. If he wants, I am not going to, I don't know,

16 intimidate witness in any way. I was just stopping him because of the

17 translation. That was my only concern.

18 Q. [Interpretation] Yes, please go ahead and say what you wanted to

19 say.

20 A. Well, had there been a stamp -- because I did have the opportunity

21 to see how soldiers made driver's licences and passports for themselves

22 and would turn an illegal document into a legal one. I saw that. But

23 even if it did have a stamp on it, still the document would mean nothing

24 to me, because there was a state of lawlessness at the time.

25 Q. What you would like to tell us, it's true, isn't it, that it was

Page 5872

1 usual before the war for all official documents to bear a stamp and a

2 signature? And I'm speaking about the time before the war. Is that

3 right?

4 MR. WEINER: I'd object at this time, Your Honour.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Weiner.

6 MR. WEINER: Yesterday he was made an expert on artillery. Then

7 they were asking him -- now they're asking him if he's an expert on

8 government documents. We have no background on -- he was a waiter at the

9 pizzeria. I don't know if he has the qualifications to talk about

10 government documents. We are going far beyond his expertise. I think we

11 did yesterday, and I think we're going back into that today.

12 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, may I respond?

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

14 MR. ZECEVIC: With all due respect, I wasn't referring to

15 government documents. I don't know where my learned colleague got the

16 government documents. I only said: Was it, according to his knowledge,

17 usual that the official documents have a stamp and a signature? That's

18 all. He, as a person who lived in the former Yugoslavia, of course is

19 very well aware, he must have come up from time to time in possession of

20 an official document. And actually, the witness brought it up by

21 himself. It wasn't my line of questioning. I was just following that

22 direction, because the witness came up with that assertion. Thank you,

23 Your Honour.

24 MR. WEINER: By saying "official documents," are we saying

25 government official documents? Political official documents? Party

Page 5873

1 official documents? We have no background as to his expertise as to

2 documents. In the SDA, in the SDS, the Communist Party, into all sorts of

3 government documents. I think we got off line yesterday, getting into all

4 sorts of issues as to multiple rocket launchers, as to airplanes, and now

5 I think we're going off field again into various types of official

6 documents without any background or expertise.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Weiner, your points are taken. And I do

8 hope that Mr. Zecevic's questions may be of a general nature.

9 MR. ZECEVIC: I understand.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: And also, as long as they are relevant.

11 MR. ZECEVIC: Of course, Your Honour. Thank you.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Because sometimes a witness may bring about

13 something, and you may want to go into it. But if it's not relevant,

14 don't go into it, because it will obviously be ignored.

15 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you, Your Honour. I kind of considered it

16 was a relevant issue. Thank you.

17 I was advised that it's the time for the break. Would you like me

18 to break at this point or shall we --

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. No, no. We'll have our break. We have

20 exceeded.

21 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: So we'll continue our proceedings at 16.15.

23 MR. DI FAZIO: May I very briefly ask the Chamber a number of

24 matters. They do affect this afternoon.


Page 5874

1 MR. DI FAZIO: The next witness that we had intended to call has

2 had to go back to a nearby country where he resides on account of the fact

3 that his young daughter has been taken ill and indeed hospitalised. And I

4 understand that he just had to simply get up and go and left today. So I

5 wanted the Defence to understand that. We don't know what's going to

6 happen, and I assume that they have prepared for cross-examining and

7 hearing the evidence of that next witness, who we all know is on the

8 list. So I just needed to alert the Chamber and the Defence to that.

9 We'll make all inquiries, of course, to see if he can be returned and

10 see if things can proceed smoothly on Monday. But I just don't know at

11 this stage how things will pan out.

12 So that --

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Depending on what is happening with his

14 family, he may not be available even on Monday.

15 MR. DI FAZIO: That's right.

16 Now, this afternoon -- I don't know how long Mr. Zecevic is going

17 to continue. He may be with this witness for the remainder of the day or

18 me may finish very briefly soon after the break. If that happens, if we

19 do finish this afternoon before the close of court sitting times, what

20 does the Chamber want us to do? I can indicate that we could proceed

21 immediately into submissions on the Variant A/B document. My colleague

22 Ms. Reidy is preparing for that and will be armed and ready to go on that

23 this afternoon if you -- if need be. Or we could proceed on Monday with

24 submissions on that. Whatever happens, if we finish before 6.00, we won't

25 have someone else to call into the witness box. I just wanted you to

Page 5875

1 know.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Because yesterday, we did say as soon as we

3 finish with the present witness, including re-examination, then we will go

4 back to Variant A and B. So that stands as unfinished business.

5 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. So we can assume that if we finish

6 early and we've got time left, we'll be going into Variant A and B this

7 afternoon.


9 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.

10 --- Recess taken at 3.51 p.m.

11 --- On resuming at 4.17 p.m.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Zecevic. You can continue.

13 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you, Your Honours.

14 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Dagovic, just a couple of questions about

15 this document. Could you please tell me, since the document is in front

16 of you, the numbers in this document, do they go in order from one side to

17 the next, from one page to the next?

18 A. As far as I can see, yes, they are.

19 Q. Thank you. Could you please tell me, Mr. Dagovic, we said a while

20 ago, if I understood you properly, that Inspector Sarkanovic asked you

21 questions relating to this document. Is that right?

22 A. I said not in relation to this document, because I've never seen

23 this list and this title. But they did mention lists.

24 Q. So if I understood you properly, Inspector Sarkanovic mentioned

25 some list, but he never showed it to you.

Page 5876

1 A. Not a list, but lists, and he never showed me any.

2 Q. Do you remember whether this was during your first or second

3 questioning in May 1992? If you remember. You looked at the statements

4 yesterday, so perhaps --

5 A. I didn't look at the statements -- no, I did look at the

6 statements, but I didn't really look at the dates. I think it was -- he

7 asked me the first time during the first statement, but he also asked me

8 during the second time, this other one asked me during the second

9 statement.

10 Q. Do you remember that yesterday when these two statements were

11 presented to you - and we're talking about documents D28/3 ter and D29/3

12 ter - you explained to us and you read in those statements the parts that

13 were true and the parts that were, according to you, not correct. Is

14 that true?

15 A. Yes, it is.

16 Q. On page 5789 of yesterday's transcript, in response to a question

17 by my learned friend: [In English]

18 Q. Do you mean the whole statement or only a part of it?

19 A. One part of it, the last part of it.

20 Q. And can you tell us which sentence begins -- that part

21 that's not correct begins with which sentence?

22 A. It will be clearer if I give you the last sentence of the

23 part that does state what I said. I would also like to

24 state that I did not participate in any way in the

25 formation of the SDA, and the text that follows this

Page 5877

1 sentence, I'm not familiar with."

2 [Interpretation] Did you state that?

3 A. Yes. That was the last sentence up until it was okay, and then

4 all the rest that followed in my view was added on.

5 Q. Thank you.

6 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, maybe we could show D29/3 ter, please, and

7 D29/3 be put on the ELMO, please. It's stapled together, so you cannot

8 put the English or not? It's not a problem. Thank you.

9 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Dagovic, could you please tell me, this is

10 the statement that you looked at yesterday; is that right?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. It's a statement provided in Bosanski Samac on the 21st of

13 October, 1992; is that right?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. So yesterday you mentioned or you stated up until which place the

16 statement is correct. Could you please repeat this for us again.

17 A. Yes. The correct part is more or less in the middle of the text.

18 It states: "From the SDA," and then there's a comma. And after that,

19 the part really, as far as I know, does not belong to my statement.

20 Q. So if I understood you properly, the last sentence which you claim

21 is authentic in this statement is "I would also like to state that I did

22 not participate in any way in the formation of the SDA." Is this true?

23 A. Yes.

24 MR. ZECEVIC: For the purposes of the Honourable Trial Chamber,

25 it's the first sentence of the third paragraph. Thank you, Your Honours.

Page 5878

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I think we have -- we looked at it yesterday.

2 MR. ZECEVIC: Oh, thank you. Thank you. I was just trying to be

3 helpful.

4 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Dagovic, would you kindly read the last

5 sentence. It's not the last sentence of the statement, because you've

6 already read that, but the sentence before that which begins "I was

7 told ..."

8 A. "I was told that my name was on the list of volunteers for the

9 defence of the town, but I cannot explain how it got there." Is that the

10 one that you mean?

11 Q. Yes. You told us yesterday, and you've repeated again now, that

12 this part -- so the part that comes after the sentence that you've read

13 before, which ends "in the formation of the SDA," that nothing that comes

14 after that is true. Is that what you're claiming?

15 A. Yes.

16 MR. WEINER: That's not what he --

17 JUDGE MUMBA: No. Yes, counsel, there's some leading here of the

18 witness. He said that after that sentence ending with "SDA," the rest

19 was not stated by him. It's not that it's not true.

20 MR. ZECEVIC: Oh, yes.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: You see?

22 MR. ZECEVIC: I apologise. [Interpretation] I apologise. I

23 didn't mean anything bad by that.

24 Q. So after the formation of the SDA, what comes after that was not

25 stated by you.

Page 5879

1 A. Yes, that's right, except for the fact that I placed my signature

2 at the end.

3 Q. Now you've just read this sentence when you were told that you are

4 on this list; is that right?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Didn't you tell us a little earlier that the inspectors really did

7 ask you or tell you that you are on some list?

8 A. Yes. But along with that, I said that there's a third statement

9 also which I don't see. So perhaps if you provide me with the third

10 statement, I will get something out of that, because I signed three

11 statements, as well as three blank statements. So I would like to perhaps

12 have all of them, and then we will see what I said.

13 Q. Mr. Dagovic, I'm not trying to present statements to you. I'm

14 simply interested in this specific statement, and I would kindly ask you

15 to respond to my questions.

16 Are you, then, claiming that you stated what it says in this

17 statement in the last sentence?

18 A. No.

19 Q. So according to you, you did not state that.

20 A. No, I did not. I did state what comes before "SDA." Everything

21 else that follows that, I didn't see.

22 Q. But it's a fact that this was stated to you in the course of the

23 questioning; is that right?

24 MR. WEINER: I object.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Yes. I was about to, yes, caution counsel.

Page 5880

1 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, Your Honours, but I really -- the situation is

2 like this: The witness confirms that this has been told -- that he was

3 told during the investigation that he is on some kind of list.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: List, yes.

5 MR. ZECEVIC: This particular sentence exactly says: "I was told

6 that I am on some list, but I don't know anything about it, or I cannot

7 explain how I got to this list."

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, this sentence which is in this particular

9 statement was not stated by him. That's what he's saying.

10 MR. ZECEVIC: That is what he says, yes. I'm just wondering what

11 is -- what is wrong with this statement, because he confirms that this was

12 really said to him.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. But what you should avoid doing is to try and

14 supplant this particular sentence into the statement which he says he

15 agrees with, which is the preceding paragraph, up to "SDA."

16 MR. ZECEVIC: I understand, Your Honours, I will withdraw my

17 question. Thank you very much.


19 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. Thank you, Mr. Dagovic.

21 MR. ZECEVIC: Mr. Usher, I don't need the statements nor the

22 previous document. Thank you.

23 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Dagovic, if I'm not mistaken, you were 23

24 years old in 1992; is that right?

25 A. Yes, more or less. Perhaps I was 21. I can't really calculate

Page 5881












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 5882

1 that. I was between 21 and 23.

2 Q. You were born on the 28th of May, 1969.

3 A. Yes, yes, that's right.

4 Q. You mentioned that you were a lance corporal. When did you serve

5 your military service?

6 A. In 1999 -- in 1989. So I was fresh out of the army.

7 Q. Yes, fresh out of the army.

8 Where did you serve your military term?

9 A. I served my term in Karlovac, in the Republic of Croatia.

10 Q. What was your specialty? What we call VES in the army.

11 A. I was in the engineers unit. That was where I was. And I

12 was a lance corporal.

13 Q. After you completed your military service, you had a regular

14 military booklet; is that right?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. After you completed your military duty, you reported to the

17 appropriate military department in Samac; isn't that right?

18 A. Yes, it is.

19 Q. Tell me, Mr. Dagovic, in your military booklet, you had a wartime

20 assignment; isn't that so?

21 A. I can't remember. I think I have the booklet at home, but I'd

22 have to look at it. As far as I know, I did not have a military

23 assignment in it.

24 Q. Was it not your duty as a reservist if there was a war or an

25 imminent threat of war to report to a certain place?

Page 5883

1 MR. WEINER: I'd object.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Weiner.

3 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, this has come up now three times. In

4 each of these three times now we've objected. The issue here is whether

5 or not they're going to try to indicate he had a duty and he violated that

6 duty. However, as we all know, the JNA had split up, the former

7 Yugoslavia had split up. There is no issue -- there is a serious issue of

8 whether there was any duty. Or rather, there is no issue because there

9 was no duty, because as the JNA as it existed in the '80s no longer

10 existed in 1992. This line of questioning has come up three times, and

11 each of those times, the Court has found -- has sustained our objection,

12 saying this type of information is not allowed.

13 You're asking him to make a legal decision as to whether

14 Yugoslavia existed technically, then technically whether the JNA existed,

15 and then if it did exist, whether or not he still had a duty. It really

16 becomes a legal issue, which this Court has to make the decision. It's

17 not the type of issue for this witness to offer an opinion.

18 MR. ZECEVIC: If I may respond, I was simply asking -- I

19 appreciate what my learned colleague has explained to the Trial Chamber.

20 But believe me, it was not my intention at all. My intention is just to

21 ask the witness whether he's aware of his obligation as a military

22 reservist, nothing else. I am not trying to -- to establish that he

23 violated any of his rights or go into that area, whether he accepts JNA,

24 BiH army or the former Yugoslavia. Just the simple answer, yes or no,

25 whether he was aware of the fact that as a reservist he had the duty -- as

Page 5884

1 a military reservist, he had a duty to, I don't know, in case of imminent

2 war danger or wartimes, report to a certain place.


4 MR. ZECEVIC: And that would be my last question. No other

5 questions.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. That is before the breakup of the federation.

7 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, of course, Your Honours.

8 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, he's limiting that question to prior to

9 April of 1992 would he have had --


11 MR. ZECEVIC: Exactly, Your Honours.

12 JUDGE SINGH: I'm sorry, but can you just explain that a little

13 more. You say he had a duty. Assuming he had a duty, but what is the

14 first step? Has he got to be called up? Did he receive a call-up

15 notice? That must precede the duty, mustn't it? Is there any evidence

16 that he was called up? Can you ask him if he was called up?

17 MR. ZECEVIC: Of course I will but I wasn't really -- I will

18 follow the suggestion of the Honourable Trial Chamber. I was evading,

19 actually, that question, because I anticipated that my learned colleague

20 will make an objection. But I will.

21 JUDGE SINGH: But logically I think we must try to follow this,

22 because all you've done is refer to some booklet.

23 MR. ZECEVIC: Of course.

24 JUDGE SINGH: And the booklet must say something. We don't know

25 what it says.

Page 5885

1 MR. ZECEVIC: I agree, Your Honour. I agree, Your Honour. If I

2 may elicit the answer to the first question and then I will ask the

3 question which Your Honour is -- I'm grateful. Thank you.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, you may proceed.

5 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

6 Q. Mr. Dagovic, you heard my question.

7 A. Before --

8 Q. Before April 1992, as a military reservist, was it your duty to

9 report to a certain place in case of imminent threat of war or war?

10 A. Yes. I did have a duty to report there, but let me add

11 something. Had Yugoslavia remained after 1992, I would not have gone to

12 kill innocent women and children, even if I had been sent to prison for

13 that. So I would not have responded to the call-up, because I saw what

14 was happening. I saw what had happened in Slovenia and then in Croatia.

15 But yes, I did have the call-up. You're right.

16 Q. So the duty was there, but you are telling us that due to your

17 convictions, it would not have responded, regardless of the legal

18 consequences; is that correct?

19 A. Yes, that's absolutely correct.

20 Q. Mr. Dagovic, did you at some point before the 17th of April, 1992

21 receive any kind of notification, or were you called upon in a public

22 announcement to report as a military reservist to the place where you were

23 supposed to report? If you can remember that.

24 A. You mean before Bosnia and Herzegovina was established, that is,

25 recognised? Are we talking --

Page 5886

1 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, no. Witness, the counsel did give a date,

2 and that is before 17th April, nothing more but that date. So your answer

3 should be precisely based on that date, before 17th April, 1992,

4 regardless of the status of which country.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, what I wanted to say

6 was that Bosnia was recognised before April. That was before April. And

7 I did receive draft notes between the time when Bosnia was recognised and

8 April. That's why I wanted to clarify. And I did not respond to the

9 call-up.

10 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

11 Q. If I understood you correctly, because we are aware of both dates,

12 does it mean that you were called up between the 6th and the 17th of

13 April?

14 A. I know I received the call-up after Bosnia-Herzegovina was

15 recognised. I don't remember the exact dates.

16 Q. So you don't know if this was before the 17th of April? You don't

17 remember?

18 A. It was both before and after the 17th of April.

19 Q. So you received these call-up papers twice?

20 A. Several times, many times. After every fight, we were called up.

21 Q. I don't understand what sort of fight you are referring to. I am

22 talking about draft notes from the Secretariat for National Defence of

23 Bosanski Samac, from the military authorities.

24 A. Well, I spoke of this yesterday. If you understood me, when the

25 war started, when we were in camp, first we were beaten and then people

Page 5887

1 arrived telling us to go to the army. I don't know that that's exactly.

2 I know approximately when it was.

3 Q. Mr. Dagovic, would you be so kind, you were detained on the 5th of

4 May; is that correct?

5 A. That's correct.

6 Q. I'm asking you about the exact dates. Between the 6th of April

7 and the 5th of May, when you were detained, did you receive draft notes?

8 Were you called up? And if you were, do you remember how many times it

9 was?

10 A. I don't know the dates, but it was on several occasions that I was

11 called up.

12 Q. Thank you, Witness.

13 A. You're welcome.

14 Q. As you said, you didn't want to respond to those call-ups; is that

15 correct?

16 A. Yes, that's correct.

17 Q. Tell me, in what manner were you called up? Did a courier arrive,

18 or was there a public announcement, or did both things happen?

19 A. Before I was detained, there was an announcement on the radio.

20 Q. An announcement for all reservists?

21 A. Yes. But because 99 per cent of the Serbs had already been

22 mobilised, it was the others who were left.

23 MR. ZECEVIC: I don't know, Your Honours, would you like me to

24 pursue this matter any more?

25 JUDGE SINGH: I just wanted to know what the relevance of this

Page 5888

1 line of questioning was. Was he detained on that particular day?

2 MR. ZECEVIC: He was detained from May 5th, Your Honours.

3 JUDGE SINGH: Yes. Because he detained because he did not respond

4 to the call-up notice, or was he detained because he had a pistol at home,

5 or because of some other thing, and then incarcerated and what happens

6 happened? I think that is what we would like to know, why was he

7 detained. If you know, you can suggest or put it to him.

8 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, Your Honour.

9 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, counsel, if I might add one thing to

10 Judge Singh's question. I think if you're going to ask him all of those

11 questions, you also have to go to the other fundamental question: Or was

12 he incarcerated because of his ethnicity or religion? I don't think you

13 can -- I think you've got to give him the whole gamut of possibilities if

14 you're going to ask that at all.

15 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, with all due respected, I'm going to ask the

16 question, but I don't know whether the witness will answer the questions.

17 I don't know whether he knew why he was incarcerated.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Let me say this, Witness. Can you wait?

19 Counsel, you have -- if you feel that they're not necessary for

20 the defence of your client, then you don't have to ask them.

21 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm perfectly aware of that. I was just asking

22 whether my line of questioning was enough concerning the military

23 obligation -- the reserve military obligation, that was my question.

24 Q. [Interpretation] Tell me, Mr. Dagovic, do you think that your

25 incarceration on the 5th of May had anything to do with the fact that you

Page 5889

1 did not respond to the announcement telling all reservists to report for

2 military duty?

3 A. I'm glad you put this question to me. On the contrary. My

4 mistake was that I reported. The list that you showed me, was perhaps a

5 list of people who did report, because I know that people who did not

6 report, they were not incarcerated, as opposed to us who did report and

7 our names were found on one of these lists. So the mistake I made was to

8 report, because this was obviously a list of citizens. Because when the

9 so-called Republika Srpska was set up, they did not know who was still in

10 town and who wasn't. In this way, they obtained the list. Before that,

11 they intimidated us. They told us we would be shot. And they intimidated

12 us to reporting. And when they did, they were provided a complete of list

13 of the citizens who were still in town and they used it to incarcerate

14 people, and I'm sure of this because the people who did not respond, who

15 did not report, and who hid, were not incarcerated.

16 Q. Does this mean that you think it is connected or not?

17 A. What do you mean?

18 Q. Well, the fact that you did not obey the announcement for military

19 reservists?

20 A. But I did report. You didn't understand me, sir. I did report to

21 the territorial building in Samac because we were threatened with

22 shooting.

23 Q. Mr. Dagovic, please. I will try to put very clear questions to

24 you. So you did respond to the announcement; is that correct?

25 A. Yes.

Page 5890

1 Q. When you were questioned on the 9th of November, 2001, on page

2 3921 you said the following to a question put by the Prosecutor: [In

3 English]

4 Q. Did you do anything else at the Territorial Defence

5 building?

6 A. As far as I remember, no.

7 Q. Did they ask you, did they try and recruit you, try and

8 mobilise you into the JNA? Did they ask you about forced

9 labour at that point or anything else at that point?

10 A. Yes, they offered us weapons or rather to join the army of

11 Republika Srpska. We tried, and most of other people

12 refused, of course.

13 Q. What did you do next?

14 A. Then I went to my home."

15 [Interpretation] Is that what you said?

16 A. Did you put a question to me? I didn't hear it.

17 Q. I said: Is that what you said?

18 A. Yes, that's what I said. That's what I've been saying all along.

19 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, I think the issue is over the word

20 "report," how we're all characterising the word "report." He's viewing

21 the word "report" as reporting to the TO and I think Mr. Zecevic is

22 referring to the word "report" as reporting to the military itself, to the

23 JNA. And I think that's where the confusion is here. We have a word

24 "report," and we have two different meanings of it.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: I'm sure Mr. Zecevic can clear that up.

Page 5891

1 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, Your Honours.

2 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Dagovic, the statement I just read back to

3 you concerning your arrival at the Territorial Defence building, you were

4 then reporting to a call-up from the army, were you not?

5 A. Well, there was an announcement over the radio. Who it was, I

6 don't know. The army, probably. And I suppose it would have been

7 somewhere else if it had been someone else, so I assume that it was the

8 army.

9 Q. And you reported, you went there, and you did not wish to receive

10 weapons; is that correct?

11 A. As I told you, I did not want to take any weapons. But they put

12 my name on a list. There weren't any questions. They just listed us, and

13 we went home.

14 Q. Thank you. After this event, you were given a work assignment; is

15 that correct?

16 A. Yes, that's correct.

17 Q. Your brother also had work duties; is that correct?

18 A. Yes, that's correct.

19 Q. As far as you know, this was a general duty, just like military

20 service in the former Yugoslavia.

21 A. Well, you're mixing up concepts. That was not my state, so it was

22 not my duty. I was forced to do it. Nothing was voluntary. Everything

23 was under coercion.

24 Q. Well, let me put the question to you like this: Before the 6th of

25 April, as far as you know military duty and work duty in case of war or

Page 5892

1 imminent threat of war was a general obligation pertaining to all the

2 citizens of the former Yugoslavia.

3 A. I don't know, but I'm sure it was not for all citizens.

4 Q. How do you know if it's not for all citizens?

5 A. Well, that's not logical. Some people are ill; some people are

6 elderly, young; they don't have to do work duty. But here everybody had

7 to go; children, the infirm, the elderly, old men and women, so this is

8 not what you are talking about.

9 Q. Mr. Dagovic, on the 9th of November when you were interviewed, on

10 page 3922 you spoke of work obligation. And in line 17 in answer to a

11 question put by my learned friend: [In English]

12 "Q. Forced labour assignments. Give the age of the oldest --

13 the range of the oldest people and the youngest people.

14 A. Well, as I said, they were like, between 16 and 60. They

15 asked me -- they asked for all these people to report to

16 them. So it was between the ages of 16 and 60.

17 Q. Were there any Serbs that had to work forced labour?

18 A. No."

19 [Interpretation] Is that what you stated, sir? Do you remember?

20 A. I didn't hear your question.

21 Q. I apologise. Do you remember having stated this?

22 A. Yes, but that has nothing to do with what we've just been talking

23 about. Reporting and work duty --

24 Q. Please, just answer my question, sir.

25 A. All right.

Page 5893

1 MR. ZECEVIC: May the witness be shown the document D22 E/2 ter.

2 Actually, right now, Your Honours, the translation of that

3 document exists. I gave it to the registry, but I don't know whether it

4 is appropriate that we distribute it at this time.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Yes, since you are going to discuss it with

6 the witness.

7 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, thank you, Your Honour. D22 E/2 ter. It's a

8 list of people engaged in the working brigade for the months April, May,

9 June, July. I mean, just for your ...

10 I kindly request the registrar to supply the -- oh, yes. I'm

11 sorry.

12 Your Honours, I'm just notified that this document is under seal,

13 so we might not be able to put it on the ELMO.


15 MR. ZECEVIC: I will take care on the line of the questions. I

16 will not ask anything concerning -- I believe I remember why it was under

17 seal, because of the certain name of a certain witness.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. So the English translation will be what

19 number?

20 MR. ZECEVIC: D22 E/2, I believe.

21 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, it will be document D22 E/2.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you.

23 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.

24 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Dagovic, this document bears the title

25 "List of Workers in the Work Brigade from April to August 1992"; is that

Page 5894

1 correct?

2 A. That's correct.

3 Q. Sir, you said a little while ago on the transcript of the 9th of

4 November, it says that none of the Serbs were under work obligation; is

5 that correct?

6 A. As far as I know, none of them were, except for Pero Pita, but he

7 was ill. He could have turned the gun on the wrong side. That's why he

8 didn't go to the front line.

9 Q. He was a Serb, was he not?

10 A. As far as I know, either his father or his mother were Serb.

11 Q. Would you please turn to page 2, number 44.

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. This is the name of your brother, is it not?

14 A. Yes, that's correct.

15 Q. It says that he worked for 69 days in total; is that correct?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Do you feel that this is correct for this period of time?

18 A. Well, you'd have to ask him that. I don't know.

19 Q. Thank you.

20 A. I just know that he was not paid. He did not receive the

21 remuneration that's mentioned here.

22 Q. That was going to be my next question. Thank you for helping me.

23 Tell me, sir, under number 92, Ilija Ivanovic, do you know this

24 gentleman?

25 A. Yes. He's a Croat.

Page 5895

1 Q. On page 1, number 10, Ilija Arsic, do you know this gentleman?

2 A. No.

3 Q. Can you tell by his first and last name what his ethnic background

4 is or not?

5 A. Well, according to his last name, he would be a Serb. But his

6 first name could also be Croat. But it seems that he only had to do work

7 obligation once. He may have been drunk and unable to go to the front

8 line.

9 Q. Would you look at number 58, sir, please. Zivorad Djordjevic.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. You will agree that this is a typical Serbian first and last name,

12 is it not?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Do you know this gentleman?

15 A. Yes, I do. But I see that he only had to work once.

16 Q. Would you look at the last page, page 6, number 174, please.

17 A. Dragan Vuksic.

18 Q. Dragan Vuksanovic?

19 A. Oh, yes, Vuksanovic, I'm sorry.

20 Q. A total of 52 days.

21 A. Yes, yes, that's more than the others.

22 Q. Would you say that he is a Serb?

23 A. Yes. I just don't know -- sorry.

24 Q. This document has a stamp and a signature, has it not?

25 A. Yes. But if I may say --

Page 5896

1 Q. Thank you, sir.

2 A. All right. I wanted to add something.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: The witness says he wanted to add something. Maybe

4 he can go ahead.

5 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, please.

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. There has

7 been a major mistake here, since I know just like the gentlemen does that

8 all military conscripts are obliged to report for duty in case of war.

9 But it's absurd, then, to receive payment for such a -- an obligation.

10 Also, the women are missing from this list, women who were on work duty.

11 And also, since this is a regular document with a stamp and a signature, I

12 don't see a signature here indicating that they received compensation. So

13 this is something that would accompany such a document. So I don't see

14 this as a valid document.

15 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. So contrary to what my learned friend on the other side claims,

17 that you were not versed in these matters, you do appear to know about

18 these things.

19 A. Well, you didn't ask me about that.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Weiner, yes.

21 MR. WEINER: I'd object. Is he trying to now impeach me through

22 him, or is he trying to contradict me through him?

23 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, I didn't pose the question. It was

24 just the question to the witness whether he think that is he is an expert

25 in this field.

Page 5897

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. But it's the way you took it up with the

2 witness.

3 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, I am sorry. It was just for the -- maybe it

4 was inappropriate. I didn't mean it really as it sounded. I'm sorry.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: And then, also, counsel, you should be able to look

6 out for futility in some of the comments, in some of the excesses that

7 witnesses say.

8 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, Your Honours.

9 Q. [Interpretation] Sir, Mr. Dagovic, could you please tell me, this

10 document entitled "The List of Employees Engaged in the Work Brigade,"

11 that's the title, isn't it?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. For a while, if I remember well -- if I remember your statement,

14 you worked in the work brigade for a while; isn't that right?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Did women carry out this difficult labour that the men performed

17 in the work brigade?

18 A. Yes. And they were also humiliated while doing it.

19 Q. Thank you.

20 A. You're welcome.

21 Q. Mr. Dagovic, could you please tell me the following: Yesterday

22 when you were shown those photographs, you pointed out your house and your

23 uncle's house; isn't that right?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Your uncle -- your uncle's name is Sulejman Dagovic; is that

Page 5898

1 right?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. He was a barber by profession; isn't that true?

4 A. Yes. I wanted to confirm that. He's a barber.

5 Q. Mr. Dagovic, are you aware of the fact that he also was on work

6 duty?

7 A. He remained at his job.

8 Q. And this was in the hospital; isn't that right?

9 A. Yes, that's right.

10 Q. Mr. Dagovic, do you remember whether your uncle received a salary

11 for his work?

12 A. I don't know. This is something you should have asked him,

13 because I was in the camp at the time that he was working, so I never

14 managed to ask him that.

15 Q. But he was in the same hospital where you received treatment, I

16 think, from the 8th of June until the 8th of July; isn't that right?

17 A. Yes, that's right.

18 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, at this time I have five documents

19 concerning the names. It's the list of the people employed at the general

20 hospital in Bosanski Samac. These are the documents which are really

21 similar to the ones I presented just -- I mean, before in these

22 proceedings. It is concerning the name and the working place and the --

23 and the coefficient and the amount of dinners that they have been paid.

24 Unfortunately, none of these documents I still have the translation. I

25 would like to use them if I can have the ID number and ask the witness.

Page 5899

1 It is concerning his uncle -- his uncle, yes.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Were they handed in to the Translation Unit?

3 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, Your Honour.


5 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, I believe seven days ago, ten.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: I see. And you indicated the agency?

7 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, I indicated. But it was said that

8 unfortunately due to the trial of Mr. Milosevic and Brdjanin and Talic,

9 they cannot promise me anything. It may come soon but --

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. We'll go to same way. We'll have them

11 numbered for identification purposes.

12 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, I would like them numbered for identification

13 purposes, and I will really quickly go through them with the witness, if

14 possible.

15 Your Honours, all these documents have been -- have been disclosed

16 to the Office of the Prosecutor, and they have their ERN numbers.

17 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, for the assistance of other

18 Defence counsel, not for the Chamber itself, of course, because you don't

19 have these, these are -- can be found in volume 3 of the consolidated

20 Defence document that the Prosecution collated and consolidated.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: I see. Thank you.

22 Yes. Maybe counsel can begin with giving us the number stamped on

23 it so that we all know which document we are discussing at a given time.

24 Then we can give it a number for identification.

25 MR. ZECEVIC: Okay. The first -- the first document is this list

Page 5900

1 of May 1992. Could I have the identification number.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Does it have an ERN number?

3 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, the ERN number is Y0005284.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we have the number for identification, please.

5 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. It's document D27/2 ter ID.

6 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.

7 Shall I go through all the documents so we don't lose time after

8 this?

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Yeah, the ones you wanted to discuss, yes.

10 MR. ZECEVIC: Okay. The next document has -- I'm having problems

11 with the ERN number. It's Y000, I assume, 52, and then the last number is

12 5 -- it's the same list, for June.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: For June 1992.

14 MR. ZECEVIC: June 1992.

15 JUDGE MUMBA: And it's only one sheet, is it?

16 MR. ZECEVIC: It is two sheets, Your Honour.


18 MR. ZECEVIC: That's the only document with two sheets.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we have an ID number for it.

20 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. It's document D28/2 ter ID.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. And the next one will be?

22 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry. I just have to consult with my

23 assistant.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, go ahead.

25 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, Your Honours. The next document is --

Page 5901

1 has an ERN number Y0005288. It's the same list, for July 1992.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we have an ID number.

3 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. It's document D29/2 ter ID.

4 MR. ZECEVIC: The next document has -- this is the information to

5 the executive board. It bears the ERN number Y0005287, from July 23rd,

6 1992.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: The number, please.

8 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, it's document D30/2 ter ID.

9 MR. ZECEVIC: The last document bears the ERN number Y0005289. It

10 is the same report, dated 12th of September, 1992.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we have the number, please.

12 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. It's document D31/2 ter ID.

13 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, I was just checking out the numbers

14 which I have concerning the Variant A and B document, and I believe we

15 already used the number which were given to the documents we marked

16 just now. Because number D27/2 was a witness statement offered into

17 evidence by my co-counsel Ms. Catharine Baen. So was 28, so was 29, 30,

18 31 and so on. Just in order that we clarify the transcript, I would --

19 I'm sorry. It's just --

20 JUDGE MUMBA: So this was just --

21 MR. ZECEVIC: It was ringing the bell, but I wasn't sure. So I

22 just took it. Luckily I had it with me, the binder of this.

23 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we reorganise the numbering, please.

24 MR. ZECEVIC: As far as I know, my last -- our last number with

25 the reference "/2" for our client was 32/2 ter -- or 32 -- 31/2, actually,

Page 5902

1 because it was admitted. D31/2 was our last number. So I assume that

2 this other documents can go in subsequence to that.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, we can see that. We've already got --

4 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry. I really didn't mean to cause any

5 trouble. I just thought that it would be better that we clarify this

6 right now, rather than later.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, yes, so that we correct the numbering.

8 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. The previous last document

9 admitted on the 12th of February was D31/2 and D31/2 ter. I apologise.

10 The five documents today in the same order of sequence will be from D32/2

11 ter ID to D36/2 ter ID.

12 MR. DI FAZIO: Would it be safer, Your Honours, to go through each

13 one individually, so we're all absolutely crystal clear? Because it could

14 easily lead to problems, I think.

15 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Maybe the registry assistant can do that

16 slowly.

17 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes. Yes, Your Honours.

18 MR. DI FAZIO: And perhaps for the assistance of counsel who have

19 these documents, if the ERN number --

20 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes. I will read the ERN numbers.

21 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you very much. Thank you.

22 MR. ZECEVIC: Would the usher be so kind to show the witness the

23 document which bears the ERN number Y00058 -- 5284. It should be D32/2

24 ter. And this is this list for May 1992.


Page 5903












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 5904

1 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

2 Q. Mr. Dagovic, do you see this document?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. It says: "JUR general protection hospital Bosanski Samac." The

5 title is "data about the" -- [No interpretation]

6 Let me repeat again. "Data about the manner, conditions, and

7 means for payment or remuneration of salaries in accordance with the

8 determined coefficients for the months." Is that true?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Beneath that, it states: "May 1992"; is that right?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Mr. Dagovic, could you please tell me, under number 1, it's

13 Dr. Sisic Marko?

14 A. Mirko.

15 Q. Yes, Mirko. I apologise.

16 It seems to me that you mentioned this doctor during your

17 statement. He treated you; isn't that right?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Under number 12, it's Sulejman Dagovic; isn't it?

20 A. Yes, that's right.

21 Q. And in the continuation, it says "brico," barber?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. This is your uncle, isn't it?

24 A. Yes, that's right.

25 Q. And then it states further along that he's in the sixth salary

Page 5905

1 category, that the coefficient is 0.7; is that right?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And there is also a dinar amount; isn't there?

4 A. Yes, that's right.

5 Q. You said that you don't know whether he received a salary or not.

6 A. Yes, I don't know that.

7 But I would like to add something. This is an official document,

8 and I don't have anything against this, but I expect that you also provide

9 me with 184 salary slips for all of these people.

10 Q. If I understood you properly, you consider this an official

11 document, this document to be an official document, this specific

12 document.

13 A. Well, I see signatures. I see a stamp. So if this is a stamp,

14 and I also see a salary list.

15 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, by pure luck I have given to the

16 registry the exact original of these documents. We don't have many

17 originals, but this one is the original. Could this original be shown to

18 the witness, please. It is the same -- that is document D32/2 ter, but it

19 is the actual original. Maybe the -- my learned colleagues from the

20 Prosecutor desk can check it out.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Can also look at it.

22 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, please.

23 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Dagovic, this document which you just looked

24 at and this document that you are looking at right now, they're identical,

25 aren't they?

Page 5906

1 A. Well, the first one is. But this is a little different, this

2 other one, because it had a different stamp.

3 Q. What kind of a stamp?

4 A. Well, here you can see that there's also a stamp.

5 MR. ZECEVIC: Would you please put this original piece of paper on

6 the ELMO, please.

7 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Dagovic, look at the screen. This stamp here

8 underneath the date, the 22nd of April -- of June, 1992, is that a stamp?

9 A. Yes. I see it's a stamp. Yes, that's right. But when I meant

10 stamp, I meant the one on the other document. But let's not get

11 confused here. I do see that it is a stamp, "K-2," something like that.

12 Q. And there's also initials above the -- above the stamp; is that

13 right?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Mr. Dagovic, could you please tell me -- my question was the

16 following: Is this document that you see on the monitor right now and the

17 document for which you just a little while earlier claimed to be an

18 official document, are these two documents identical?

19 A. No.

20 Q. In which sense are they not identical?

21 A. If I may be permitted to place the document that I had in my hands

22 before on the ELMO.

23 Q. Yes. Mr. Dagovic, I kindly asked you when I asked you, I asked

24 you to take the document dated the month of May 1992, not to take a

25 different document.

Page 5907

1 A. Well, I apologise. I didn't see the document was here. So this

2 is what I thought you meant.

3 Q. Could you please take the document dated May 1992 and place it on

4 the ELMO.

5 In your opinion, could you please tell me, are these two documents

6 which are on the screen right now identical?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Can you tell me, on the right-hand side at the very bottom of the

9 document, there is some vertical writing. What does it say there?

10 Something is typed.

11 A. "Manager of the work unit, Dr. Mirko Sesic, s-c-i med dot," which

12 is what you meant.

13 Q. Yes, that's what I meant.

14 As far as you know, was Mr. Mirko Sesic really the manager of the

15 hospital?

16 A. Yes, yes. That's why he was not in the army, as I said yesterday.

17 Q. Thank you.

18 MR. ZECEVIC: Could you show the original -- I don't need the

19 document D32/2 ter. But maybe for the Trial Chamber if you would like to

20 inspect the original, Your Honours.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Weiner?

22 MR. WEINER: Is he offering it into evidence, or are we --

23 JUDGE MUMBA: It's already been --

24 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, this is ID. This is ID. I'm not offering it

25 into the evidence because I don't have the translation, my dear

Page 5908

1 colleague. I'm just offering it for inspection. I'm sorry.

2 May I proceed now, Your Honours?

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, you can go ahead.

4 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

5 Q. Mr. Dagovic, can you find the document which is the same list as

6 this but dated June 1992?

7 A. Yes. I have it in front of me.

8 Q. This should be document D33/2 ter.

9 MR. ZECEVIC: [Previous translation continues] ... And I cannot

10 read the ERN number. It's unreadable. It's illegible. I'm sorry, Your

11 Honours. This is the list from June 1992.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: And it's --

13 MR. ZECEVIC: D33/2 ter ID.


15 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.

16 Q. [Interpretation] Have you found the document?

17 A. Yes. I have it here before me.

18 Q. Mr. Mirko Sesic is again the first on the list; is that correct?

19 A. Yes, it is.

20 Q. Would you please turn to page number 2 and look at number 92 [as

21 interpreted].

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. This is again your uncle, is it not?

24 A. That's correct.

25 Q. The coefficient, the amount, everything?

Page 5909

1 A. Yes. It's all there. Correct.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: I think can counsel just correct the transcript.

3 Your question was "turn to page number 2. Look at number 92." It should

4 be 22, because the transcript has number 92.

5 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: No. It's the transcript.

7 MR. ZECEVIC: Oh, yes. Yeah, it is number -- actually number 22.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: 22, yes.

9 MR. ZECEVIC: And on page 2 of this document.

10 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Dagovic, under number 22 in this document is

11 the name of your uncle. And it says next to his name "barber"; is that

12 correct?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Tell me, Mr. Dagovic, you spent about a month in that hospital; is

15 that right?

16 A. Yes, exactly a month.

17 Q. Tell me do you know Sadbera Kapetanovic?

18 A. Yes, I know her. She was fired when I was released from hospital.

19 Q. This was in July?

20 A. Yes. Yes, just after I left. I know she had another work duty

21 after that.

22 Q. Would you tell me, is she a Muslim?

23 A. Yes, she is. That's why she was fired.

24 Q. Tell me, sir, your uncle was also a Muslim?

25 A. Yes.

Page 5910

1 Q. He wasn't fired.

2 A. No. Probably because he was in poor health.

3 Q. Fetah Mehinagic, do you know him?

4 A. Never heard of him.

5 Q. Slavica Kurbasic?

6 A. She's a Serb.

7 Q. I just asked you whether you knew her.

8 A. Yes. Yes, I do.

9 Q. Thank you.

10 A. You're welcome.

11 Q. Tell me, Mr. Dagovic -- well, let's go on to the next document.

12 MR. ZECEVIC: The next document is the same list for July 1992.

13 The ERN number is Y0005288. It should be D34/2 ter ID.


15 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. Tell me, sir, under number 19 is your uncle, is he not?

17 A. Yes. But the woman from the last document is missing, so I was

18 right.

19 Q. Tell me, number 20, Muris Focakovic, do you know him?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Is he a Muslim?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Next to his name, it says "worked for 13 days"; is that correct?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And under "post," it says mechanic on work duty; is that correct?

Page 5911

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And his pay class is 5, the coefficient of 1.0.

3 A. Correct, correct.

4 Q. And it says 3.690 dinars; correct?

5 A. Correct.

6 Q. Under number 22, Esma -- and I suppose it's Hadziabdic, do you

7 know her?

8 A. Yes, I do, but she was ill.

9 Q. I beg your pardon?

10 A. She had stopped working a while before. So this is not correct.

11 Q. Is she a Muslim?

12 A. Yes, she's a Muslim by ethnicity.

13 Q. Thank you for this.

14 Now the next document.

15 MR. ZECEVIC: The report of the hospital of Bosanski Samac to the

16 executive board, 23rd of July, 1992. It bears the ERN number Y0005287 and

17 should be D35/2 ter ID.


19 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. Tell me, sir, under number 22, Sulejman Dagovic, that's your

21 uncle, isn't it?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. It says "15 work days."

24 A. Correct.

25 Q. In the heading, if you can read it, it says: "The presence at

Page 5912

1 work of the worker Jura for June 1992"; is that correct?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And it's signed by the manager of Jura, Dr. Sesic; is that

4 correct, at the bottom?

5 A. Yes, correct. Correct.

6 Q. The next document.

7 MR. ZECEVIC: The next document is the information to the --

8 report to the executive board of Bosanski Samac by the hospital. It bears

9 the ERN number Y0005289 and should be D36/2 ter ID.


11 MR. ZECEVIC: And it's from the 12th of September, 1992.

12 Q. [Interpretation] Tell me, sir, you see this document?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Under number 20 is the name of your uncle; is that correct?

15 A. Yes, it is.

16 Q. And the document is entitled "Presence at work for July of workers

17 of the work unit, July 1992"; is that correct?

18 A. Yes. If I may add --

19 Q. Let me just finish my question.

20 A. I apologise. I thought you had finished.

21 Q. Under number 21 is the name Muris Focakovic; is that correct?

22 A. Yes, it is.

23 Q. And then it says, "Mechanic under work obligation"; is that

24 correct?

25 A. Yes.

Page 5913

1 Q. Very well. When you mentioned the lady Esma Hadziabdic you said

2 she had stopped working.

3 A. Yes. I can't remember exactly when. I'm trying to remember, but

4 I see that there are no lists after July. After July, some refugees

5 arrived, and all of these people lost their jobs except for my uncle who

6 stayed at work in the same unit. And I wanted to add something, if you

7 will allow me. In view of the fact that this is a report for July, and I

8 see that the number of workers is 23, and there are 22 in July, so there's

9 one missing, if that's the document that refers to this.

10 Q. Tell me, sir, do you know that Esma Hadziabdic is still working at

11 the hospital in Bosanski Samac?

12 A. I don't know that.

13 Q. Thank you. Tell me, sir. This document was signed by the manager

14 of the work unit, Dr. Mirko Sesic; is that correct?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. There is also a seal of the Bosanski Samac general hospital; is

17 that correct?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Thank you.

20 A. You're welcome.

21 Q. Mr. Dagovic, when you were interviewed in November 2001, the

22 Prosecutor showed you some photographs. Do you remember?

23 A. Yes, I do remember.

24 Q. And you then testified that occasionally you cleaned the

25 municipality building, if I remember correctly.

Page 5914

1 A. Yes, that's correct.

2 Q. And then you also testified that you carried sandbags to the silo

3 or around the silo; is that correct?

4 A. Yes, that's correct.

5 Q. Tell me, did you carry sandbags somewhere else also?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Where?

8 A. To the embankment facing the hospital. That's where I carried

9 sandbags.

10 Q. Tell me, Mr. Dagovic, were all the important buildings in town

11 protected by these sandbags?

12 A. Yes, but this was not to protect buildings. When we were

13 carrying them to silos, we were not doing it to protect buildings but

14 to -- to create bunkers for soldiers from positions -- on positions from

15 which they could shoot at people.

16 Q. And the parapet that was erected near the hospital, was that used

17 for soldiers to shoot behind?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Who were they shooting at?

20 A. In the direction of the village of Prud, a Croatian village.

21 Q. Tell me, you said a while ago that all the important buildings

22 were protected with sandbags; is that correct?

23 A. Well, that's what you said. I didn't say it.

24 Q. But you confirmed it was correct.

25 A. I said that at the silo, we were not protecting buildings but

Page 5915

1 putting sandbags on the silo to create a parapet.

2 Q. Do you remember that the general hospital in Bosanski Samac was

3 shelled and that it was hit? Do you remember that?

4 A. I remember a shell landed in the courtyard of the hospital. That

5 happened while I was there.

6 Q. Thank you. So apart from the parapet and the silo, you did not

7 carry sandbags anywhere else?

8 A. Not as far as I can remember.

9 Q. Did you see them around town? I'm referring to sandbags around

10 buildings.

11 A. As far as I could see, I didn't see very many. No, in fact I

12 didn't see any in town.

13 Q. Tell me, Mr. Dagovic --

14 MR. ZECEVIC: Can the witness be shown the photograph Exhibit 14A,

15 photograph number 56.

16 Q. [Interpretation] Do you remember looking at this photograph?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. It's the garage and the courtyard of the MUP.

19 A. Yes, yes, I remember them well, especially the courtyard.

20 Q. Tell me, in the distance behind, you can see a river.

21 A. Yes. The river Sava. Yes.

22 Q. And behind it is the bank that belongs to the Republic of Croatia;

23 is that correct?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Tell me, the building on the left-hand side, can you see it?

Page 5916

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. That was part of the municipal building where the cadastral office

3 was?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Is that a prefabricated building?

6 A. Yes. It was in the courtyard. I think it was prefabricated.

7 Q. Tell me, when you went to clean the municipal building, did you go

8 to clean that building or only the main building?

9 A. The main building.

10 Q. Just the main building?

11 A. Yes, just the main building.

12 Q. Did they take someone else to clean this building?

13 A. Well, I didn't see anyone there, so I think not.

14 Q. You didn't see anyone in that part.

15 A. No, not there.

16 Q. I assume it was not used, because it was opened toward -- it was

17 not protected from fire, from Croatia.

18 A. I don't know. The other building was also exposed to fire.

19 Q. Tell me, did you see anyone working in that building?

20 A. No.

21 Q. Thank you. I have only a few more questions for you, so it will

22 take only a few minutes.

23 Yesterday when you were examined, you stated the following: On

24 page 5792, to a question put to you by my learned friend: [In English]

25 "Q. And you wanted to be exchanged; right?

Page 5917

1 A. I was forced to be exchanged.

2 Q. I am asking you whether you wanted to be exchanged.

3 A. No, I did not want to be exchanged and I did not want to

4 go to the camp either."

5 [Interpretation] That's what you said, was it not?

6 A. Correct.

7 Q. Do you remember in November 2001 --

8 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry. I completely forgot. I don't need this

9 document any more, 14A. Thank you, Mr. Usher. I'm sorry.

10 Q. [Interpretation] Do you remember, Mr. Dagovic, in November 2001,

11 more precisely on the 9th of November, you talked to the Prosecutor about

12 the same topic.

13 A. Correct.

14 Q. On page 4009, line 14, to the Prosecutor's question: [In English]

15 "Q. You indicated that you were exchanged in early November,

16 on November 5th. Could you tell the Court the

17 circumstances of that exchange, please?

18 A. They arrived and they told me I was going to be exchanged.

19 And of course, I was happy that I would be able to leave

20 that hell."

21 [Interpretation] Did you say that?

22 A. Correct. There's no contradiction here. I was forced.

23 Q. You're mixing up different things, sir.

24 A. Who would want to leave their own home if they were in their right

25 mind. Those are two different things. I did want to leave that hell, but

Page 5918

1 not because I wanted to. It was because I was beaten, so I was forced to

2 leave.

3 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, I would kindly request that the

4 witness be instructed -- I didn't pose any question. I just asked him

5 whether this was what he has said. He said yes and then started to --

6 JUDGE MUMBA: I'm sure you observed the character of the

7 witness --

8 MR. ZECEVIC: I do understand. But I wouldn't like to, I don't

9 know, make the witness nervous or intimidated in any respect. I just was

10 asking simple matters concerning the transcript, verification of the

11 transcript. Nothing else.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Very well. But he has added what he thought

13 he should add. And if you want to deal with that, you can deal with it.

14 Mr. Weiner.

15 MR. WEINER: I was just going to say that counsel appears to be

16 impeaching him with a prior inconsistent statement, and it isn't

17 inconsistent, and he was explaining why it isn't inconsistent.


19 Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

20 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes. But it is obvious that the witness was

21 anticipating my questions. But I have another statement I would like to

22 present to him before the impeachment. So let me just finish this

23 before --

24 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. You can go ahead.

25 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

Page 5919

1 Q. On the same date, sir, on the 9th of November last year, on page

2 3973, to the Prosecutor's question: [In English]

3 "Q. Let me just jump ahead on a few questions. We will step

4 away from Lugar for a moment. You left the hospital on

5 what date?

6 A. Hospital, around the 7th of July, a policeman named Dragan

7 Stefanovic from the village of Crkvine came to me and he

8 asked me or rather said to me that the Red Cross was

9 asking whether I wanted to go for an exchange. I said

10 yes."

11 A. Correct.

12 Q. [Interpretation] That's correct too?

13 A. Yes. But I was not exchanged, so I was tricked again.

14 Q. Will you please wait for my question.

15 A. Well, I was afraid you would move away from this topic, so I

16 wanted to say this because I feel it is very important.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Witness. But do always wait for questions from

18 counsel. If there is anything extra you want to say after counsel has

19 finished asking you questions, you can ask for the permission from the

20 Chamber to do so.

21 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. Mr. Dagovic, you have already explained without my asking you.

23 But now I would like to ask you to repeat. I assume you will repeat what

24 you have already said. So in November at one point, you said that you

25 were glad to leave that hell. In another place you said that you were

Page 5920

1 told that the Red Cross was asking for you to be exchanged and you agreed;

2 is that correct?

3 A. That's correct. If the Court will allow me to explain.

4 Q. I'll let you explain, but let me go on first.

5 On the 13th of February, you said you did not want to be

6 exchanged. Could you explain this.

7 A. Well, thank you. When I said I did not want to be exchanged, this

8 was in context. It would be absurd for someone to want to leave their

9 home and their family and be exchanged. I was happy to be leaving that

10 hell because I had been beaten up. I had been to hospital. And when they

11 said, "Do you want to be exchanged, to go back to camp," of course I

12 wanted to be exchanged, to leave that hell. But nobody liked leaving

13 their home and their family. So it was by force. You made use of this

14 and you twisted it round to suit your purposes out of context. I was

15 happy to leave that hell, yes. But I was not happy to be incarcerated.

16 So I was locked up like an animal, and we don't even treat animals like

17 that. So you used this in context -- in a context that suits you, in a

18 legal way.

19 But as Her Honour Judge Mumba said, I cannot wait for the question

20 to finish because I feel I haven't answered. I've come here to tell the

21 truth and not to be put questions to which I cannot be allowed to answer.

22 Q. Thank you, Mr. Dagovic, for you exhaustive reply.

23 MR. ZECEVIC: [Previous translation continues] ... with this

24 witness, thank you.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pantelic.

Page 5921

1 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. In fact, we are almost finished

2 for today, I believe.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: You can go ahead with your questions.

4 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. I mean, is our time until 6.00 today?

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. We may go beyond that.

6 MR. PANTELIC: Okay. Yes. Because I have other procedural

7 matters which I want to raise, so that was my guess to know exact --

8 JUDGE MUMBA: No. Let's deal with cross-examination first.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could I please go out for a moment,

10 if possible.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. The usher, can you escort the witness

12 out, please.

13 I may as well ask the interpreters, if we take a ten-minute

14 break --

15 Can you escort the witness outside, please.

16 Yes. I will ask the interpreters. If we take a ten-minute break

17 now, can we continue?

18 THE INTERPRETER: Yes, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. We'll take a ten-minute break.

20 --- Break taken at 5.59 p.m.

21 --- On resuming at 6.07 p.m.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: The proceeding -- we are not about to continue the

23 proceedings as of today. We've been informed that Mr. Milan Simic is

24 quite tired. And there's nothing we can do about that but adjourn.

25 We shall leave it to the Prosecution to determine the sequence of

Page 5922

1 their witnesses. I hope they will stick to the list. But for this

2 particular witness, if it's possible for him to come on Monday, fine. If

3 it's not possible, another date can be arranged.

4 I hope Mr. Pantelic will bear with the change of timing for this

5 particular witness, for your continued cross-examination.

6 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, yes, Your Honours. By all means, yes.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, because the Victims and Witnesses Unit has

8 also to arrange with his employers.

9 MR. PANTELIC: I fully understand the situation.

10 And Your Honours, I have a very brief issue to raise --

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. You can go ahead.

12 MR. PANTELIC: -- with regard to Variant A and B. This is a

13 formal motion on behalf of all my colleagues --

14 MR. WEINER: Excuse me, Your Honour.


16 MR. WEINER: Attorney Ashley Reidy is the attorney handling this.

17 We thought this was going to be over today. She's not here today. I'd

18 ask that this be held till Monday.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: All right.

20 MR. WEINER: I have had little, if any, involvement in it, and I

21 really couldn't respond to anything, in any event

22 MR. PANTELIC: If we may add, Your Honours, I just spoke with my

23 colleague Ms. Reidy, and she told me that it will be enough to see it in

24 transcript. So I won't --

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay. So what you want is to state what you want to

Page 5923

1 say and then she will respond --

2 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. She will read the transcript, and then she

3 will be -- prepare for several days. So for the sake of efficiency.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: All right.

5 MR. PANTELIC: In fact, Your Honours, our formal motion is related

6 to the sort of subpoena to the certain number of persons which might be

7 of -- their testimony might be of importance for this issue Variant A and

8 B.

9 Namely, I am thinking about the three unknown agents of AID

10 service; let's say John Doe 1, John Doe 2, and John Doe 3. Also, I have

11 in mind Mr. Alimanovic, who was mentioned through the testimony of

12 Mr. O'Donnell. I don't know his first name. And also, I am thinking

13 about the subpoena for President of -- Presidency of SDS party in

14 Republika Srpska, Mr. Dragan Kalenic, and also the head of the SDS main

15 office, Mr. Milovan Bjelica.

16 Also in addition, we are mindful to call

17 two accused persons currently under the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Of

18 course we have to make certain contacts with their lawyers. They are two

19 prominent political figures. And I do believe that their testimony should

20 be limited specifically to the issue of Variant A and B. But we shall be

21 in a situation to give their names on Monday after the consultations with

22 their lawyers. Thank you.

23 JUDGE MUMBA: Before you -- yes. You have to discuss with these

24 possible witnesses you intend to call, or if they are accused, you have to

25 discuss with their lawyers and get their statements. You have to approach

Page 5924

1 them and find out if they can assist your case, get their statements,

2 before you can apply for subpoena.

3 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. That was my idea, in fact. There are two

4 ways. Maybe they can come personally here before this Trial Chamber --


6 MR. PANTELIC: -- if they want.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: If they agree to be invited as witnesses.

8 MR. PANTELIC: And the other alternative would be sort of a

9 statement of affidavit or something like that.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: So yes, you can make those preparations. There is

11 no need for hurrying on this issue. It can wait. We can proceed with the

12 case when you are ready for with your witnesses. We can go back to it.

13 There is no need for you to be in haste, as it were.

14 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, thank you. Thank you for your instructions.

15 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. So it doesn't have to be on Monday. You can

16 go ahead and see which witnesses you think you want to call for this

17 particular -- for these particular documents. Make the normal

18 arrangements. If you feel -- and you still feel you want them, that's

19 when you can apply for subpoena.

20 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Your Honours.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: So it doesn't have to be next week. All right?

22 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Yes, thank you.

23 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, we would just like an opportunity --

24 once again, this is Attorney Reidy's issue to properly oppose portions of

25 it based on when they finalise what their plan is.

Page 5925












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 5926


2 MR. WEINER: If we're going to move to quash subpoenas or

3 whatever.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: That's why I'm telling them that they better do it

5 properly. There's no need for haste. And then the Prosecution, as usual,

6 will have the opportunity to respond, like respond -- the opportunity

7 to respond on the other witness suggested by Ms. Baen. Do you recall?

8 MR. WEINER: Yes.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: So no decisions are going to be taken yet. And

10 every party will be given the opportunity they need.

11 MR. WEINER: Okay. Thank you very much.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: You're welcome.

13 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Your Honours.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The Court will rise until Monday at 14.15

15 hours.

16 The other point I wanted to mention was the Trial Chamber was

17 asked as to the schedules of the sittings. The schedule -- we shall go on

18 sitting until the week beginning the 18th of March. That week we shall

19 not sit. Thereafter, we shall continue sitting. The written schedule

20 will be provided as soon as Ms. Godic [phoen] comes back.

21 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.14 p.m., to

22 be reconvened on Monday, the 18th day of February,

23 2002, at 2.15 p.m.