Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 8296

1 Thursday, 23 May 2002

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The accused Milan Simic not present]

5 [The witness entered court]

6 --- Upon commencing at 2.18 p.m.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Please call the case.

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

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

10 Tadic, and Simo Zaric.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Cross-examination is continuing with

12 Mr. Pisarevic.

13 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours.


15 [Witness answered through interpreter]

16 Cross-examined by Mr. Pisarevic: [Continued]

17 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Paradzik. The last thing we discussed

18 yesterday was the organisation of the local commune of Brod. The

19 questions I will now be asking relate mostly to the period before the 17th

20 of April, 1992.

21 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction. Local commune of

22 Prud.

23 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation] The mistake in the transcript has

24 been corrected.

25 Q. In the local commune of Prud, as you say, a plan, some sort of

Page 8297

1 military plan, was adopted; is that right?

2 A. No.

3 Q. Was there a plan regarding civilian defence?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Can you tell me whether you personally had any responsibilities in

6 the local commune of Prud?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. What were your responsibilities?

9 A. My responsibility was the evacuation of the population, women and

10 children, organising boats across the Sava River, as well as accommodation

11 of refugees from Bosanski Samac.

12 Q. If I understood you correctly, that was your responsibility before

13 the 17th of April, 1992, wasn't it?

14 A. I was one of the people responsible for that. There were several

15 of us.

16 Q. Was this perhaps in the framework of the work plan of the civilian

17 defence?

18 A. That was an agreement involving Izet Izetbegovic, who was

19 responsible for civilian defence on the commune level, and he was looking

20 for someone from the local commune of Prud to contact on this issue. And

21 he asked us, as the one responsible on the municipality level, in the

22 event of a flow of refugees from Samac, whether we were able to organise

23 accommodation and transfer to the Republic of Croatia.

24 Q. Can you remember, Mr. Paradzik, when was this?

25 A. I can't give you the date.

Page 8298

1 Q. Can we agree that it must have been before the 17th of April,

2 1992?

3 A. Yes. Yes.

4 Q. Izet Izetbegovic was the vice-president of the SDA?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. He was a Muslim by ethnicity, wasn't he?

7 A. Yes, he was.

8 Q. On the territory of the local commune of Prud, was there a

9 military unit or, as we call it, company?

10 A. In which period?

11 Q. Before the 17th of April, 1992.

12 A. No.

13 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, it is again --

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Lazarevic.

15 MR. LAZAREVIC: Clarification of transcript. Here it says, page

16 3, line 9 and 10, "on the territory of the local commune of Prud was there

17 a military unit or, as we call it, company?" Mr. Pisarevic said a

18 specific word, satnija. This is a very specific Croatian word for a

19 military unit, and of course it does not mean a company anyway. So we

20 would like a more specific translation for this term.

21 [Trial Chamber confers]

22 JUDGE MUMBA: I thought that the translation was all right. Where

23 it says military unit or, as we call it, "company," which is normally used

24 even in English to denote a group of soldiers, a specific formation of a

25 group of soldiers.

Page 8299

1 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes, I am aware of that. But maybe if the word

2 satnija, because we will use it in more occasions, would be good to use...

3 JUDGE MUMBA: All right.

4 MR. LAZAREVIC: I'm not suggesting anything, of course. I don't

5 want to interfere in the interpreters' business, but ...

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Maybe the Trial Chamber can find out from the

7 interpreters if there is any other way of interpreting.

8 THE INTERPRETER: "Company" is the correct translation of the word

9 used.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. All right. We proceed.

11 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation]

12 Q. Can you please tell the Trial Chamber now what position Mijo

13 Masic, also known as Mis or Mouse, occupied in the commune of Prud.

14 A. After the 17th of April, he was a commander.

15 Q. You claim that Mijo Masic was not the commander of that military

16 unit even before the 17th of April, 1992?

17 A. No, he wasn't.

18 Q. Did you remember, or do you know, that the locals of Prud dug

19 trenches in the direction of the Serb village of Trnjak?

20 A. No.

21 Q. You remember that trenches were dug on the embankment facing the

22 town of Samac, don't you?

23 A. Yes, I do.

24 Q. At points of entrance to the village of Prud, were there any

25 checkpoints put up?

Page 8300

1 A. No.

2 Q. How about the centre of the village of Prud?

3 A. No.

4 Q. Did the members of the ZNG, the Croatian National Guard, walk

5 around the village in uniforms with a red bandanna?

6 A. No.

7 Q. With a black bandanna. Correction.

8 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please --

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. --

10 MR. DI FAZIO: -- whereas I'm not objecting to the line of inquiry

11 of Mr. Pisarevic, I have no desire to stop him in these questions, I think

12 that he ought to specify the time that relates to the questions. For

13 example, the questioning relating to Croatian National Guard walking

14 around with red bandanas, timing is of importance for that evidence to

15 have any value to you. The same applies to the question relating to the

16 digging of trenches facing Bosanski Samac, and the witness answered yes.

17 The question of when those trenches were dug is of course of some

18 importance to you, whether it was before or after the 16th and 17th of

19 April. So these -- whereas I don't object, it would be wise, I think, for

20 Mr. Pisarevic, and of value to you, for him to specify periods of time

21 when he's putting these sorts of matters to the witness.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, counsel. I think the point made by the

23 Prosecution is important as to being time specific.

24 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation] I agree, Your Honours. All of

25 this is important. But before beginning my cross-examination, I warned

Page 8301

1 the witness that my questions would relate to the period before the 17th

2 of April, 1992. That's why I didn't consider it necessary to remind him

3 of this fact before every specific question and every specific action

4 involved.

5 Q. These trenches facing Bosanski Samac on the embankment in Prud,

6 were they dug before the 17th of April, 1992?

7 A. No.

8 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Mr. Pisarevic, I wonder whether you could clarify

9 with the witness in relation to your questions regarding checkpoints, the

10 following: Were there any checkpoints anywhere in Prud at the time in

11 question, before April 17th, 1992? I ask this because your questions

12 referred to the entrance to Prud, sounding as though there was only one

13 entrance, and also the centre of Prud. So if you could seek

14 clarification, that would be very good. Thank you.

15 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. Mr. Paradzik, I think you've understood the drift of the

17 Honourable Judge. Were there any checkpoints anywhere in Prud before the

18 17th of April, 1992?

19 A. There was one on the bridge over the Bosna River, manned by the

20 reserve police on the side of Prud.

21 Q. Mr. Paradzik, I would like to know: Did the locals of the Prud

22 local commune, or some other members, put up some other checkpoint in the

23 village of Prud?

24 A. As far as I know, no other checkpoint was organised.

25 Q. Can you tell me whether there were unorganised and arbitrarily

Page 8302

1 installed checkpoints in the local commune of Prud?

2 A. I wouldn't know that.

3 Q. And are you aware of the fact that certain inhabitants of the

4 local commune of Prud and other local communes populated by Croats went to

5 the war in Croatia to fight on the side of the Croatian army in the

6 Republic of Croatia in the period of the war in Croatia?

7 A. There were no organised trips to Croatia for that purpose.

8 Q. Do you know of any cases involving individuals from the local

9 commune of Prud who became members of the Croatian National Guard fighting

10 in the Republic of Croatia?

11 A. I don't know where other people went.

12 Q. Did you see in your local commune any of the locals wearing

13 uniforms of the ZNG?

14 A. No.

15 Q. Was guard duty organised in the local commune of Prud?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Did you have an established Crisis Staff of the local commune of

18 Prud?

19 A. No, we didn't.

20 Q. Are you aware of the fact that Mr. Simo Zaric, when he went to his

21 home village of Trnjak to visit his mother, was regularly stopped and

22 searched at checkpoints of the village of Prud, whether official or

23 unofficial, self-organised? Are you aware of that?

24 A. As far as I know, Simo Zaric was able to move around freely

25 through Prud.

Page 8303

1 Q. Do you remember, Mr. Paradzik, the meeting between representatives

2 of the local commune of Trnjak and those of Prud held in the community

3 centre in the centre of Prud?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Can we agree that this meeting discussed the digging of trenches

6 by the locals of Prud, trenches facing Trnjak, which was populated by

7 Serbs?

8 A. I don't know the details of that discussion.

9 Q. Did you attend this meeting?

10 A. Not all of it.

11 Q. Do you know of one event when, on Christmas 1991, outside a cafe

12 in the centre of Prud, fire was opened from a machine-gun by Pero Majic

13 son of Iko, and another Majic, both of them Croats?

14 A. I wasn't there, and I don't know who opened fire.

15 Q. But are you aware of this shooting?

16 A. Shooting at Christmas is a custom. I don't know where the

17 shooting came from and who did it, but it's customary.

18 Q. You will agree it's not customary to shoot from a light

19 machine-gun?

20 A. I don't know whether it was a light machine-gun or not.

21 Q. Do you know that in the period before 17th of April, 1992, Prud

22 was often visited by Stjepan Blazanovic, called Blaco from Slovanski Brod,

23 a Croat, member of the army of the Republic of Croatia?

24 A. Stjepan visited Dubica. His wife was from Dubica. I don't know

25 that he ever visited Brod -- Prud, sorry.

Page 8304

1 Q. Do you know that Mr. Meter and Mr. Pilipovic, from Slavonski Brod,

2 members of the Croatian army, used to come?

3 A. I am not. I don't know that.

4 Q. Do you know that on the 20th of April, 1992, in Prud, a plan was

5 developed for the occupation for the takeover of Samac?

6 A. I'm not aware of that.

7 Q. In 1992, was your telephone number 61634?

8 A. I think it was.

9 Q. Are you aware of the fact that on this plan, next to your name,

10 your telephone number was indicated?

11 A. No.

12 Q. If you can remember, was the telephone number of the local commune

13 in Prud at the time 61611?

14 A. I don't remember the number.

15 Q. Do you know Mr. Marko Bozanovic?

16 A. I do.

17 Q. Do you know that Mr. Marko Bozanovic, a Croat, was appointed

18 commander of the armed forces by the joint Crisis Staff of the HDZ and the

19 SDA?

20 A. I know that under the decision of the presidency of Bosnia and

21 Herzegovina, Marko was appointed commander of the Territorial Defence.

22 Q. Do you know that this decision was made on the 15th of April,

23 1992?

24 A. I don't know the date of its adoption.

25 Q. Do you know that at the same time, at the same meeting, of the

Page 8305

1 same Crisis Staff, Alija Fitozovic was appointed his deputy, Alija

2 Fitozovic being a Muslim from Bosanski Samac?

3 A. I'm not aware of that.

4 Q. Is it true that the military unit, namely, company, was part of

5 the 102nd Brigade of the HVO, with a seat --

6 A. In terms of territory, it was connected with Odzak.

7 Q. Is it true that within this military unit there were weapons, such

8 as Kalashnikovs, recoilless cannons, 105-millimetres Ossa hand-held rocket

9 launchers and other weaponry?

10 A. No. They only had light weaponry.

11 Q. Will you tell me what you imply by that?

12 A. They had no Ossa hand-held rocket launchers or mortars or any such

13 thing.

14 Q. Does that mean that they had recoilless cannons?

15 A. It doesn't. They didn't have them.

16 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Mr. Pisarevic, I wonder whether you could seek a

17 clarification. Page 10, line 7 in response to your question concerning

18 the 102nd Brigade of the HVO, the witness's answer was: "In terms of

19 territory, it was connected with Odzak." What was connected? The 102nd

20 Brigade, or what? It doesn't seem clear to me.

21 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation] All right, Your Honour. I will

22 clear it up immediately.

23 Q. Mr. Paradzik, my question was the following: Was your military

24 unit in a subordinate relation towards the 102nd Odzak Brigade, that is to

25 say, the 102nd Brigade of the HVO, which had its command in Odzak? In

Page 8306

1 other words, was it a part of that brigade?

2 A. No.

3 Q. Could you please answer the following question: Under what

4 command was this military unit? Who did it belong to?

5 A. It was part of the 104th Brigade. It was an independent company.

6 Q. Could you please tell me when this 104th Brigade was created?

7 A. After April 17th.

8 Q. The 104th Brigade belonged to the HVO; is that correct?

9 A. At that time, it wasn't called the HVO; it was called the

10 Territorial Defence.

11 Q. Are you aware of the fact that the commander of all military units

12 in the territory of the local commune of Prud was a certain gentleman

13 called Cavka, who was a member of the Croatian military in Croatia?

14 A. He was not a commander.

15 Q. Was the person by that nickname present in the local commune of

16 Prud both before and after the 17th of April, 1992?

17 A. It wasn't in Prud before April 17th, but this person was in Prud

18 after April 17th.

19 Q. Mr. Paradzik, this person is not a resident of the local commune

20 of Prud; is that correct?

21 A. Yes, he is not.

22 Q. Mr. Paradzik, you certainly know Badisa Nujic, Tadija Grgic, Pero

23 Majic, Pero Pepic, Mato Paradzik, Marko Vrljic, Ilija Mandzukic and

24 others; is that correct?

25 A. Yes.

Page 8307

1 Q. Are you aware of the fact that they were people who had certain

2 responsibility, commanding responsibilities in this unit, commanders of

3 platoons, of departments, and so on?

4 A. No, they did not.

5 Q. Could you please tell me the following: Did the persons called

6 Anto Masic, nicknamed Rus, Badisa Nujic, nicknamed Baja, Anto Sarcevic,

7 and Mato Majic, nicknamed Lulas, have the responsibility of duty service

8 in the local commune of Prud?

9 A. All the villagers of Prud had to do this duty service, not only

10 them. We all took our turns.

11 Q. We are now going to move to another topic, the events that took

12 place on the 16th and the 17th of April, 1992. In your statement, you

13 said that when you woke up and came to the centre of Prud, about 200

14 people gathered there with mainly hunting weapons and other kinds of

15 rifles. Do you remember this?

16 A. Not everybody had rifles.

17 Q. Well, those who did have them.

18 A. Well, I'm not certain about the number. The whole village came.

19 I can't tell you exactly who was present where, but the majority of people

20 were in the centre.

21 Q. Mr. Paradzik, the numbers don't matter.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. My question is as follows: What did you mean when you said "other

24 kinds of rifles"? What other kinds did people have? Can you remember?

25 A. M-48, PAPs, and Kalashnikovs.

Page 8308

1 Q. I'd just like to clear something up. A PAP what is that? It's an

2 abbreviation. You and I can understand each other, but we should also

3 clear things up for the Chamber. What does this abbreviation PAP mean?

4 A. I don't know what it is. I just know that the rifle was known by

5 that name.

6 Q. Would you agree this is a semi-automatic rifle?

7 A. Yes, something like that.

8 Q. This rifle, this PAP rifle, this is a military kind of weapon, is

9 it not?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. On that morning when you gathered in the centre of Prud, you

12 handled, in accordance with the military plan that you had had from

13 before; is that correct?

14 A. No.

15 Q. All right. Could you tell us what activities were undertaken in

16 the local commune of Prud when about 200 people that you mentioned

17 gathered?

18 A. Everybody was panicked and a decision had to be made what to do.

19 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Mr. Pisarevic, if we could look, please, to line

20 14 on page 13. The question says: "On what morning when you gathered in

21 the centre of Prud you handled" handled what? We've been talking about

22 PAPs and rifles and things before that. Can you clarify what your

23 question actually refers to, please? So that's page 13, lines 13 through

24 to 15.

25 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation] The question was as follows: When

Page 8309

1 they gathered them in that morning, did they act in accordance with the

2 military plan? And your answer was: No.

3 A. Yes, that's correct. We did not.

4 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Okay. Thank you. It was the word "handled"

5 which raised a query.

6 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation]

7 Q. Could you please tell me the following: You mentioned a person

8 called Namik Suljic. He is a Muslim by ethnicity, a member of the SDA; is

9 that correct?

10 A. Yes, he's a Muslim, but I don't know whether he was a member or

11 not.

12 Q. He was the deputy of the commander in the police station in Samac;

13 is that correct?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. If you can remember, could you please tell me the following: How

16 many times during the night of the 17th of April, 1992 did he come to

17 Prud?

18 A. Several times. He crossed the bridge several times and he went

19 back to Samac several times.

20 Q. Every time he crossed the bridge. You're referring to the bridge

21 on the River Bosna; is that correct?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Would you agree that the bridge was free for crossing at that

24 time?

25 A. Yes.

Page 8310

1 Q. Could you tell me the following: When did Mr. Namik Suljic leave

2 the Motorola or the walkie-talkie with you?

3 A. Immediately that evening, that night. It might have been around

4 3.00. I'm not sure. After the shooting in Samac. That's when he came.

5 He was on the checkpoint.

6 Q. What checkpoint was he at?

7 A. I guess he was at the checkpoint on the bridge. I don't know.

8 Q. Did he leave the Motorola at the checkpoint on the bridge?

9 A. No. He left it in Prud.

10 Q. Could you please tell us the exact location where he left it?

11 A. At the cultural centre.

12 Q. Was this just one office in the centre where your command was

13 located?

14 A. There was no such command. It was raining, and we were at the

15 centre.

16 Q. Can you remember how many people were in this office, in this room

17 at the centre?

18 A. I think more than 20. There was quite a few people there, and

19 this was taking place upstairs. There were people downstairs too.

20 Q. Did Mr. Suljic leave this Motorola to somebody specifically or did

21 he just leave it there?

22 A. He left it, but I don't know to whom.

23 Q. That morning, did you see Alija Fitozovic in Prud, a Muslim from

24 Samac, the deputy commander of the military units of HVO and SDA?

25 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please.

Page 8311


2 MR. DI FAZIO: Unless my memory serves me wrongly, the witness

3 hasn't said that he was the deputy commander of military units of the HVO

4 and SDA at all, so the question assumes that. I think the proper way to

5 approach the matter for Mr. Pisarevic would be to first ask whether or not

6 Alija Fitozovic was indeed the deputy commander of any military unit in

7 the HVO or SDA and then proceed to the next part of the question.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pisarevic.

9 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation] I understood, Your Honours. This

10 is not a problem.

11 Q. Did you see Alija Fitozovic, a Muslim from Samac, in Prud?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. When did you see him?

14 A. After midnight.

15 Q. Please, after midnight is a long time span. Could you tell me

16 more precisely at what time did you see him?

17 A. After midnight on April 17th. The shooting had already started in

18 Samac.

19 Q. Could you please tell me how long Mr. Fitozovic stayed in Prud?

20 Was he also at this social, cultural centre?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. How long did he stay there?

23 A. Until the morning.

24 Q. Until the morning. Would you say it was 6.00 or 7.00 in the

25 morning?

Page 8312

1 A. 6.00 or 7.00.

2 Q. Did Alija Fitozovic have a Motorola or a walkie-talkie on him?

3 A. I didn't see it.

4 Q. Did you see Ibrahim Salkic, nicknamed Ibela, also in Prud at the

5 same time?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Did Salkic have a Motorola?

8 A. I didn't see it.

9 Q. Until what time did Mr. Salkic stay in Prud?

10 A. I think up until the same time, maybe up until 6.00.

11 Q. Could you give us certain names who were -- who also heard the

12 name of Mr. -- the voice of Mr. Zaric in Prud?

13 A. Anto Petric, Mato Vidovic, Mato Grgic, Marko Barugdzic, Alija

14 Fitozovic. I think that's enough.

15 Q. This Motorola, this walkie-talkie, what do you know about its

16 technical characteristics?

17 A. I know very little about it.

18 Q. So you couldn't say what this Motorola or walkie-talkie was, its

19 type, or anything like that?

20 A. It's the same as what the police had. They called it Motorola.

21 Q. What was the quality of sound? Were there any interferences?

22 A. No, there was no interference.

23 Q. So let's conclude. This Motorola is not a radio; is that correct?

24 A. No, it's not a radio.

25 Q. Mr. Paradzik, as far as I know, you are not an expert in voice

Page 8313

1 recognition; is that correct?

2 A. Well, I really don't know who could be an expert in that.

3 Q. Well, I asked you if you were one.

4 A. I'm not.

5 Q. Are you familiar with the fact that the passwords in the Samac

6 police were "sea" and "seagull"?

7 A. No.

8 Q. In the statement, you said that citizens started crossing from

9 3.00 a.m. on the 17th of April, 1992, up until 2.00 p.m. on the same day.

10 Is that correct?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. We have a piece of information that in that time frame 10.000

13 citizens of Samac -- 1.000?

14 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter correction. 1.000 citizens of Samac

15 of Muslim and Croat ethnicity left Samac to Prud.

16 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation]

17 Q. Is that information correct?

18 A. I'm not sure how many people crossed the bridge.

19 Q. What is your personal estimate? How many people crossed over?

20 A. I don't. Whoever crossed over went immediately to the Republic of

21 Croatia.

22 Q. So you wouldn't be able to give your personal estimate? A couple

23 hundred?

24 A. Well, I really don't. I wasn't there the whole time. I didn't

25 see everybody who crossed over.

Page 8314

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pisarevic, your 30 minutes is over.

2 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation] Just five more minutes and then

3 I'll be finished.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: All right.

5 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation]

6 Q. From the location where you were at in Prud, the bridge on the

7 River Bosna cannot be seen; is that correct?

8 A. I was near the bridge.

9 Q. Were you in the centre?

10 A. At that time I was in the centre. I was not at the bridge at

11 3.00.

12 Q. Do you know whether anybody was hurt while crossing the bridge,

13 whether anybody was hurt by weapon fire?

14 A. During the night, nobody was hurt.

15 Q. Was anybody killed?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Do you remember that on the 17th of April, 1992, in the evening

18 hours, your unit from Prud tried to attack Samac across the bridge and

19 three members of this unit were killed? Do you remember this incident?

20 A. There was never any attack attempted against Samac.

21 Q. Are you aware of the fact that three members of your military unit

22 were killed on the bridge, on the River Bosna, between your local commune

23 and the city of Samac?

24 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, the use of the expression

25 "your military unit" is troubling. I don't recall this witness saying

Page 8315

1 that he was part of any military unit. I think he said he was part of the

2 self-defence for the town.


4 MR. DI FAZIO: If that's what Mr. Pisarevic means, then let him

5 specify that in the question to the witness, but I don't think the witness

6 has said he's part of any military unit.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pisarevic.

8 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if I understood

9 correctly what the witness said, he said that from the 17th onward there

10 was a military unit on the local commune of Prud under the command of Mijo

11 Masic, nicknamed Mis, or "Mouse," and I said that this was on the 17th of

12 April, in the evening.

13 Q. Was anybody killed? Do you know if anybody was killed on the 17th

14 of April, in the evening hours, on the bridge crossing the River Bosna?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. These people that were killed, they were not residents of Prud; is

17 that correct?

18 A. I have a correction to make. I am not sure that this happened on

19 the 17th of April.

20 Q. We have some facts showing that it happened on the 17th of April,

21 but it's a fact that certain persons were killed there; is that correct?

22 Where were these people from?

23 A. They weren't from Prud. I don't know where they were from.

24 Q. Were they maybe from the Republic of Croatia?

25 A. I'm not sure. At that time, people were arriving from all sides.

Page 8316

1 I'm not sure where they were from.

2 Q. Were the killed persons wearing uniforms?

3 A. I didn't see any.

4 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I don't want to stop

5 Mr. Pisarevic from this line of questioning, but I fear that we may end up

6 with a situation where both Mr. Pisarevic and the witness are talking

7 about separate episodes. Mr. Pisarevic, I think, from looking at the

8 transcript, is referring to an episode that he alleges, or his

9 instructions are, took place on the 17th of April. The witness is talking

10 about people being killed on the bridge, but he doesn't think it was the

11 17th of April. So we might end up with Mr. Pisarevic talking about one

12 incident and the witness talking about another. So I think that it should

13 be clarified in the transcript; otherwise, once again, it's of no benefit

14 to you, and for that matter, Mr. Pisarevic, because he can't make use of

15 it at a later stage. So I suggest the matter be clarified so that it's

16 clear that both -- the witness clearly understands what Mr. Pisarevic is

17 referring to.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pisarevic. You've understood what

19 Mr. Di Fazio has said.

20 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation] I have, Your Honours. Thank you.

21 Q. If this incident didn't happen on the 17th, could it have been on

22 the 18th or immediately after the 17th?

23 A. I don't know the date. I know some people got killed. I can't

24 really tell you where they were from.

25 Q. It was the 17th or the 18th or the 19th. I'm not insisting. But

Page 8317

1 was it immediately after the 17th?

2 A. It was certainly after the 17th. I can't tell you the date.

3 Q. Was it a day or two or three after the 17th?

4 A. I don't remember.

5 Q. Thank you. I've got just a couple of more questions and we'll be

6 through.

7 The locals of Struke, this hamlet in your local commune of Prud,

8 left their houses at a certain point. They were immediately set on fire

9 after they were abandoned, weren't they?

10 A. No.

11 Q. Did you, prior to early July, go to Trnjak or Dubica, and Struke?

12 A. No, I didn't.

13 Q. When did the military operation corridor take place? It was in

14 July, wasn't it? The order on the evacuation of Croat citizens from the

15 municipality of Odzak and the local commune of Prud was issued by the

16 command of the 102nd Brigade of the HVO, based in Odzak; is that correct?

17 A. Yes, it is.

18 Q. According to your own statement, it was the time when you left for

19 Croatia, wasn't it?

20 A. Yes, it was.

21 Q. Who accompanied you? Who left together with you?

22 A. All the inhabitants of Prud.

23 Q. Do you have any knowledge about the residents of other villages in

24 Odzak? Did they also leave for Croatia?

25 A. They did.

Page 8318

1 Q. So if I understood you correctly, nobody stayed behind on the

2 territory of Odzak municipality, no Muslims or Croats.

3 A. I don't know about other places. I know that three men remained

4 in Prud.

5 Q. Just one more thing. Is my information correct that not a single

6 citizen of Prud was killed during the war operations in the Republic of

7 Bosnia-Herzegovina?

8 A. It is.

9 Q. Just one final question. Before you came to testify in The Hague,

10 did you talk to Dragan Lukac?

11 A. No.

12 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have no further

13 questions.


15 The Prosecution, re-examination?

16 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Thank you, Your Honours. Just two very brief

17 questions.

18 Re-examined by Mr. Di Fazio:

19 Q. Witness, you said that, this afternoon, that the bridge was free

20 when Namik Suljic crossed it. I want to know what you meant by that. Do

21 you mean that it was free of obstruction and impediment or was it free of

22 anyone trying -- by that I mean physical obstruction or impediment, or was

23 it free of anyone shooting at it, free of anyone trying to stop people

24 from crossing it? Do you understand what I mean?

25 A. At that time, the bridge had not been occupied, had not been taken

Page 8319

1 over yet, but intermittent fire was opened at it.

2 Q. Was intermittent fire opened at it during the times that this Mr.

3 Suljic was crossing over, or going back and forth?

4 A. I wasn't on the bridge when Namik crossed it, and I really don't

5 know.

6 Q. Thanks. You also said that no one was hurt during the night

7 crossing the bridge. Was anyone hurt during the day crossing the bridge?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Who was hurt, and how were they hurt, as far as you're aware?

10 A. Seven our young men were injured. They were on the bridge

11 receiving incoming civilians, and they were hit by a mortar shell.

12 Q. These young men from the village of -- the town of Prud?

13 A. Yes, from Prud village.

14 Q. Yes. Thank you.

15 MR. DI FAZIO: I have no further re-examination.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you very much for giving evidence to the

17 Tribunal. You are now free. You can leave the courtroom.

18 [The witness withdrew]

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Any other witness?

20 MR. DI FAZIO: No, Your Honours. Yesterday, as you know, I

21 discussed with you what I hoped would be arrangements for Mr. Ibro

22 Taletovic to give evidence today and become part heard in the case.

23 Yesterday and this morning, Mr. Weiner was engaged in proofing the

24 witness. This morning he told us, the Prosecutors in the case, that he

25 did not feel able to testify in the case at all. He felt that he was

Page 8320

1 physically and mentally unable to give evidence. I ask you to bear in

2 mind that he endured a harrowing episode. He was a survivor of the

3 massacre, mass murder, call it what you will, at Crkvina, and simply felt

4 that he couldn't provide any evidence. On that basis, and on that basis

5 alone, the Prosecution would not be minded to call him. However, having

6 also proofed him, it became clear that there was not much that he could

7 offer the Chamber by way of evidence that another witness could not offer

8 in any event, another gentleman who we intend to call to give evidence and

9 who can provide an account of the events at Crkvina.

10 Bearing in mind all of those matters, the Prosecution has decided

11 it will not call him to give evidence. Regrettably, we don't have any

12 other witness that we can slot in at short notice. The only person that

13 we could have done that with is Ewa Tabeau, and as I told you last week,

14 she is on mission and not available at the moment. And the next witness

15 is not flying in until tomorrow. So the situation has arisen, I'm sorry

16 to say, that whereby we can't produce any further witnesses for the

17 remainder of the afternoon.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: All right.

19 Any matters from the Defence? Yes, Mr. Lukic.

20 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] If there are no other issues to be

21 discussed, I would like to avail myself of the opportunity to tender three

22 documents of which I got official translations. Since we have spare time

23 now, apparently, perhaps we could introduce them into evidence now.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, you can go ahead.

25 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] The first document that I would like

Page 8321

1 to tender, along with an official translation, is D1/3 ter ID. It has

2 been introduced by the OTP as P5, and it's a decision on the strategic

3 objectives of the Serbian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina. On the 12th

4 of September, 2002, [As interpreted] I disputed the translation provided

5 by the Prosecution, saying that the date of the promulgation of this

6 decision in the Official Gazette of Republika Srpska should be included in

7 the translation too, and this document is now being introduced as D1/3

8 ter.

9 And I have now got a complete translation, including the date of

10 its publishing in the Official Gazette. I have prepared for the Trial

11 Chamber also document P5, translated, and the new complete translation

12 given me by the CLSS.

13 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, would you just give the

14 Prosecution a moment to look at this document? There probably won't be

15 any objection, but --

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, you can look at it.

17 [Prosecution counsel confer]

18 [Trial Chamber confers]

19 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please --

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Di Fazio.

21 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I don't have any objection,

22 but I can't really see any difference at all between the document that is

23 already in evidence as an ID and this translation. But I don't know -- my

24 learned friend says that there was no date. The original D1/3 ID had the

25 date on it clearly marked, 12th of May.

Page 8322

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Lukic. What was the difference?

2 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] That was precisely my objection. It

3 was not a question of when the decision was made, but when it was

4 published. And in this translation that we've got now, we can see that

5 the decision was published in the Official Gazette of Republika Srpska on

6 the 26th November 1993, which is two and a half years after the adoption

7 of the decision.

8 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. I understand my learned friend's

9 point. I regret that I didn't immediately grasp it, and on that basis,

10 I've got no problem.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. Can we have the number? It's an Exhibit

12 now.

13 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. It will be D1/3 for the

14 English translation and D1/3 ter for the exhibit in B/C/S. Thank you.

15 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] My next document is one which we

16 introduced in the B/C/S version under an identification number during the

17 testimony of Kemal Mehinovic, and that is the decision on the assignment

18 of court-appointed counsel. I've got an official translation now. It's

19 D39/3 ter ID.

20 MR. DI FAZIO: Again, may I just see that document briefly?

21 No objection, if Your Honours please.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we have the number, please, as an exhibit?

23 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. It will retain the same

24 number, D39/3 for the English translation, and D39/3 ter. Thank you.

25 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] And one more document. On the same

Page 8323

1 day, another document was introduced through the same witness, D40/3 ter

2 ID. It is an enactment of the Batkovici centre, addressed to the military

3 court in Bijeljina, identifying the detainees currently held in Batkovici,

4 and the date of the document is 18 February 1993.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The usher can assist. Can the usher assist to

6 get the documents distributed?

7 Yes. Can we have the number, please?

8 MR. WEINER: Excuse me. Does counsel, in B/C/S, have the second

9 page of this one?

10 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I have only this. The B/C/S version

11 has only one page.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: How come -- then where did this page come from on

13 the translation, or is it that all the names could fit on one page in the

14 B/C/S version?

15 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I believe it's the format of the

16 translation. The spacing is such that the English translation took up two

17 pages. There is only one in the B/C/S version.

18 MR. DI FAZIO: No, I don't think that can be right, if Your

19 Honours please. As my colleague and I compare the document, the B/C/S

20 version, the first part, so to speak, ends on number 22, Pasaga Tihic.

21 Then there's another list that goes to Esad Kosic, and then there's 8,

22 ending on somebody Galeb. And you can see that on the second page of

23 the English, and then there's a whole list of extra names on the English,

24 and we don't have the rest of the B/C/S.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. So what copy was given to the translation?

Page 8324

1 Because they must have got it from the B/C/S.

2 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I submitted a one-page document, which

3 I tendered into evidence. I'm not aware of the existence of any other

4 version. I have to check this, because I don't have the copy I submitted

5 to the CLSS now.

6 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Mr. Lukic, I think also what we have here, apart

7 from the additional names, of course, we also have the name of the

8 commander, a Doko Pajic, and a signature on the translation, so it

9 seems to be of some importance from that perspective.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I think you need to clear these --

11 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] If my learned friends from the

12 Prosecution will let me have a copy.

13 I will have to compare this to the document that I had submitted

14 to the CLSS. If this is true, it's probably the case that I didn't give

15 the entire document to the OTP. It's probably why Ms. Reidy told me that

16 she would have to give me approval in due course, because there is no

17 indication of who signed it. It was originally identified as D40/3 ter

18 ID. Let us keep the identification number for now, if the Trial Chamber

19 agrees, and the OTP as well, until I have a chance to verify.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. We will retain the D40/3 ter ID, which we

21 already have, and then the translation you will have to verify

22 with -- find out from the Translation Unit. -- clearly to be a different

23 document.

24 Mr. Weiner?

25 MR. WEINER: No. I was just getting up to speak on behalf of

Page 8325

1 Attorney Reidy on this document, but there's no need. Thank you.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Lazarevic.

3 MR. LAZAREVIC: Thank you, Your Honours. I have two brief matters

4 to raise before the Trial Chamber.

5 The first issue is strictly related to the Defence of Mr. Zaric.

6 We were recently informed by our colleagues from the Prosecutor, and the

7 Bench is also aware of that fact, that they do not intend to call Mr. Omer

8 Nalic, who was on their list of witnesses. And first, I would like to ask

9 if this is their final position; and if so, we would like to ask for

10 permission of the Bench to approach this witness, because possibly this

11 could be a witness of interest for Mr. Zaric's defence.

12 His statement was disclosed to us as part of disclosure, and

13 there are some portions of this statement that we consider exculpatory,

14 possibly exculpatory for Mr. Zaric, and we are interested in possibly

15 calling this witness as a Defence witness. So first I would like to know

16 from our colleagues from the Prosecution if they're still on the same

17 position, they won't call Mr. Nalic as their witness.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Di Fazio.

19 MR. DI FAZIO: Our position remains the same. He won't be called

20 as a Prosecution witness.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: That's Mr. Omer --?

22 MR. DI FAZIO: Omer Nalic.

23 JUDGE MUMBA: Nalic.

24 MR. LAZAREVIC: Well, in that case, I would like the permission of

25 the Trial Chamber to approach this witness and possibly take a statement

Page 8326

1 from him and --

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Call him as a Defence witness?

3 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I think the Defence can go ahead and approach

5 the witness, since he's no longer on the list of Prosecution witnesses, so

6 he remains available.

7 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Of course, there's no property in witnesses,

8 and the Defence are perfectly free to do that, but I assume they don't

9 have the wherewithal to -- they don't know how to get in touch with him,

10 and I assume they'll have to go through us to try and approach him, and I

11 assume that that's what is being sought at the moment.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Oh, I see. I thought it was just permission. I

13 thought they knew how to get hold of him.

14 MR. DI FAZIO: Well, I assume not. I assume not. I'd be very

15 surprised if they did have contact with him.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Then the Trial Chamber can expect that the

17 Prosecution will cooperate?

18 MR. DI FAZIO: We will -- not in the sense of simply handing out

19 the address, but we will certainly be more than happy to act as an

20 intermediary and convey the desire of the Defence to speak to him, to Mr.

21 Nalic, and from there on it's up to Mr. Nalic to do whatever he wishes.

22 There are lots of ways of doing that. I suppose if the Defence gave us a

23 letter, we could undertake to post it to Mr. Nalic or -- anyway, there

24 are practical ways of doing so, and I think --

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I think the Trial Chamber will leave it to the

Page 8327

1 parties to deal with the matter. Yes. If there will be any problems,

2 then --

3 MR. DI FAZIO: We can refer the matter to Chamber.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, it can be referred to the Chamber.

5 MR. DI FAZIO: But I think that would be a far more practical

6 approach.

7 MR. LAZAREVIC: Thank you, Your Honours.


9 MR. LAZAREVIC: That was my understanding, actually just to ask

10 first from the Trial Chamber for permission to approach. It was a

11 Prosecution witness, and of course we wanted to handle this in the proper

12 way. We will cooperate with our colleagues in this respect and do

13 everything we can to do it properly.

14 The other issue is on behalf of all Defence counsel I would like

15 to raise. And during the testimony of previous witness Ms. Drljacic,

16 Hajrija, it appeared that this witness gave her statements or - I don't

17 know - it was an interview or what it was, to Yves Roy, the investigator

18 of the Prosecution. Since we do not have in our records and in our files

19 any sort of statement or informal interview or proofing notes or anything

20 like that that was -- that could indicate that it was done by Mr. Yves

21 Roy, we are now in a position to ask our colleagues if such statement

22 exists, and if it does, why it wasn't disclosed to the Defence.

23 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I'm sure the Prosecution can answer that.

24 MR. WEINER: Yes. In her testimony, she said she talked, not gave

25 a statement, not signed anything, didn't give any -- provide any written

Page 8328

1 materials. She talked to Yves Roy. Yves Roy is not only the

2 investigator, but he's kind of the liaison to the witnesses on behalf of

3 the attorneys. He talks to some of these people on a regular basis: How

4 are you? How are you feeling? We just want you to know you're going to

5 be coming up to testify in two months, in three months. You're going to

6 be coming up to testify at the end of the year. He calls to say hello,

7 lets them know the trial is still continuing, we will get to you. They

8 call him to see when they're coming. He talks to these people on a

9 regular basis. He maintains contact. Some of these people -- no one has

10 talked to him other than -- talked to them other than taking a statement

11 eight to ten -- eight years ago. It's Mr. Roy who stays in touch with

12 them, finds out their new addresses, how to stay in -- how to get hold of

13 them if they have to. These people, some of them move around from one

14 location to another. They talk to him. It doesn't mean he's sitting down

15 taking an official statement, as listed under the Rules. They have

16 received a copy of the interview, the informal interview, which was taken

17 from that witness. They received verbal information from me prior to

18 testifying as to what exactly this witness said, what additional detail,

19 and they've received a written statement as to the detail which was taken

20 by me.


22 MR. WEINER: And that's what's available and what exists.

23 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes, Your Honours. This is exactly what we would

24 like to find out. Does the Prosecutor have any other statement, informal

25 statement, proofing notes, investigator notes, regarding Witness Drljacic

Page 8329

1 Hajrija. This is the only question that we would like to know.

2 MR. WEINER: There are no statements. I have never seen any

3 statement taken by Yves Roy relating to this witness. There is no

4 informal interview taken by Yves Roy relating to this witness. The only

5 thing I'm aware of are two things: Number one, the informal interview that

6 she gave some years ago and the interview or the proofing session which I

7 took and which I have provided an oral statement to each of the Defence

8 counsel and a written statement to Defence counsel, which was hand

9 delivered by Mr. Lese our trial manager, last week. Thank you.

10 MR. LAZAREVIC: I can confirm these two documents, informal

11 statement and Mr. Weiner's proofing notes we have received. We just

12 wanted to find out if there was anything else. Because there were some

13 indication during the testimony of the witness that she allegedly signed

14 something or she gave an interview to Mr. Yves Roy, so we were just --

15 maybe -- I don't know.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, but the explanation Mr. Weiner has given is

17 sufficient, and you could have pursued that with the witness herself when

18 she made those remarks or she gave that type of evidence. Because now

19 it's over. And the Prosecution has given an explanation as to how Mr. Roy

20 talks to witnesses, including to this particular witness, over a period

21 before they actually come to testify.

22 Yes, Mr. Pantelic.

23 MR. PANTELIC: Maybe I can assist the Trial Chamber. As far as I

24 remember, Your Honours, this, I would say, topic or issue was practically

25 raised and we found --

Page 8330

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Maybe we're going beyond the break time. Can we

2 have a break and then come back?

3 MR. PANTELIC: No, no. I think it's just a few words, Your

4 Honour, and then we are finished for today.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Because the interpreters are overworked.

6 MR. PANTELIC: You're right. Okay. Because my colleague has

7 something after the break. Sorry, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we have a break and continue at 1620

9 hours.

10 --- Recess taken at 3.49 p.m.

11 --- On resuming at 4.20 p.m.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic, you were making some submissions.

13 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. My understanding was that --

14 yes. Your words, Madam President, were, page 34, line 14, today: "Yes,

15 but the explanation of Mr. Weiner has given is sufficient, and you could

16 have pursued that with the witness herself when she made those remarks or

17 she gave that type of evidence, because now it's over."

18 I checked the transcripts. It's page 8196, on Tuesday, 21st of

19 May this year. In fact, my colleague Pisarevic, during his

20 cross-examination, came to the fact that witness mentioned Mr. Roy, and it

21 was on this page 8196, line 9. The answer was: "Please, excuse me. I

22 talked to Mr. Roy." Then the question was: "But when was that? Could

23 you tell us?" And so on. Then the other question on line 12 was:

24 "Ma'am, everything matters to us. This business is too important for any

25 unclarities. Did Mr. Roy reread the statement to you?" The answer was:

Page 8331

1 "I don't remember, but if I signed it, then my signature is still there,

2 and I'm not avoiding anything."

3 And then in re-examination, that was the page 8204, conducted by

4 Mr. Weiner, the question was -- his question was: "Okay. No problem. But

5 when you spoke with that lady, did you speak to her in person? Was she

6 sitting with you or did you speak to her over a telephone?" The answer of

7 witness was: I know that I talked both on telephone as well. I didn't

8 talk to a woman in person in Salt Lake City at all. I only talked to

9 Mr. Roy. That's how I pronounce his name."

10 And therefore, we were not able to go into this matter, because it

11 was finished in re-examination, and then now we kindly ask from our

12 learned friends to clarify this issue, point number one, whether they are

13 in possession of any signed statement by the witness Hajrija Drljacic, in

14 the presence of Mr. Yves Roy or not.

15 Point number 2: Is there any information with regard of the, I

16 would say, official contacts within the standards of statements that we

17 are speaking here with Mr. Roy, simple as that. Nothing more. It's not a

18 big matter for us. Just for the record. Thank you.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: All right.

20 Mr. Weiner?

21 MR. WEINER: Once again, the same thing. You're mixing apples and

22 oranges. When they talk about the statement to the woman, they're talking

23 about the informal interview, which was presented to them I don't know how

24 many years ago. There's that. I won't call it a statement. It's an

25 informal interview document of several pages. They have that. They have

Page 8332

1 my notes of my summary as a Prosecutor, speaking to the woman, as we

2 prepare for trial, which the way I read the Rules, it is not

3 discoverable. I turn it over as a matter of fairness so people can't say

4 you're ambushing them or it's not being fair that we're not getting the

5 latest information. I turn it over. Those are the statements. Does

6 Mr. Roy talks to the witness? Yes. Who do you think contacts the

7 witnesses? Who do you think has to make sure that they have passports,

8 that they have papers? Who do you think has to make sure that they're

9 going to be coming here, who stays in touch with them, tells them get

10 ready, it's a month away. They speak to Mr. Roy a lot. Is Mr. Roy out

11 there taking statements? No. Not as long as I've been here.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The Trial Chamber doesn't see any problem at

13 all from the quotations of the transcript by Mr. Pantelic from the

14 explanation by the Prosecution. It's a non-issue, actually.

15 MR. WEINER: Thank you.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: We'll go into closed session, or private session,

17 since we don't have to take down the blinds.

18 [Private session]

19 [redacted]

20 [redacted]

21 [redacted]

22 [redacted]

23 [redacted]

24 [redacted]

25 [redacted]

Page 8333












12 Pages 8333-8337 redacted private session














Page 8338

1 [redacted]

2 [redacted]

3 [redacted]

4 [redacted]

5 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 4.34 p.m.,

6 to be reconvened on Monday, the 27th day of May,

7 2002, at 2.15 p.m.