1 Thursday, 15 May 2003

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 2.16 p.m.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Good afternoon. Please call the case.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon. Case number IT-95-9-T, the

8 Prosecutor versus Blagoje Simic, Miroslav Tadic and Simo Zaric.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. This afternoon we are starting the

10 cross-examination. Who is beginning, Mr. Lukic?

11 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours. And

12 good afternoon to everyone, all the participants in the proceedings.

13 WITNESS: SIMO ZARIC

14 [Witness answered through interpreter]

15 Cross-examined by Mr. Lukic:

16 Q. And good afternoon, Mr. Zaric.

17 A. Good afternoon.

18 Q. I hope that you have had a rest and that you are ready to continue

19 answering the questions. I will not take too much time asking you

20 questions but what I will want to do is to clarify some things that you

21 have already mentioned about during your examination-in-chief and that are

22 interesting for me with respect to the defence of my client.

23 What I recalled is that on the first day of the testimony, that

24 was on the 6th of May, you described a meeting in Prud on the 19th of

25 March, 1992, and then you mentioned to Mr. Pisarevic, you mentioned

1 Mr. Blazanovic, Braco, you mentioned him, he was a member of the Croatian

2 Army and that he was active when attending that meeting. Do you recall

3 that?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. We've already heard his name several times during the testimony of

6 other witnesses and during the Prosecution case, some witnesses mentioned

7 him and I thought this was interesting also -- he was also mentioned in

8 the Defence case and some persons you mentioned -- mentioned him. Now,

9 bearing in mind the work you did before the war and during the war, more

10 in particular your intelligence information and what you've heard here in

11 the courtroom regarding the testimonies of the witnesses who testified

12 about him, do you have any knowledge that he organised the bringing out of

13 certain people from the municipality of Samac in the beginning of the

14 conflict, a number of people from which villages and so on? Do you know

15 anything about it? Particularly, did you know -- did you have any

16 personal knowledge of that happening during at that period of time? Did

17 you have any contemporaneous knowledge of those facts?

18 A. Yes. I had some intelligence information which pointed to the

19 presence of Mr. Blazanovic, Stjepan Blazanovic, also known as Braco,

20 precisely in the territory of the municipality of Samac, and in

21 particular, in that part of the municipality that those parts that were

22 populated with Croatian populations and I mean Donji and Gornji Hasici,

23 part of the Croatian Tisina and part of Novo Selo so approximately this is

24 where his activities took place, and it was by him coming on to the

25 terrain and with a number of people who were with him, together with him,

1 he managed, after the war broke out, after the conflict broke out, he

2 managed to extract a relatively large number of Croatian citizens to

3 safely take them out to that part of the territory which according to him

4 was the safest part of the territory so that they could go in the

5 direction of Grebnice, Domaljevac, Bazik, or more precisely, to that part

6 of the municipality of Samac where there were mostly Croats or exclusively

7 Croats living at the time.

8 Q. In this Court, we heard that he managed to take out about 250

9 people, villagers from those villages. After the departure of women and

10 children -- mostly women and children, do you remember we heard that in

11 closed session but what I'm interested is this what your information is

12 regarding the number of people that he managed to take out?

13 A. Precisely, yes, this corresponds to this information. We always

14 thought that this was a couple of hundred people of Croat nationals,

15 mostly women and children, that he managed to take out, taking them into

16 the direction that I mentioned previously.

17 Q. We also heard the testimony of my client and some other witnesses

18 that at the time there was the attack on the bus of Serb soldiers who were

19 going towards the front line. Do you have any knowledge regarding this?

20 Is this something that you know about? Was this at that time about

21 mid-May as it was alleged?

22 A. Yes. I do know about that event, in particular, because at the

23 time, I was deputy commander for security of the 4th Detachment and part

24 of the people, precisely from Samac, used a specific direction to move

25 into the new then defence positions that were gravitating towards the main

1 road, which links Samac to Obudovac and it cuts off practically part of

2 the territory which further goes towards Croatian villages, Grebnice,

3 Bazik and Domaljevac.

4 Q. I would like the witness to be shown a map, and perhaps he could

5 draw this location where the attack on the bus happened, and I would like

6 us to use the map we've already used in this case, and this is the map

7 from the expert report of Mrs. Tabeau but now this is a map from the work

8 of Mrs. Radovanovic because it is slightly changed in the B/C/S version

9 but it is very clear and it would be good to show it and I would like to

10 ask some questions, so I would ask Mr. Usher to show the map to the

11 witness, to put it in front of the witness. Thank you.

12 What I need is, if you can draw and mark with number 1 where was

13 the location of the attack?

14 A. [Marks]

15 Q. And also where was the line which was then the demarcation line,

16 the line between the warring sides?

17 A. First of all I'd like to draw a line, the itinerary of the bus

18 which at that time it was going as a regular bus taking the soldiers,

19 taking them to the positions, and then approximately, in my opinion, I

20 could put where the location is, because the map doesn't have too many

21 details so I cannot be absolutely accurate.

22 Q. Very well, if you can do that, that's even better.

23 A. From the town of Samac, there was this road, and then here it goes

24 left towards Tisina, through Tisina, the bus went along this road to Novo

25 Selo, and then from Novo Selo, approximately it would take this route that

1 I am drawing now. It would come to as I would call it, this regional

2 road, this is the one I'm pointing to with the pen, which connected

3 Bosanski Samac to the depth of the territory and it was going further

4 towards Obudovac. This incident that took place and that I mentioned

5 earlier, it happened approximately here, right in the middle of Novo Selo,

6 where there were not so many populated houses and then it continued, the

7 settlement of Novo Selo continues and then it went to -- the road went on

8 to Brvnik where there were our Defence lines which were undulating and

9 following this direction, along the Sava River and then again, practically

10 along the embankment return to Samac.

11 Q. I'm sorry, Mr. Zaric, so that we can have the drawing clear for

12 later, could you just put it in a dotted line so that we can see that it's

13 a different -- that the defence line should be different from the route of

14 the bus, or make it thicker, but so that we have to differentiate between

15 these two lines?

16 A. What I'm doing now, that's approximately the defence line, which

17 was behind the regional road which connects municipality of Samac to the

18 depth of the territory towards Obudovac but from there, this is

19 practically the route of this bus, while this dot here, which is slightly

20 more marked, more pronounced, this is where the bus was ambushed, which I

21 think happened on the 12th or the 13th of May, I'm not quite sure about

22 the date but approximately that's when it happened.

23 Q. Just a moment, just a moment. I'd like you to mark number 1, the

24 route, the itinerary of the bus?

25 A. [Marks]

1 Q. With number 2, if you can mark the location of the incident where

2 the attack on the bus happened?

3 A. [Marks]

4 Q. And with number 3, could you please mark the demarcation line

5 between the warring parties?

6 A. [Marks]

7 Q. You said that according to your recollection, that happened on the

8 12th or the 13th of May; is that correct?

9 A. Yes. This happened on the 12th or the 13th of May, and it was a

10 bus of soldiers that was going in that direction, and to be honest,

11 according to my recollection, that bus, apart from the people who were

12 from Samac mostly, predominantly, there were many people who were

13 originally and who were engaged but who were originally from Donja Dubica

14 and Novi Grad, and they had come to our area, that bus was practically

15 ambushed in a classical sabotage terrorist way. It was riddled with

16 bullets and I recall that the driver of the bus only thanks to him, his

17 name is Mico Kuresevic, we called him Smokljo, that was his nickname, he

18 was injured in several places, dozens of bullets went through his body but

19 it was thanks to him and to his cool head, he managed to get the bus out

20 in that direction -- in this direction, towards the line of the defence,

21 and there, there were already some people from our area, and practically

22 he managed to move the bus towards there, with many injured soldiers, some

23 of them are -- have remained disabled, like a young man who to this date

24 is now disabled in a wheelchair and many others have still some

25 consequences -- serious consequences from this ambush which was set up in

1 a classical way and which provoked a great degree of upset and those of us

2 who led the army, among the people in the area of Samac.

3 Q. You will agree with me that this ambush was deep in the territory

4 which at the time was under the control of the JNA so to speak; is that

5 correct?

6 A. Yes, it was deep in our territory, in the territory under our

7 control, but it was thanks to Mr. Cepanovic [phoen].

8 Q. Blazanovic, you mean?

9 A. Yes, I mean Stjepan Blazanovic, it was thanks to this instructor

10 of the Croatian Army who was probably an expert, he was brave and

11 courageous and he brought this group of people and they did what they did.

12 Q. What I would just like to say is that for the record, under number

13 1, the witness marked the direction of the bus, of the route of the bus,

14 the direction in which bus was going. Second was the location of the

15 attack on the bus, and number 3 marks the front line which is a

16 demarcation line between the warring sides. If there are no objections

17 could we please have exhibit number for this exhibit? And if we can

18 tender it into evidence?

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Any objection?

20 MR. RE: The Prosecution does not object, Your Honours.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we have the number, please?

22 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit D195/3, thank you.

23 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

24 Q. When we are still on this subject, and you've also testified about

25 your intelligence information regarding the pre-war arming, what I'm

1 particularly interested in regarding these villages that we are talking

2 about, and we know already, all of us here in the courtroom, we know that

3 these are the villages that were populated with Croatian population, Donji

4 Gornji Hasici, Novo Selo, and Zasavica, Brvnik. You mentioned a field gun

5 that was in Hasici. I'm interested in after the war broke out, did you

6 find out that the villagers of these villages were really armed, and what

7 were their weapons? Do you know? First of all, could you answer that

8 question and then I'll ask you something else but could you tell us about

9 your intelligence information regarding the weapons and the arming in

10 these villages when detentions took place, the villagers in those

11 villages, were they really armed?

12 A. It was not a field gun of a large calibre. It was a mortar, 120

13 millimetre mortar which according to my assessment is a very lethal weapon

14 with a long range so we later found out, we got data, that these were 120

15 millimetre mortars and then through certain stories, we heard when they

16 were searching them because it was on the 8th of February, allegedly the

17 police was working investigating this case but nothing was found, that it

18 was precisely that mortar they managed to get that mortar out in a barrel

19 for brandy, they managed to get it out, but that happened later after the

20 conflict broke out by some people in that area.

21 Q. Did you later find out, did you have later intelligence, that it

22 was in this territory, in these villages, that a large amount of weapons

23 were seized?

24 A. Yes. I did know that, because there was an operation that was

25 carried out, what was gathered, weapons were gathered, what was found were

1 classical weapons that had belonged to the Yugoslav People's Army, because

2 there were automatic weapons, semi-automatic rifles and also old M-48

3 rifles and classical small automatic rifles of German and Russian

4 manufacturer so it was after this operation, after the conflict broke out,

5 in these Croatian villages, a large amount of weapons were seized and

6 taken to the Territorial Defence warehouses.

7 Q. You testified about a number of villagers from these villages who

8 were taken to the secondary school and the primary school, did I

9 understand from your testimony that you contacted Sarkanovic and Savic

10 frequently, your colleagues, I shouldn't say colleagues but SUP inspectors

11 that you knew, did they give you information that it was against -- that

12 these people were investigated, that there were certain interviews that

13 were conducted with these people? Did you have this information?

14 A. Yes, precisely on this theme, I found from Mr. Sarkanovic, who

15 was the chief of the criminal department, and Mr. Savic [as interpreted],

16 that after these people were placed in isolation in the hall of both

17 schools, interviews were held with them on the topic of the possession of

18 illegal weapons in this area.

19 MR. LAZAREVIC: Just one small correction for the trip, those

20 words were actually said by -- in different order. The answer of

21 Mr. Zaric on page 9, line 12 it says, "precisely on this theme, I found

22 from Mr. Sarkanovic, who was the chief of the criminal department, and

23 Mr. Savic," so words Mr. Savic were before who was the chief of the

24 criminal department, because it is, I believe, not in dispute that

25 Mr. Milos Savic was chief of the criminal investigation and Mr. Sarkanovic

1 wan just an investigator in the police.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, that will be accepted.

3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

4 Q. Just a slight suggestion from my colleagues, when you were

5 mentioning this, what's the name, the mortar, 120 millimetre, is that the

6 VBR, the multiple rocket launcher that's mentioned?

7 A. No, 120 millimetre mortar is a classic artillery piece, it has

8 different calibres with one barrel, it can be 120, 80 or 60 millimetres.

9 As I was an artillery man in the army, I know this, and it is not

10 contested that this is weapons which is not a VBR or not weapon which at

11 the same time simultaneously can fire several rockets.

12 Q. Thank you for this clarification.

13 Now I'm going to ask you some questions about the decision on the

14 isolation of Croats that you've testified in -- that is P71. There is no

15 need for this exhibit, this document, to be placed in front of you. I

16 understood from your testimony that when you were describing --

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Lukic, before you proceed and before we leave

18 this topic of the attack on the bus, it is my understanding from your

19 testimony, Mr. Zaric, that nobody was arrested for this attack on the

20 bus.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Madam President, nobody was

22 arrested. We immediately organised part of our forces to try and discover

23 who were the perpetrators but apart from the traces where they had been

24 and in which direction they went, through which channel they managed to

25 get out, at that time, it was -- there was a lot of greenery and it was

1 quite clear from the grass where they had gone, we didn't manage to

2 uncover any perpetrators who had done this, but it was in the evening and

3 in the following few days, nonstop through the communications, that both

4 sides used, they, I mean the Croatian side, they boasted how they had

5 carried out this operation, and for us, this was uncontested. Nobody else

6 except for a very well prepared and well-organised sabotage group could

7 have done this, could have attacked a bus full of soldiers going to the

8 position, to the line.

9 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

10 Q. Now I'd like to ask you a couple of questions about this decision

11 regarding the isolation of Croats and regarding the written document that

12 you've testified in chief when Mr. Pisarevic was asking you questions.

13 From your testimony, I got an impression, perhaps you can tell me whether

14 I was right, you told me that regarding this decision on isolation, you

15 found out about it from two sources, one source was your direct ability to

16 notice when Croats were taken away in lorries, from your neighbourhood,

17 and the second source is also your direct knowledge, that is that the

18 written document, P71, you were able to see in Mr. Todorovic's office and

19 also in the offices of Mr. Sarkanovic and Mr. Savic; is that correct?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. In that decision, did you speak about it with any members of the

22 Crisis Staff or rather did you find out about this decision being issued

23 from any members of the Crisis Staff?

24 A. No. I didn't speak to any members of the Crisis Staff, apart from

25 seeing this decision on the desk of Mr. Todorovic and I saw it on the desk

1 in a couple of copies, also in Mr. Savic's office and Mr. Vlado

2 Sarkanovic's office who were investigators and I spoke about it to

3 Mr. Savo Cancarevic, who had been the commander at that time of the police

4 in Samac because I didn't find it normal, I didn't find it pleasant,

5 because I had seen this scene that the police was rounding people up,

6 putting them in lorries and that reminded me of a very, very ugly picture,

7 and Savo told me that this was chief, Stevan Todorovic, had said that the

8 police were supposed to do this, that there was a decision of the Crisis

9 Staff regarding this, and this decision, when I saw it, when I saw it in

10 front of me, at that very moment, I didn't even enter into any kind of

11 legal matters, so to speak. How much is it an impression of some truth

12 and authenticity but I saw the signature, I saw the -- what said on the

13 top of the document and I could see that according to what I was able to

14 observe, there was a signature of Mr. Blagoje Simic, as far as I can

15 recall, and then I thought that what later happened, very quickly, people

16 were collected in these two schools, people had gone to Zasavica and my

17 normal conclusion I would say was that behind that decision Crisis Staff

18 was behind this decision. Was standing behind that decision but to be

19 absolutely honest regarding this topic apart from these people I did not

20 speak to anyone about it.

21 Q. Mr. Todorovic, did he ever tell you that this was a decision of

22 the Crisis Staff? Did you ever speak to him about this?

23 A. I never spoke to Mr. Todorovic about this because I thought that

24 it was unnecessary to speak to him about this since his police was doing

25 some work on the streets and they were doing things which according to me

1 were completely unacceptable, inhumane, I don't even have words to express

2 it.

3 Q. Mr. Sarkanovic and Savic, those two gentlemen, did they tell you

4 that they know that the Crisis Staff had brought this decision?

5 A. Yes. They said that Mr. Todorovic said that there was a decision

6 from the Crisis Staff but they had not spoken to some of the people from

7 that level, I don't know, meaning to say that this information was all

8 based on what -- on the information that I received from Mr. Savic, being

9 the chief of the criminal department, Mr. Vladimir Sarkanovic and from

10 Mr. Savo Cancarevic, who had said that he does have the order from the

11 chief of the police to engage the police in order to pick up the Croats

12 and to bring them into isolation.

13 Q. I would also like to know one thing regarding this decision, I

14 suppose Mr. Zaric that before you surrendered to this Tribunal and

15 especially when this trial began, I suppose that you had the possibility

16 to speak with Mr. Tadic regarding this decision. Did Mr. Tadic ever tell

17 you that he was aware of this decision in any of the conversations he had

18 with you?

19 A. No, he never told me anything of the sort. We did speak about

20 this. Now regarding this decision and his knowledge about it, Mr. Tadic

21 never told me that he knew anything about it.

22 Q. I would like to talk about another topic, it is something that

23 you've testified about regarding this first exchange that took place in

24 Zasavica on the 26th of May. You've told us about it, about this event,

25 you told us what happened, you told us also that you were about 30 metres

1 away from the truck in which people were placed, people who were to be

2 exchanged and that the place was from 300 to 400 metres away from the

3 river. My question is the following: Do you recall where Tadic was at

4 that point with regards to the place where you were, was he next to the

5 truck, was he next to you, or maybe you didn't see him at all then?

6 A. If I recall correctly, during all that time, I must have seen him

7 twice or three times in the part that goes from the trucks in the

8 direction of the winding road that -- through which these people who were

9 exchanged were going, in order to be exchanged, towards the River Bosna,

10 there was a point there, and this is where the direct exchange was taking

11 place, the exchange over the river.

12 Q. Have you ever seen Tadic call some names?

13 A. No. Mr. Tadic did not call any names. The calling of names was

14 carried out by a member of the Red Cross, the International Red Cross, and

15 he was assisted by a police officer just in case that foreigner did not

16 pronounce the names correctly, the police officer was helping him.

17 Q. Have you heard if Mr. Tadic at that time yelled at anybody?

18 A. No, absolutely not.

19 Q. I presume that you must remember that at that point, Serbs came

20 for the exchange but I would like to ask you the following question: Do

21 you remember if all the Serbs who were to be exchanged, were they all

22 exchanged? Do you know anything about this? Do you have any knowledge

23 about their exchanges? Have you heard about this from anybody?

24 A. I have heard something about it when they arrived at the company

25 Tekstilac, actually this is a restaurant, and there was a welcoming lunch

1 for the representatives of the International Red Cross and these people

2 had arrived on that side to say that way, and I had heard then from the

3 conversation that there were -- there was about ten Serbs who were on the

4 other side in the territory of the municipality of Odzak, they were

5 supposed to cross but they did not, either because it was not allowed for

6 them to do so or I don't know what the truth is, but there was a certain

7 number of Croats and I don't know if some Muslims were part of that group,

8 I'm not sure, but I know that a certain number of people on this side, as

9 Mr. Petric was, he was not the only one, there were also others who said

10 that they did not want to cross to the other side, they returned, and that

11 is maybe why the agreement was not respected to exchange hundreds of

12 people. And this is why a certain number of Serbs was returned or

13 actually they did not even cross on the other side, and this is what

14 people were saying, the people with whom we were having lunch, they were

15 sitting there, we were talking to them and they knew who they were because

16 they had arrived there with them together on the other bank of the river

17 which was under the control of the HVO and the forces of the municipality

18 of Odzak.

19 Q. I would like to ask you a few questions about the July exchanges.

20 You have told us that you were present during those exchanges, you've also

21 described to us problems that occurred during the bringing of

22 Mr. Grga Zubak to that exchange. You have heard also my client testify

23 before this Honourable Trial Chamber and he participated in the

24 organisation of -- he organised this exchange. Mr. Todorovic was being

25 treated after a medical -- he had an undergone medical treatment after an

1 accident. Do you know if Savo Cancarevic and my client had any problems

2 with Todorovic because Grga Zubak left then, this is what my client said

3 and this is why he was transferred to do something else. Do you know

4 anything about this?

5 A. Yes, I had received some information regarding this. Mr. Tadic

6 and Mr. Cancarevic during some conversations told me that when

7 Mr. Todorovic returned from the hospital after an accident, a car

8 accident, which he was involved in, he was saying why was it allowed that

9 Grga Zubak goes but I would like to say that at the checkpoint in Gorice,

10 the chief of the private department police, Mr. Stevan Todorovic, and they

11 used to call each other Kum, and there was a man who did not allow

12 Mr. Grga Zubak to be transported in a bus as a man who was to be

13 exchanged, and this is when Mr. Tadic, I must be honest, they told this

14 police officer that it was not his place to do so, it was a man who was

15 extremely rough, and arrogant, he is an uncouth police officer and I

16 believe that at the time he only wore a police uniform, only at that time,

17 never again, and this is why I deem or I believe that when Mr. Cancarevic

18 and Tadic told me about this problem and that problem escalated when

19 Mr. Todorovic came back from the hospital, through Mr. Todorovic or

20 according to Mr. Todorovic rather he was a person for whom they could get

21 points through him. They were talking about this as if they were not

22 talking about people but points, and I remember this very well. I also

23 know that there was a physical brawl between Mr. Cancarevic and Todorovic

24 after that, and this is a story that was circulating in the town of Samac,

25 that the chief of the security station and the chief of police had an open

1 fight on the street.

2 MR. LAZAREVIC: Well, I hope that Mr. Lukic will clarify certain

3 parts of Mr. Zaric's answer because looking at it in the transcript, I

4 find them -- well, not particularly clear. First of all, on page 16, here

5 it says chief of the private department police, Mr. Stevan Todorovic, and

6 I don't believe this is exactly what Mr. Zaric said. He used all these

7 words but in a different context.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: We can clear that with him, just ask him to repeat

9 his answer slowly.

10 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes, and also there is one more thing since I'm

11 already on my feet, maybe I should draw attention of my colleague to

12 this. Mr. Zaric here says on couple of occasions they were talking about

13 this and unless Mr. Lukic would like to clarify that, the words that were

14 used for people who are to be exchanged, it seems like here what I see in

15 the transcript that those words were used by Mr. Tadic, Cancarevic and

16 Todorovic and this is not what Mr. Zaric said.

17 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Yes.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, can we have the answer clarified, please?

19 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. When you were mentioning the conversation with that police officer

21 for whom you said that you only saw him there as being a private police

22 officer of Mr. Stevan Todorovic, tell me, who was talking to him, who was

23 having an argument?

24 A. It was Mr. Tadic and myself, on the checkpoint in Gorice when he

25 stopped all the buses and he did not allow because Grga Zubak -- he asked

1 Grga Zubak to come out of the bus and to return him. We opposed to that

2 and fortunately, I believe that in the end it all turned out to be well,

3 but I remember very well this incident.

4 Q. Thank you.

5 A. And when I talked about privately, that it was -- I thought that

6 that checkpoint in Gorice, because Gorice is situated in the middle

7 between Bosanski Samac and Brcko, there was a point which was used by

8 Mr. Todorovic for various deals, he was implementing his own policies

9 there, and for instance, talking about that checkpoint through that police

10 officer whom he called kum, there were names of the people who were to be

11 arrested and I talked about it when we had a meeting in Belgrade, and this

12 is why I say that that checkpoint was manned by a private police officer

13 of Stevan Todorovic, because they were implementing all the actions that

14 he was ordering them to do, and those actions were not humane, not

15 professional and not correct. They were not police duties.

16 Q. I will also need a clarification, when you were talking about Grga

17 Zubak, you said they were using these people as points, what did you mean,

18 exchange points?

19 A. I'm talking about Mr. Todorovic, who had an influence, a certain

20 amount of influence, and not to say that he was one of the first ones but

21 he was certainly among the people who were deciding who was to be

22 exchanged or not, and when I was talking about points, it means that he

23 thought that since Mr. Grga Zubak worked before as a professional police

24 officer, that he had certain authority on the territory of the

25 municipality of Samac, that he was a member of the Crisis Staff from the

1 HDZ, SDA and so on and so forth, it was probably those were his criteria,

2 he thought that for Grga Zubak he could probably collect some important

3 Serbs on the other side, people who were detained or imprisoned on the

4 other side and they were using the words points, that's why I said when

5 they were using those words, is that this is an incorrect statement

6 because we are talking about people who were in a situation that they were

7 going to be exchanged.

8 MR. PANTELIC: I do apologise to my learned friend. It's a kind

9 of not so clear issue here on page 18, line 9 and 10, reading this

10 particular part of sentence in particular it's private police officer of

11 Stevan Todorovic, I believe that it is not a right sense that the words of

12 Mr. Zaric were translated so maybe my learned friend can clarify that with

13 Mr. Zaric because we heard something a little bit different, that private

14 could mean that it's ordinary police officer in that term or -- I would

15 like to clarify that, if it's possible. Thank you.

16 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

17 Q. Would you please clarify, what do you mean by this term, "private

18 police officer"?

19 A. I was thinking of a person who obeys all the orders and who

20 carries out all the tasks that Mr. Todorovic gives him, and those tasks

21 were not very professional. It was not humane, and there were incorrect

22 actions but because Mr. Todorovic was the personification of such

23 behaviour he was choosing people to man certain checkpoints, to do those

24 chores and duties and this is why I call it private police officer, this

25 is why I said that, maybe the term is not exactly precise but that's what

1 I meant to say.

2 Q. Please answer by saying yes or no, tell us if Grga Zubak was

3 exchanged during that exchange and the principle one person for one

4 person, tell us if you know?

5 A. I think that yes, this is what happened, the exchange was on a

6 one-to-one basis.

7 MR. LUKIC: Will you bear with me for just a minute?

8 Q. [Interpretation] I have one question stemming from my client. Do

9 you know that the Vukovarcani had anything to do with those police

10 officers, with respect to the events that took place afterwards in Sid

11 [Realtime transcript read in error "SIT"]?

12 A. I have a lot of reason to doubt and to think that there is a link

13 between that checkpoint of the police in Gorice --

14 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours by the way it is translated this

15 question really doesn't seem quite clear. First of all, it -- the events

16 that took place afterwards in SIT. SIT was referred as Samac textile

17 industries here and Mr. Lukic was referring to Sid town in Serbia, so --

18 and when he said Vukovarcani this means people from Vukovar. And this

19 would give sense to the question probably.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Maybe he can repeat the question slowly, Mr. Lukic.

21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. Yes. I am absolutely certain that Mr. Zaric will tell us about it

23 if he knows about it. I have asked if there were some ties with those

24 police officers, those officers that Mr. Zaric was describing as being at

25 the checkpoint and he will -- and I mentioned the Vukovarcani inhabitants

1 of Vukovar, and Mr. Zaric will certainly tell us what he understands, and

2 yes, indeed, I was talking about Sid, it is a place in Serbia and I wanted

3 Mr. Zaric to answer this question.

4 A. Yes. There is a certain connection according to my very deep

5 belief, and the link is precisely with this checkpoint of the police in

6 Gorice that I was talking about. And what later turned into an incident

7 when we arrived in Sid, in front of a motel, at a parking lot there. We

8 arrived in the afternoon, late in the afternoon, two or three soldiers

9 wearing the uniforms of the Yugoslav People's Army asked to see

10 Mr. Grga Zubak. I don't know what happened. I was not there immediately

11 at that point. I received that information only later on from Mr. Tadic

12 and from the people who were providing security for this convoy. But I

13 heard these three soldiers came up to the bus where Mr. Zubak was, they

14 had this information and then a problem occurred, they started cursing his

15 Ustasha mother, they wanted to get on the bus to pull him out of the bus

16 and I believe that only thanks to the courage and the cold head of the

17 people in the security at the checkpoint, a larger scale incident was

18 prevented. When I say that there must have been a link, I can only assume

19 that the people from the police in Gorice must have had some connections

20 because I think that this policeman in Gorice came from that area and I'm

21 sure that he had informed somebody that Mr. Grga Zubak was on that bus and

22 maybe it was that group that was to do something to Mr. Grga Zubak and

23 that's why I have established this link, because these people from

24 Vukovar, these Vukovarcani did not have a way of knowing who the people on

25 the bus was. Still they mentioned the name of Grga Zubak who had already

1 been involved in the incident on that same way, and that is why I am of

2 the opinion that there must be a link between that checkpoint and what had

3 happened later on.

4 Q. Thank you very much. Just a short question suggested to me by my

5 client. You've mentioned in your testimony Mr. Ante the veterinarian who

6 was exchanged in Vemetin in 1992. That was not actually organised and had

7 nothing to do with the Samac commission. A question from my client was:

8 Are you aware that the family of Mr. Ante, the veterinarian, remained in

9 Samac and they still live there?

10 A. Yes, I'm aware of the fact. I know that the son of Mr. Ante,

11 the veterinarian and my son are good friends. And Ante's son has business

12 premises not far from the centre of the town and I also know that the

13 veterinarian's wife has kept her apartment and the family has remained

14 there all throughout the war and they still live in the territory of

15 Samac.

16 Q. His wife is also a Croat?

17 A. Yes, she is a Croat. I believe her name is Zdenka but I'm not

18 sure.

19 Q. Now we shall move on to another topic. Can you please repeat the

20 lady's name?

21 A. I believe that her name is Zdenka but I'm not 100 per cent sure.

22 Q. Mr. Zaric, in the indictment, Miroslav Tadic is charged with a

23 close cooperation with yourself within the framework of his role in the

24 4th Detachment. That is what the indictment alleges. It is not

25 indisputable that both of you were members of 4th Detachment. Can you

1 tell us something about your cooperation from the time the 4th Detachment

2 was established to the moment when Mr. Tadic left the 4th Detachment and

3 left for another post? What kind of a cooperation did you have, if any at

4 all?

5 A. From the 5th of January, 1992, when the commander of the 17th

6 Tactical Group issued a decision that was Mr. Lieutenant Colonel Stevan

7 Nikolic, to appoint the command of the 4th Detachment, which -- in which

8 both Mr. Tadic and myself had leading positions, Mr. Tadic was a member of

9 the logistics and I was in charge of the security and morale, from that

10 moment on, we had a bit more opportunity to see each other and talk to

11 each other. I would like to say very honestly that Mr. Tadic was the

12 least present during the conversations and the meetings of the detachment

13 command. By the nature of his work in the logistics, he did not have to

14 be present. And secondly, we respected Mr. Tadic as a person older than

15 the rest of us and the commander did not insist on his presence because

16 there was no need for him to be there. There were no particular tasks to

17 be given to him. Therefore, there were no close connections between the

18 two of us in terms of the organisation and the work of the 4th Detachment.

19 Although some witnesses have tried to portray our relationships as being

20 very close before this Trial Chamber.

21 Q. According to your knowledge, did Miroslav Tadic have any

22 activities regarding the 4th Detachment before its establishment? You've

23 mentioned meetings in November and December. Was he present at these

24 meetings? Did he engage in any activities before the establishment of the

25 4th Detachment?

1 A. No. He had a marginal role, or no role at all. I did not see him

2 at those meetings that we had before the war. Mr. Tadic was neither an

3 officer nor a commissioned officer. He was not attending any of the

4 meetings during which we discussed the topics that would have a serious

5 security character.

6 Q. And another question that is linked to some of the testimonies

7 during the Prosecution case: Were you present or did you hear that a

8 meeting was held or that an activity took place regarding the 4th

9 Detachment in the AS cafe, if you did hear something, tell us what you

10 heard.

11 A. There was no meeting of the 4th Detachment in the AS cafe. What

12 kind of a command would that be to allow itself to hold its meetings in a

13 coffee place where there are other people as well? This is really

14 ridiculous, it's farcical. It would be sad if it was not funny.

15 Q. You've heard testimonies of various witnesses here and I'm going

16 to ask you directly: Did you hear, during the relevant period, that

17 Mr. Tadic had problems with specials or volunteers or people in

18 multi-coloured uniforms, the people who came from Serbia? Did you hear at

19 that time anything about that?

20 A. Yes. I know that, and I know more about that than about other

21 things, because of the posts that Mr. Tadic held after the outbreak of the

22 conflicts. He worked in the civilian protection, and also he was actively

23 involved in the exchanges, and they had their positions and all of that,

24 and I believe that on several occasions he was exposed to humiliation and

25 I remember very well one or two days when I returned to Samac, I don't

1 know where I had been, but I heard that he had been ill treated, him and

2 his son. He was forced to destroy some inscriptions from the previous

3 systems, he had been threatened while he was performing his duties, and

4 the threats were especially from Mr. Lugar. That was while he was

5 performing his duties in the civilian protection. I also heard, I did not

6 witness that, but I heard about the arrival of Zvezdan Jovanovic, who is

7 now a media personality in Serbia, and many others, and that he had been

8 humiliated by them and ill treated by them. I'm sure that Mr. Tadic was a

9 person who would exploit -- expose to us all sorts of ill treatment by

10 those people, people from Serbia, by those specials who had arrived from

11 there.

12 Q. You've mentioned and we've also heard a testimony about

13 Captain Jez, who was also a security officer, and you've mentioned him in

14 that context recently. Can you tell us about the relationship between

15 this man and Todorovic and his specials? Did you hear anything about

16 that?

17 A. A day or two days ago, I did mention Mr. Jez and I said

18 unfortunately he was also a commander but that was very unfortunate. He

19 was deputy commander and the chief of the security organ in the 2nd

20 Posavina Brigade. To my mind, this person is prone to dodgey deals, prone

21 to crime, very arrogant, very coarse in his behaviour, very ill mannered

22 and had I not known that he had arrived from Banja Luka and had I not

23 known that he was an intellectual because he has a bachelor's degree, he's

24 an engineer, I would not have been able to believe that, I would have

25 always thought that he had arrived with this gang of specials. He was a

1 very ill mannered person, not mature enough for the post that he was --

2 that he held. However, we had to tolerate him for a certain period of

3 time. Eventually he was arrested and luckily enough he left our area in

4 the package with Crni, Lugar and all the other specials who were arrested

5 in November, 1992.

6 Q. My next question arises from the testimony of my client, who has

7 said that in the massacre in Crkvina and in the killing of Dikan he heard

8 from you. Can you tell us how Tadic reacted when he heard about these two

9 crimes?

10 A. His reaction was the one of deep distress, and as far as I can

11 remember, he said that he was afraid that this would escalate and that we

12 would not be able to control the situation, that he was deeply

13 disappointed that something like that had happened, that he is now -- he

14 is now afraid. I had told him some details and how I heard about it

15 originally, how Mr. Lugar had killed these people, I did not want to tire

16 the Trial Chamber with this, but obviously, Mr. Tadic reacted in the way I

17 have just described.

18 Q. I'm going to ask you a few questions about the exchanges and about

19 the money involved in that. We've heard testimonies about that. During

20 your testimony, I understood that you had all sorts of intelligence about

21 the events in Odzak and in Samac during the war. On the other hand, I

22 concluded from your testimony that very many acquaintances of yours and

23 relatives of yours were also exchanged. I would like to know before you

24 appeared before this Trial Chamber, did you hear stories about bribes,

25 money and exchanges and did you hear anything about -- in that context

1 with regard to Mr. Tadic, that would concern Mr. Tadic?

2 A. Not a single word within that context. Throughout the war, I did

3 not say anything that would concern Mr. Tadic [as interpreted]. The first

4 information about that or insinuations or the formations I heard here

5 during the various testimonies.

6 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, we have some problems here in the

7 transcript. I will read it out in English so Mr. Zaric will hear what

8 it says and this was not actually his answer. Here on page 26, line 20

9 and 21: "Throughout the war I did not say anything that would concern

10 Mr. Tadic." This is literally what it says in the transcript. And this

11 is not what Mr. Zaric said.

12 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

13 Q. This is obviously an error in the transcript. Can you please

14 repeat what you said?

15 A. Throughout the war, for the duration of the war, while Mr. Tadic

16 was most immediately involved in the exchanges as a member of that

17 commission, I did not hear from anybody on one side or the other, and I

18 had hundreds of conversations, that Mr. Tadic would take any money or

19 bribe from anybody in order to do anybody a favour. Just on the contrary,

20 my information about Mr. Tadic is just the opposite, it is all very

21 positive. I believe that this arose from the testimonies of the witnesses

22 who were prepared to say what they said.

23 Q. Let's not speculate. You said that you know -- have different

24 information about Mr. Tadic. Do you know what his financial position was

25 before the war and did he help people before the war?

1 A. The town of Samac had about 6.000 or 6.500 inhabitants. He was

2 among the wealthiest people there. He had most money and most assets in

3 the town, and he was recognisable as the person who very often, within his

4 abilities, always helped other people. He always gave money to his

5 friends and acquaintances who wanted to open their own private business or

6 they needed to borrow money for festivities or other things. He was --

7 as -- an unofficial bank, and every time he lent money, he never asked for

8 these -- from these people for any interest. He was one of those people

9 who did not have any reason to target people who had to be exchanged, and

10 ask them to give him money for favours. This is my very deep conviction.

11 Q. When he was lending money, did he lend money to everybody,

12 irrespective of their ethnic background?

13 A. He gave money to everybody. I don't know for sure who these

14 people were but it was a public knowledge that anybody who wanted to

15 borrow money, Serbs, Croats, Muslims, Roma, everybody could go to him,

16 everybody could ask him and many people did indeed turn to him for loans,

17 and it was nothing unknown.

18 Q. And finally, a few questions that arise from the last answers to

19 Mr. Pisarevic's questions, when he asked you about your acquaintance with

20 those who are present here and who are not present here, you said

21 something about Mr. Todorovic, Mr. Simic, but didn't hear anything about

22 your acquaintance with Mr. Tadic. I did not hear your opinion of

23 Mr. Tadic. I would like to hear primarily, based on your knowledge, your

24 immediate knowledge, during the war, based on the facts that you witnessed

25 and the facts that you heard, I would like to hear what you think about

1 Mr. Tadic and his attitude towards other ethnic groups during the war?

2 How did he treat Croats and Muslims? We've heard all sorts of testimonies

3 but you were also an eyewitness to all that so can you tell us something

4 about that?

5 A. In a nutshell, I knew Mr. Tadic when I was younger. He was one of

6 the best athletes in our area. Later on I knew him as a very loved

7 teacher at the school, and then I got to know him better during the war.

8 In my eyes, Mr. Tadic is a humanitarian and a person who, with all his

9 being, worked in this commission for the exchange, in order to help

10 people, miserable people, that were exposed to all sorts of hardships by

11 the war. I know from many stories, stories told to me by my friends who

12 had left and my relatives who had arrived, I attended only two exchanges

13 with Mr. Tadic, and I've testified about that, but I heard about many of

14 his travels, many of his departures, from the people who arrived. I heard

15 and I listened to their stories. The duties that he performed in the

16 technical sense, I believe that he performed them with a lot of emotion

17 and he invested a lot of his energy to help these wretched people as much

18 as he could, and within that context, I perceived Mr. Tadic, and I've

19 heard dozens of such stories about Mr. Tadic. And this is not an

20 exaggeration. Whatever I said is not an exaggeration.

21 I have another comment that I almost wouldn't like to volunteer.

22 I was very surprised to hear the testimonies of some people, knowing how

23 much effort he invested to help them. So -- but that is not important.

24 What I have just said is my official opinion of Mr. Tadic, and I also know

25 that as the commander of the civilian protection -- left right and centre

1 exposing himself to danger in order to repair or rectify any problem that

2 was the consequence of shelling, of killings. We have -- we faced with a

3 bad situation because over 860 people were killed in Samac and we had over

4 130 civilian victims.

5 Q. I believe that the Trial Chamber will be able to evaluate that.

6 Can you please now answer my question with either yes or no? This is my

7 last question with regard to his activities in the civilian protection and

8 during the exchanges, what you saw, what you heard, did you witness any

9 discrimination shown by Mr. Tadic towards any ethnic background, any other

10 people?

11 A. Never. On the contrary.

12 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I have no further questions, Your

13 Honours. Thank you.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you. Mr. Pantelic?

15 Cross-examined by Mr. Pantelic:

16 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Mr. Zaric.

17 A. Good afternoon.

18 Q. In the testimony and the answers that you gave to Mr. Pisarevic,

19 you mentioned an occurrence linked to the detention of 4th Detachment

20 members to the Samac police station, and you also mentioned that the

21 Commander Nikolic called Stevan Todorovic and Blagoje Simic in relation

22 to these events, and you then spoke further, that Todorovic replied and so

23 on and so forth. Do you perhaps recall what Commander Nikolic told you,

24 what was the reaction of Blagoje Simic, what did Blagoje Simic say on that

25 occasion, if you recall?

1 A. As far as I recall, commander told me that Mr. Blagoje Simic said,

2 first of all that he was surprised that there were members of the 4th

3 Detachment who were imprisoned and he said that he had nothing against

4 something being done or everything being done for these people to be

5 released and he then pointed him to Mr. Stevan Todorovic as being the

6 chief of the public security station, who would be -- who was the

7 commander of the station, and that this was within Mr. Todorovic's

8 jurisdiction. So this was more or less in a nutshell what was said.

9 Q. Very well. Thank you.

10 Further on, and I think that could be a minor interpretation

11 mistake, but perhaps this is a good time to clarify it, on page 19570,

12 testimony of the 13th of May, you spoke of the behaviour and the reactions

13 of Dr. Simic at the meeting of the command regarding the document

14 entitled information. You spoke briefly that Dr. Simic was a very calm,

15 moderate, that he was trying to find common ground with the other

16 participants, but line 12 of the transcript, on the page that I have

17 mentioned, there is a sentence which is inconsistent with your testimony.

18 I'm going to read it now, and I would like to ask you to clarify it, if

19 need be. So this -- the sentence is the following: "He spoke about the

20 relationship between civilian authority and military authority, the

21 military organs, and then you said the following: [In English] "And then

22 I was given the chance to react and I said that his words were too harsh,

23 and that this is not what the army did."

24 [Interpretation] So what I now and then found odd was that his

25 words were too harsh. That is not consistent with the rest of your

1 testimony. Specifically, could you tell what Dr. Simic's reaction was?

2 A. I cannot remember that I used these words in this context. The

3 only thing I said was that Dr. Simic expressed his dissatisfaction in his

4 belief that the document entitled "information" had more politics in it

5 than should be. That was his reaction and that was his comment of the

6 information and that was his sharpest comment, and if I said that was the

7 sharpest thing he said and if it was interpreted in this way, what I meant

8 to say was that Dr. Blagoje Simic wanted to say that the information in

9 some elements was very politically coloured and that was his sharpest

10 criticism regarding this material.

11 Q. Very well. Thank you. Now I'd like to go on to a line of

12 questioning regarding the subject itself, although this is obviously --

13 the case itself, although this of course was connected. If you please,

14 could you tell me if you and Dr. Simic, together, planned the forcible

15 takeover of power in Samac before April, 1992?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Do you have any information or knowledge that Dr. Simic, together

18 with the command of the 17th Tactical Group, before April, 1992, planned

19 the forcible takeover of power in Samac?

20 A. No. I never had any such information.

21 Q. You are a person who fulfilled certain posts before the war. I'm

22 not going to repeat that. You are an experienced policeman so to speak.

23 Security person. Security officer. Did you ever have any information in

24 the course of 1992 and 1993 that Dr. Simic had ordered that somebody

25 should be arrested in Samac or detained?

1 A. No, never, never. I never received information that such a

2 suggestion stemmed from Dr. Blagoje Simic.

3 Q. Do you have any knowledge that Dr. Simic, in the course of 1992

4 and 1993, had ever ordered beating up of people who were detained in some

5 of the detention centres in Samac?

6 A. No, never. I never had this information at hand, and I remember,

7 in the autumn of 1992, if this deserves to be mentioned, when, as it

8 happens, in one house belonging to Milan Milicic in Pelagicevo, who was

9 celebrating his patron saint's day and he invited some people, and as it

10 happened, I was there in that house, not knowing and even if I had known,

11 this isn't so important now, Mr. Blagoje Simic came, Mr. Milan Simic, and

12 Mr. Stevan Todorovic came, and there were a few other people that I knew,

13 and in the meantime, there was a very fierce verbal argument between us,

14 between Stevan Todorovic and Milan Simic, and I remember when Mr. Blagoje

15 Simic said to Milan, in a sense that he would -- it was never up to him,

16 he was not supposed to do what he had done in the school. I remember that

17 Blagoje said that but that was by the by for me to say that to Milan,

18 since Stevan Todorovic and I always had arguments.

19 Q. So if I understood you correctly, Dr. Simic condemned what Milan

20 Simic did?

21 A. Yes, he condemned what Milan Simic did and I have to say that this

22 was a bit of a surprise at this kind of meeting, because they met often,

23 they socialised, they carried out this policy, so I thought that this was

24 in these negative elements, they were far too often together, but really

25 Mr. Blagoje reacted in this situation as I just mentioned, as I just

1 explained.

2 Q. Otherwise, I presume that we will agree that those were members of

3 the Crisis Staff, they were from different parties; is that correct,

4 Mr. Zaric? They were people who were from the Reformist Party and

5 liberals and from the SDS and there were non-party people; is that

6 correct?

7 A. I was not involved --

8 Q. Only if you know.

9 A. I did not -- I was not involved in this kind of analysis but

10 according to the people that I know it is a fact that to start with not

11 all the people were from the Serbian Democratic Party but very quickly,

12 they accepted its policies, that is uncontested.

13 Q. Further on, when we are speaking about these relationships, Samac

14 is not a very large town and you're a well informed man. Would you agree

15 with me if I tell you that Stevan Todorovic and Milan Simic were very

16 close, also with respect to the way that they behaved, and also their view

17 point on life? Would you agree with me in that?

18 A. They were, and in particular, this is where I found Milan Simic

19 rather a surprise because I knew him from before, not in this context but

20 later on he gained elements of a very rough Serb nationalist and he joined

21 in certain actions with Stevan Todorovic, with getting drunk, having

22 brawls, lecturing other people, trying -- being arrogant, trying to become

23 a cult personality, these were the characteristics of both of these two

24 gentlemen.

25 Q. Milan Simic was president of the executive board, and I presume

1 that you know, considering that before the war, you heard -- had

2 certain -- you fulfilled certain functions in the municipal structures,

3 that Milan Simic, within this function, he had access to important

4 financial means and to the budget; is that correct?

5 A. Absolutely. He was the main man, as far as finances were

6 concerned.

7 Q. And Stevan Todorovic had behind him his policemen and certain

8 other personalities of dubious character?

9 A. Absolutely. I agree with you.

10 Q. And you, as a conscientious person, as an officer, reacting to

11 such occurrences, you condemned this link between capital and armed force,

12 that is namely could you tell us if you know whether any criminal

13 activities of these two regarding smuggling of oil, et cetera, cigarettes

14 and drinks, everything that was lacking during the war, could you just

15 answer with a yes or no because it's time for a break, if you have any

16 information?

17 A. Yes, I have information and I agree with your assessment and I can

18 give you more information regarding some things that I know more about, if

19 you assess that this is relevant to speak about.

20 Q. It is possible we will be speaking about this but it's now time

21 for a break.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. We'll take our break now.

23 --- Recess taken at 3.45 p.m.

24 --- On resuming at 4.15 p.m.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic?

1 MR. PANTELIC: May I proceed, Your Honour?

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I had asked you to proceed.

3 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you.

4 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Zaric, earlier we spoke of the relationships

5 between Milan Simic and Stevan Todorovic, at the question of my colleague,

6 Mr. Lukic, you also mentioned Captain Jez. Are we going to agree that

7 detention and arrest of Milan Simic and Stevan Todorovic by the military

8 police was in fact caused by certain information in respect of their

9 illegal activities?

10 A. The reasons for their arrest, I don't know the exact reasons.

11 They were detained and arrested by the organs of the military police,

12 commanded by the security organ of the East Bosnia Corps but I cannot rule

13 out the possibility that one of the reasons for the arrest of

14 Mr. Todorovic and Mr. Simic, and before that, of Captain Jez, could be

15 linked because of certain machinations that it could have been some kind

16 of a link in respect of certain instances of criminal activities, of

17 criminal offences, so this -- there could be some grounds for qualifying

18 this in this way.

19 Q. The activity that was linked to the information, what we call the

20 letter with 13 signatures, which is exhibit number 127, also speaks of an

21 initiative which existed to call the session of the municipal assembly of

22 Samac where the executive organs of the municipality would be critically

23 looked at.

24 A. Yes. This was one of the proposals defined in the conclusion

25 after the information was discussed and on the 29th of November, when

1 conclusions were adopted, when certain proposals were put forward, one of

2 the conclusions was the suggestion to finally hold the first assembly

3 session as the highest legislative body and that certain matters are

4 resolved at this assembly, and that everything is cleared up at this

5 assembly, and it was within this context that this proposal was put

6 forward within the conclusion.

7 Q. Mr. Zaric, could you tell me if you have any personal knowledge,

8 direct knowledge, that Dr. Simic ever took part in these illegal

9 activities that we have spoken about?

10 A. Specifically, I have nothing I've heard against Dr. Simic but I

11 would like to say to the Honourable Trial Chamber that when I was

12 interviewed in 1998, when I gave a statement to the Office of the

13 Prosecutor, I didn't try too much to differentiate between the executive

14 and the legislative power, I called it all authorities in Samac, and then

15 certain hypotheses were weaved around these what I call the authorities.

16 I didn't speak of Dr. Simic specifically or other structures but now, when

17 through the practice and what I feel to be individual responsibility and

18 how it should be considered, perhaps there is some need for somethings not

19 to change my testimony, not to change my statement, but to point to how I

20 perceived them now from the point of view of legislative and executive

21 organs in the area of the municipality at the time.

22 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

23 JUDGE MUMBA: Microphone, Mr. Pantelic.

24 MR. PANTELIC: Sorry, Your Honour.

25 Q. [Interpretation] So when we are speaking about the legislative

1 organ, we are talking about the municipal assembly of Samac, which is

2 conditionally speaking legislative organ. We know that the municipal

3 assembly in fact adopts drafts of the law; is that correct?

4 A. Yes, that's correct.

5 Q. Very well. Further on, to your counsel, you spoke about some

6 threats by persons from the civilian authorities. First of all, did

7 Dr. Simic ever threaten you?

8 A. No, I never heard that, nor did he ever personally -- did he ever

9 express a threat in that context, or said anything that I should be

10 fearing Dr. Simic for any reason.

11 Q. Bearing in mind the fact that before your commercial activities,

12 economic activities, you were head of the secretariat for internal

13 affairs, I think it was in the 1970s, I can't quite recall, but what I'm

14 interested in whether you would agree with me if I say that the principle

15 within the organ of the interior or internal affairs, what happens is that

16 the municipal assembly proposes the candidates but the final decision and

17 the appointment is done by the secretariat for internal affairs, that is

18 the minister, do you agree with me?

19 A. Yes. This is the way in 1975 I was appointed chief of SUP in

20 Samac, and I don't think that this mechanism changed, not at the time when

21 Mr. Todorovic was appointed, as chief of the public security station.

22 Q. Very well. Now we will go on to the subject in relation to

23 Odzak. First of all, would you agree with me, with my assertion that in

24 relation with the work obligation and we've already heard many testimonies

25 in respect of this, but would you agree with my assertion that those

1 people who went to the work obligation were Serbs, Muslims and Croats,

2 that is regardless of their ethnicity?

3 A. Yes. There were different structures but it was dependent -- it

4 depended on the nature of the work that they were carrying out. I would

5 say that certain harder jobs and -- that were more difficult jobs were

6 done by Muslims and Croats.

7 Q. And we can also agree that a large majority of the Serb population

8 was mobilised and they were on the front line, they were carrying out

9 combat tasks; is that correct?

10 A. Yes, most of the able-bodied Serb population, they were in

11 military units and they were carrying out the hardest tasks in the war.

12 Q. We have also heard the testimony that in the territory of the

13 municipality of Samac, I think there were over 500 people who died; is

14 that correct?

15 A. Yes. It was over 580 who were killed in the municipality of Samac

16 were killed, 440 were soldiers from the army, and the others were from the

17 civilian sector.

18 Q. Because of the shelling of Samac?

19 A. Yes, because of the shelling of Samac and when we are speaking

20 about the soldiers, many of them were killed on the defence line and most

21 of them were killed precisely on that defence line of Samac by HVO forces

22 because throughout this time, we were surrounded.

23 Q. Now, Mr. Zaric, those of us here who come from the area of former

24 Yugoslavia, we understand very well or more or less we understand well the

25 category of social property, state property, and so on. That is however

1 not the case with our colleagues who come from other legal systems. So

2 I'd like to very briefly answer my question, would we agree that this

3 concept of social property was practically present, it was valid, before

4 1992, in the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina, we are speaking about social

5 companies, social institutions, et cetera. Do you agree with me?

6 A. Yes, I do.

7 Q. Directly, this is not related to the case but I will ask you a

8 question because there is an indirect link. Would we agree that the

9 transformation of this property in Bosnia-Herzegovina in fact started

10 after the Dayton agreement, in the sense of privatisation and the

11 transformation of property, if you can just say if you know anything about

12 that?

13 A. I think that some of it started happening before, but not in the

14 sense of real transformation, the way it was carried out after the Dayton

15 agreement, but the reform forces or reformist forces on the level of

16 Yugoslavia that were led by the president of the executive council,

17 Mr. Ante Markovic, and who were very much present in the area of

18 Bosnia-Herzegovina were in favour of market economy and the -- in the

19 situation where workers would use their shares to buy parts of the

20 companies, but I would say that this activity was interrupted by the war

21 and, as you say, it continued or it resumed in the more serious manner

22 after Dayton agreement, after the first preconditions were established so

23 that something could be done properly in peace.

24 Q. Yes. But my point is the following: We agree, and we are

25 speaking about the territory of the municipalities of Samac and Odzak.

1 You know about the companies since you were in that realm of activities in

2 the economy, we agree that these large companies were socially owned

3 before the conflict erupted in April, 1992; is that correct?

4 A. Yes, that is not contested, yes.

5 Q. And the management of these companies, that was done by the

6 social, political community; is that correct?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Yes. Mr. Lazarevic tells me that this is a normal term in where

9 we come from but perhaps we should clarify for the transcript,

10 sociopolitical community, that means the municipality; is that correct?

11 A. Yes. The municipality practically speaking was the lowest form of

12 local sociopolitical community in -- within an administrative unit at the

13 time of Bosnia-Herzegovina as it was then.

14 Q. And one -- some of the forms were socially owned; is that correct,

15 these were large systems, state-owned; is that correct?

16 A. Yes, that's correct. These were railways, post service,

17 electrical supply industry and so on.

18 Q. Very well. Now that we have made this introduction, I would like

19 to ask you to look at the exhibit, or rather several exhibits that we have

20 tendered here and perhaps you can make some comments with respect to the

21 situation in Odzak.

22 MR. PANTELIC: Could we have please Exhibit D12/2 and ter also?

23 Q. [Interpretation] You talked about the introduction of the military

24 administration and we have agreed on the fact that the complete

25 organisation of life, the movement and the functioning within the military

1 administration was under the command of the army; is that correct?

2 A. That's right.

3 MR. PANTELIC: Could we have version ter in front of Mr. Zaric and

4 English version of this exhibit to be put on the ELMO and our learned

5 friend from interpreter's booth, they have already copies in order to

6 facilitate translation.

7 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Zaric, this is an exhibit that we've already

8 discussed. This is a decision of the state of the Serbian Republic of

9 BiH, 31st of May, 1992, and it talks about various problems, about the

10 security, economy at the time. Mr. Zaric, tell us if at the time you had

11 ever had the chance do see this document or do you see it for the first

12 time?

13 A. I have never seen this decision. I believe that this is the first

14 time I see it.

15 Q. Upon reading Article 1, you can agree with me that it speaks for

16 itself and we will elaborate on it at a later stage of this trial. I wish

17 to draw your attention to paragraph 1, when it says, "Those duties are

18 carried out through the executive committee of the municipal assembly of

19 Bosnia-Herzegovina," is that correct?

20 A. Yes. This is when we can read in paragraph 1.

21 THE INTERPRETER: Could we have the English version on the ELMO

22 for the benefit of the interpreters?

23 MR. PANTELIC:

24 Q. Then it talks about the various functions?

25 A. Yes in Article 2 we can see which tasks are -- I can see what is

1 written here.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pantelic, the interpreters wanted to have the

3 English version on the ELMO.

4 MR. PANTELIC: I already provided them with two copies of English

5 version. It's D12/2 but nevertheless, Your Honour, I finished it.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: It's on the ELMO now.

7 MR. PANTELIC: I will not go into details.

8 Q. [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Zaric. Please leave that decision

9 there for a few seconds and I would like us to talk about Exhibit [In

10 English] D102/1 [Realtime transcript read in error "P102/1"], please.

11 Just for the record, I said on page 42, line 18, my question was that

12 actually I was referring to the various function of executive boards of

13 municipality and government, in terms of protection of the industrial

14 capacities. That was the basis of my questions?

15 THE REGISTRAR: Mr. Pantelic, is it P102 or is it D102/1

16 because --

17 MR. PANTELIC: It's Defence, yes. It's Defence Exhibit D102/1,

18 please.

19 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Zaric, I believe that you can read this,

20 although the copy isn't exactly clear, but you can see that this is a

21 document stemming from the Republika Srpska, dated 14 of July, 1992. This

22 is an instruction on implementing the decree on the compulsory handover of

23 spoils of war and spoils acquired by other means to the republican

24 commodity reserves. This document is self explanatory.

25 [In English] For the transcript I can suggest -- I'm not an expert

1 in the English language of course but the terms spoils of war and

2 spoils -- the sense is the requisition actually, the term requisition.

3 It's more appropriate term, because I spoke, you know, a couple of months

4 ago with the interpreters and they suggested me that it might be a proper

5 word, but anyhow, I will proceed.

6 MR. RE: Your Honours.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Re?

8 MR. RE: There is an official translation which has been before

9 the Court for a long time which is translated as spoils of war, which is a

10 commonly known term.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

12 MR. RE: If my learned friend wishes to have it retranslated or

13 checked, nothing prevents him but this isn't the appropriate way of doing

14 it.

15 MR. PANTELIC: I actually will leave this topic to my final

16 submission because we are professionals here. Maybe we should speak about

17 the spirit of law and interpretations.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Because the Trial Chamber can only follow the

19 official translation of the Tribunal.

20 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, by no means.

21 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Zaric, in the second paragraph of this

22 instruction, you can read that all movable property and assets should be

23 handed to the government of the SRBH, and should be handed over to an

24 authorised municipal or republican organ. Later we read that it is the

25 military police that is taking care of the security. Then later on, in

1 paragraph 3, we can read that it is the municipal organ for the economy

2 and we see what they are in charge of. Paragraph 4 talks about the

3 command of the army. Paragraph 5 on the other page talks about the

4 municipal organ for the economy and the fact that it is required to

5 provide adequate storage space. Point 10 we talk about the ministry of

6 the interior and what their duties and chores are and so on and so forth.

7 Before seeing this decision today, were you aware that there was such an

8 instruction issued by the government?

9 A. No. I had never seen this.

10 Q. Very well. You said that in Odzak, you remained up until the

11 month of September, 1992, if I'm not mistaken; is that correct?

12 A. Yes, I stayed in Odzak until the 25th or the 26th of August, 1992.

13 MR. PANTELIC: Could we have now Exhibit D167/1, please?

14 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Zaric, this also is an exhibit of the --

15 Defence and I would like to you look at the last page. We see it is

16 signed by the Minister of Defence, Mr. General Subotic on the 10th of

17 October, 1992. You were not in Odzak at the time, I understand. Were you

18 aware of this instruction?

19 A. No. I was not aware of this instruction.

20 Q. I would like the usher to help us with another exhibit. [In

21 English] [Previous interpretation continues] ... /1 please. Just for the

22 record, it's D170/1. Thank you.

23 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Zaric, this is a letter emanating from the

24 army main staff of Republika Srpska, the document was written on 2

25 September, 1993. We are talking about the execution of an order,

1 confidential numbered, order rather, 1085-4 by the republican directorate

2 for the commodity reserve, regarding cattle feed and maize. The document

3 is signed by Major General Djukic. I presume that you have never seen

4 this document before?

5 A. That is correct, I've never seen it.

6 Q. Would you agree with me that all the activities in Odzak within

7 the military authorities linked to the economy, were under the -- were

8 subordinate to the headquarters of the Republika Srpska, the government of

9 the Republika Srpska, as well as the executive organs of the municipality?

10 Would you agree with me after seeing all these documents that we've talked

11 about? Is that a logical conclusion?

12 A. I can say that for Odzak, and I can say that the military command

13 had its say, the government, the military command, and they very closely

14 worked with the president of the military council, Mr. Popovic, who then

15 also very closely worked with the president of the executive board of the

16 municipal assembly of Samac. That I know very clearly. For the other

17 part of your question, I cannot give any answers but I cannot exclude the

18 possibility that there is a logical link.

19 Q. In fact, I am affirming to you that a whole series of orders that

20 we have just seen right now, for which you didn't know they existed were

21 in fact the basis to regulate relationship that existed between the

22 authority of Republika Srpska and the military organs. Would you agree

23 with me?

24 A. Yes. Upon reading these documents, and from what I was able to

25 write very quickly, it was written very correctly, but I am wondering if

1 it was really applied.

2 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours one small clarification for the

3 transcript, just to give some sense to the answer of Mr. Zaric. Here it

4 says and from what I was able to write very quickly, I haven't noticed

5 that Mr. Zaric wrote anything.

6 MR. PANTELIC: It should be read, instead of "write" it should be

7 "read." It's a slip of the tongue of Mr. Zaric.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Thank you. That will be accepted.

9 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

10 Q. Mr. Zaric would you agree with me to say that within the military

11 authorities in Odzak, the military organs were competent for the

12 initiating of eventual legal proceedings in case they would find out that

13 there was an illegal activity? Would you agree with me?

14 A. Yes, I do agree with you.

15 Q. I also presume that you would agree with me to say that during the

16 period where the military administration existed in Samac [as interpreted]

17 or from Samac, the food was transferred to Odzak for the purposes of the

18 civilian citizens, for the people who were coming back; is that correct?

19 A. Yes. The food was arriving from Samac and also I can tell you

20 that very large quantities were arriving because it was the summer time

21 and harvest had not been done yet. Most of the wheat had gone to the

22 silos in Bosanski Samac and not only to Bosanski Samac, it also went to

23 other parts. But I know that the wheat had been harvested according to an

24 order of the military authorities, and it was distributed to the

25 installations that were the closest ones, now I don't know if that's what

1 you're calling republican [Realtime transcript read in error "recognise"]

2 reserves but I know one part of the quantities of wheat went for Samac,

3 another portion went for Odzak, they went -- stayed in the silos of Samac,

4 of Odzak, I know that, but it is uncontestable that the executive board

5 and the authorities of Samac were providing the citizens with food and

6 it's the citizens who were in the territory of Odzak upon the return of

7 the refugees.

8 MR. PANTELIC: Just a correction to the transcript, page 47, line

9 7, after the word "existed" it should be in Odzak, not in Samac. Because

10 it relates to military administration. And then also intervention to the

11 same page, and line 17, Mr. Zaric mentioned republican reserves,

12 department for reserves actually.

13 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Zaric, we don't have to go into such great

14 detail. I'm now going to list certain activities by the municipal organs

15 in Samac with regard to Odzak I'm going to tell you what was done there in

16 order to establish normal situation and you will agree with me, we've

17 heard a lot of testimonies, at the end of the day you were there. So this

18 is what I was asking and I don't want to go into any further details. Can

19 you please give me brief answers. Besides the food for the civilian

20 population, you will agree with me that cattle fodder was transferred from

21 Samac to Odzak, just yes or no?

22 A. Yes, I know that.

23 Q. Oil was also transferred for the aggregates in Odzak?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Also the spare parts for the water supply in Odzak, isn't that so?

1 A. Yes, that is correct, and also for the electricity network in the

2 entire area.

3 Q. And also medical supplies, medicines, for the civilian population

4 in Odzak, isn't that so?

5 A. Yes, that is correct. And also types of seeds for the autumn

6 sowing.

7 Q. Maybe this was a mistake or maybe I have misinterpreted your

8 words. You mentioned that before the military administration was

9 introduced, Colonel Simic came to the Hit plant, wasn't that maybe Gojko

10 Vujnovic who was the assistant for Commander Talic for the civilian

11 affairs?

12 A. It is possible, I'm not excluding that possibility. I know that

13 he was in charge of civilian affairs.

14 Q. It doesn't really matter at the end of the day?

15 A. Yes, it is possible.

16 Q. I don't want to go into any details of that. Mr. Zaric, you were

17 telling us about the episode while you were in Belgrade. Who did you

18 visit there, that was in late May or early June, 1992. Don't give us any

19 great details obviously. You have mentioned that when you visited the

20 command of the air force and the anti-aircraft defence, Stevan Todorovic

21 said that this was some sort of his headquarters. Did you mean that he

22 personally and closely cooperated with the people from the command of the

23 air force and the anti-aircraft defence, that they would meet later, is

24 that a good interpretation?

25 A. Yes, this is a very correct conclusion.

1 Q. And if you remember, Blagoje Simic, did he say that these were his

2 friends, did he also express some sort of a relationship with these

3 people?

4 A. No. As far as I know, Mr. Simic was introduced to these people

5 for the first time. I did not have the impression that Mr. Blagoje Simic

6 and Mr. Tadic and Mr. Tadic [as interpreted] knew these people. The only

7 person who knew them was Mr. Todorovic.

8 Q. Just a moment, Mr. Zaric. Can you please slow down? We have been

9 having problems with your testimony.

10 MR. LAZAREVIC: Page 49, line 21, here it says, Mr. Miroslav Tadic

11 and Miroslav Tadic -- Mr. Miroslav Tadic knew these people. Mr. Zaric

12 mentioned Mr. Milos Bogdanovic. Just this name to have in transcript

13 instead of mentioning Mr. Miroslav Tadic twice.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, the other name was Bogdanovic. Okay, that will

15 be accepted. Also, Mr. Zaric, please pause before starting to answer

16 Mr. Pantelic, because I can here the interpreter literally running to

17 catch up.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'll do my best, Your Honour.

19 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. Now lets move to another episode, one that you also described, and

21 that is a removal or the appointment of Colonel Djurdjevic, Mico

22 Djurdjevic. We will agree that the competent superior command was the

23 17th Corps and that Colonel Dencic as the superior officer carried out or

24 rather decided that Colonel Djurdjevic would be removed or replaced. I'm

25 talking about the formal aspect of that decision.

1 A. If we look at the decision itself, by which Mr. Dragan Djordjevic,

2 Crni was appointed commander, then it is correct that he was

3 appointed by Colonel Dencic, who at that time was the commander of the

4 East Bosnia Corps or the 17th Corps at the time. That was its name.

5 Q. You will also agree with me when I say that Colonel Djurdjevic was

6 transferred to the first Brigade in Brcko. Do you know that?

7 A. Yes. He remained very short time in Samac and he was in charge of

8 the -- on defence lines in the zone of the 2nd Posavina Brigade and soon

9 after that, maybe a month later, but I can't tell you exactly, he was

10 appointed a commander of the 1st Posavina Infantry Brigade with its

11 headquarters in Brcko.

12 Q. Do you by any chance know that during the war, Colonel Djurdjevic

13 became the chief of engineers in the main staff of Republika Srpska? Are

14 you aware of that fact?

15 A. Yes. I'm aware of that. He did reach that level and he became

16 the chief of engineers in the main staff of Republika Srpska.

17 Q. Obviously and you will agree with me that this is all within the

18 military structure, the question of appointment and removal of officers

19 that it is all a very legitimate and regular work within the military

20 structures? Will you agree with that?

21 A. Absolutely. Let me just say that in Samac, he was not suitable

22 for a commander of a brigade and still he reached one of the highest

23 levels in the main staff of the Republika Srpska army.

24 Q. You will agree with me, and I think it is not disputable, that he

25 was an expert in his area, which is engineering?

1 A. Yes, he was one of the best known experts before the war, in that

2 area, and that is probably the reason why he reached such a high command

3 position in the main staff of the Republika Srpska army.

4 Q. We are no experts. We cannot decide on the ways the army appoints

5 people but you and I will certainly agree that there were -- there was a

6 fighting in Samac area with very complex strategic and operative tasks,

7 that there was fierce fighting, will you agree with that?

8 A. Yes, I believe that the territory of Samac, within that context,

9 was one of the most complex theatres of war, and it required a lot of

10 courage in order to preserve that part of the territory.

11 Q. My learned friend Lukic asked you earlier today about the

12 decision, the alleged decision on isolation, a document that we have seen

13 here but nobody so far has confirmed its authenticity. Mr. Zaric, can you

14 please tell us whether the inhabitants of Samac, of Croatian background,

15 were ever put to work in -- on vital objects or facilities in the town of

16 Samac [as interpreted]?

17 A. No. This never happened, and the document that this -- the period

18 that this document refers to, this never happened.

19 MR. LAZAREVIC: I will help my colleague. Mr. Pantelic, the way

20 his question was translated says, "Were the inhabitants of Samac, of

21 Croatian background were ever put to work in" and then "on vital objects

22 and facilities in the town of Samac" and I believe this is not what the

23 meaning of the question was. I believe that Mr. Pantelic was discussing

24 some sort of human shields. This is not put someone to work on vital

25 facilities.

1 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Exactly. My question was whether Mr. Zaric

2 was aware of the fact that any of Croat citizens of Samac were put on the

3 vital objects in Samac during the war. That's exactly the question that I

4 posed. Thank you.

5 MR. RE: Your Honours what are vital objects?

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

7 MR. RE: Which document is he referring to.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: I was about to ask what the meaning is.

9 MR. PANTELIC: Yes.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Maybe what you do, Mr. Pantelic, repeat the question

11 in your language slowly. Then we can have the answer. Maybe that will

12 make it clearer.

13 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. Mr. Zaric, as I have said earlier today, you were answering my

15 learned friend Lukic's question, talking about document P71. Now I'm

16 asking you based on your knowledge and on your information, during 1992

17 and 1993, were Croat citizens of Samac ever put on key facilities in the

18 town, just say yes or no.

19 A. No.

20 Q. Did Mr. Blagoje Simic ever mention to you that he had made such a

21 decision or participated in the making of such a decision as we see in

22 P71?

23 A. No. Mr. Blagoje Simic never -- has never told me that.

24 Q. Will you agree with me when I say that bearing in mind the fact

25 that there were several seals or stamps of the Serbian municipal assembly,

1 we've heard testimonies to that effect during these proceedings, is it

2 then logical to conclude that somebody abused this document, especially

3 with regard to this document? Based on the fact that there were several

4 seals or stamps?

5 MR. PANTELIC: No, no. He's an experienced police officer and I'm

6 just trying to see the logical conclusion of the facts and events that

7 were -- these are the part of the evidence exhibited before this Trial

8 Chamber. In that sense. Fact number 1 -- fact number 1.

9 MR. LAZAREVIC: I apologise. Maybe if the question was put

10 another way I wouldn't have a problem with it. Just the way it was posed.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Lazarevic, would you please sit down? The

12 witness can only answer as to what he knows, what he saw or what happened

13 according to his knowledge. This is a conclusion you are trying to make

14 him or you are putting to him without any basis at all.

15 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. Mr. Zaric, bearing in mind the fact that we have heard during

17 several testimonies that there were several stamps of the municipal

18 assembly, you as an experienced person, can you maybe draw a conclusion

19 that it is possible that there may have been an abuse? I'm not asking you

20 to speculate, I'm just asking you whether this is a logical conclusion,

21 that there may have been the abuse of a stamp? Yes or no.

22 A. Yes. It is possible that somethings like that happened but it is

23 also true that there was isolation, that there were people in isolation.

24 Q. You are making my job difficult all the time. I'm just asking you

25 to answer a question, the Defence has the right to ask leading questions

1 in the cross-examination. Please just answer my question with yes or no.

2 Don't add anything. And thank you in advance for your understanding.

3 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Mr. Re?

4 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Re?

5 MR. RE: Yes, Your Honours, just going back a bit, that question

6 which I sought clarification of, it's just gone off the screen again I've

7 been trying to get up for the last few minutes, the question which was

8 translated, sorry, the translation of the question was were people ever

9 put on key facilities in the town.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: You mean that question regarding the people of

11 Croatian nationality, whether they were put on vital facilities.

12 MR. RE: It's were they put on vital facilities. It's a

13 meaningless question and Mr. Zaric said no, meaning, I don't know what

14 putting people on vital facilities or sorry, he said key facilities,

15 means. The document refers to isolation. I mean perhaps it could be put

16 again properly according to what the document actually says and Mr. Zaric

17 can give an answer based upon his knowledge and explain his knowledge.

18 Otherwise it's just fairly meaningless.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Perhaps you can clarify that during

20 cross-examination.

21 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour, that's the basis -- my learned

22 friend, you will have enough time to clarify it. You have a key witness

23 here.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic, go ahead with your questions.

25 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Your Honour. Now I'm lost, Your Honour,

1 I don't know what was my last question, thanks to the intervention. Could

2 I have a second just to check the transcript, please?

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, you can go ahead.

4 [Defence counsel confer].

5 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, thank you, Your Honour.

6 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Zaric, I assume we will also agree that

7 Croats and Muslims in the stadium in Crkvina in mid-May stayed for a few

8 days, not longer than that?

9 A. Yes, I heard that but I didn't see it, but I did hear that that

10 was the case.

11 Q. And then a certain number of them were returned to their own

12 apartments and houses and the others, I'm referring to men, were

13 transferred to the elementary and the secondary school?

14 A. Yes. They went back to the sports halls of these two schools in

15 Samac.

16 Q. You mentioned that the signature on that decision is by Dr. Simic,

17 and you couldn't say that for a fact, you're not a graphologist?

18 A. No. I can't say that for a fact, but from what I remember, from

19 11 years ago, and the way this document looked to me, and based on that

20 memory, that's what I said, but I cannot confirm for a fact and I can't

21 say with 100 per cent certainty that this is indeed Blagoje Simic's

22 signature. If I could have a better version of that document, maybe I

23 would be able to tell you more.

24 Q. But you're not a graphologist, are you?

25 A. No, I'm not an expert in that area.

1 JUDGE MUMBA: This is P what?

2 MR. PANTELIC: P71, Your Honour.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay, thank you.

4 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

5 Q. Mr. Zaric, I'm going to put something to you, the way I see

6 things, as Defence counsel. We have evidence that an attack on Serbian

7 soldiers, who were on the bus, took place. We also have evidence to the

8 effect that this attack was carried out in the area where Croatian

9 inhabitants lived and we also have evidence to the effect that these

10 Croats were armed. We also have evidence that a police operation took

11 place by which civilians were transferred to the stadium in Crkvina. I'm

12 putting it to you, Mr. Zaric, that this operation was under the authority

13 of the military and police organs, and that it was a response to the

14 incident which had taken place in the area of combat activities. Would

15 you agree with that, yes or no?

16 A. Yes, I agree with you, but as for the military organs, the 4th

17 Detachment didn't have anything whatsoever to do with all that.

18 Q. I agree with you because I never mentioned the 4th Detachment, and

19 I thought that this went without saying.

20 As regards Exhibit P127, the document showing 13 signatories,

21 would you agree with me if I said that, based on this information, an

22 initiative was initiated by a number of deputies of the municipal assembly

23 of Samac to convene a session of the assembly? Do you agree with me?

24 A. Yes. It is possible that this had such a positive effect.

25 Q. Will you agree with me if I said that this initiative came from

1 the deputies who were contrary to the book of rules of the municipal

2 assembly, tried to convene this session in a coffee bar, among them

3 Tubakovic, Stanisic and others, and also that that group did not achieve a

4 quorum and could not make any decisions on anything and especially not on

5 the issues relative to this information? Would you agree with me when I

6 say that?

7 A. No, I wouldn't.

8 Q. But do you then agree, and you have already testified to that

9 effect, that after that, a legal session of the municipality of Samac took

10 place and that the things from that information were on the agenda?

11 A. Yes. I know that that -- this session took place because I also

12 attended that session.

13 Q. And if I tell you that it was the wish of the command of the 2nd

14 Posavina Brigade, as well as your own wish, for the army which interfered

15 in some policies [as interpreted], wanted to carry out a putsch against

16 the legally elected organs of the municipal assembly, would you agree with

17 me?

18 A. This is a fabrication, this is nonsense, this has absolutely

19 nothing whatsoever to do with the truth.

20 JUDGE LINDHOLM: Just for the sake of clarity, I'm no specialist

21 in the English language but on page 58, line 4, there is the word

22 "policies," should it perhaps be "politics"?

23 MR. PANTELIC: That's correct, Your Honour, thank you, I'm

24 grateful for your intervention. In fact that was the politics actually

25 related to legally elected organs of Samac municipal assembly, thank you.

1 MR. RE: Can I clarify something here? The question was a putsch

2 against the legally elected organs of the municipal assembly.

3 MR. PANTELIC: Coup d'etat.

4 MR. RE: I understand what a putsch is. But I don't understand is

5 it the case that there was a legally elected municipal assembly that

6 you're putting to the witness and some one was attempting a putsch against

7 a legally elected municipal assembly.

8 MR. PANTELIC: That's correct.

9 MR. RE: That's the Defence case.

10 MR. PANTELIC: That's the fact. That's not only the Defence case,

11 that's a fact. Thank you.

12 Q. [Interpretation] At the end, Mr. Zaric, I have a series of

13 questions. According to the very precise instructions of my client,

14 Dr. Simic, but before that, I'd like to ask you, you spoke of an event

15 when your mother was moved out, was expelled, from the apartment. I spoke

16 to my client. I called the field, that is Samac, and I was told that

17 something in relation to this did happen but that happened after the

18 Dayton agreement. Now, could you go back to that time and can you tell us

19 when did that incident, this episode happen with the apartment and your

20 mother? Was that something that happened in 1995, 1996?

21 A. This happened in November, 1992. And not after the Dayton

22 agreement.

23 Q. Specifically, I put it to you that this was outside of the

24 framework of the indictment, and this was in relation to the session of

25 the executive board of the municipal assembly, and practically, part of

1 that executive board which was to do with the housing facilities. Do you

2 agree with me?

3 A. No it was the session of the War Presidency and Mr. Blagoje told

4 me decisively that the decision of the War Presidency four to three

5 [Realtime transcript read in error "423"], that my mother should be moved

6 out. No it was not the decision of the executive board.

7 MR. PANTELIC: I suggest a correction to the transcript, page 59,

8 line 14, it's not War Presidency 423, it's voting four to three. Four

9 votes in favour and three against. Yes.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, that's what it's supposed to mean actually.

11 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

12 Q. My client, Dr. Simic, states decidedly that the Crisis Staff of

13 the Samac municipality did not take any decision regarding the military

14 action between the 16th and the 17th of April, 1992. Do you agree with

15 this claim?

16 A. No. I said how and from whom I found out and who told me this. I

17 was not a witness to the making -- taking of this decision but the Crisis

18 Staff -- that the Crisis Staff had taken this decision, I heard that from

19 Lieutenant Colonel commander of the 17th Tactical Group and it was on the

20 basis of this discussion of this interview, that's what I claim and that's

21 what I'm claiming here before this Trial Chamber. I was not at this

22 session and I did not hear of this decision being made but this is how I

23 heard it.

24 Q. My client, Dr. Simic, claims that he did not make a phone call to

25 Commander Nikolic in the night between the 16th and 17th of April, 1992.

1 Are you prepared to change your earlier testimony, yes or no?

2 A. I don't know why you're asking me this question.

3 Q. My client, Dr. Simic, claims that the Crisis Staff, he had

4 personally never taken a decision or that he was ever in charge of

5 appointing or dismissing any commander in the territory of the area of

6 responsibility of the 2nd Posavina Brigade. Do you agree with this

7 position or not?

8 A. Perhaps he was not in charge of that but he influenced this

9 policy.

10 Q. Dr. Simic further claims that he never spoke to General Mladic on

11 the phone, in Belgrade, at the command of the RVPVO. Are you ready to

12 accept that claim?

13 A. No. He did have a conversation.

14 Q. My client, Dr. Simic, claims that this meeting at the command of

15 RVPVO, Franko Simatovic, also known as Frenki, did not attend. Do you

16 agree with this claim?

17 A. No. Frenki was present.

18 Q. Well, never mind. We'll have to ask Frenki directly then.

19 A. Very well. You can do that.

20 Q. My client, Dr. Simic, claims that in the territory of the Odzak

21 municipality, there was no organised looting by the civilian authorities,

22 but that there were individual cases, certain individuals, who were under

23 a completely different jurisdiction. Do you agree with this claim?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Further on, Dr. Simic claims that there was never organised

1 looting by the civilian authorities, by himself personally?

2 A. Perhaps he did not do it personally but there was organised

3 looting in my opinion. The way that I perceived the problem at the time.

4 I don't think that he personally looted.

5 Q. Further on, my client, Dr. Simic, claims that the volunteers from

6 Serbia were never under the command of the civilian authorities in Samac.

7 A. If Mr. Simic excludes from that the public security station, then

8 I agree with that.

9 Q. And Dr. Simic claims that in the territory of the Samac

10 municipality, there was never organised Serb Territorial Defence. Do you

11 agree with that?

12 A. No. There was a Serb Territorial Defence, and how organised it

13 was, that's another question, but it existed, it was there, as a

14 legitimate institution, and not just in Samac, but in the entire territory

15 of the Republic of Republika Srpska.

16 Q. Could you tell me, before we finish, do you remember perhaps from

17 conversations or perhaps you heard, that at the time when the president of

18 the executive board was appointed, Mr. Milan Simic, Dr. Blagoje Simic was

19 against his appointment but he was in favour of the appointment of Mirko

20 Lukic? Did you about that? Did you hear that from anyone?

21 A. I heard this story at the time of the testimony of Mr. Blagoje but

22 at the time, I was not aware of that information.

23 Q. Further on, Dr. Simic claims that the information of the 13

24 signatories document P127 is -- mostly does not correspond to the truth,

25 that on the basis of this document, there was not a single criminal report

1 that was ever filed. Do you agree with that?

2 A. A large amount of my honesty and humanity, I entered into this

3 information regardless of what Dr. Blagoje Simic thinks of it.

4 Q. First of all, Mr. Zaric, I'm asking you these questions on the

5 strict instructions of my client, so please don't think that I am trying

6 to open any kind of debate on the subject. This is part of my job and I'm

7 trying to do it as much as I can but thank you for your understanding.

8 Further on --

9 A. Mr. Pantelic, I understand you fully but I'd like to give an

10 answer which corresponds to the nature of the question that is asked. I'm

11 trying to behave in an appropriate manner as a witness.

12 Q. Thank you, Mr. Zaric. I didn't have any other opinion on the

13 subject. Of course there is no problem. Further on, Dr. Simic claims

14 that this information, the military command of the 2nd Posavina Brigade

15 and the higher command, the higher military command, that is the East

16 Bosnia Corps, rejected it, rejected this information, in respect -- with

17 regarding to political implication and the influence of politics on the

18 army but they did undertake some measures regarding the arrests of those

19 who were under suspicion of having committed certain criminal offences

20 like Lugar and others. Do you agree with me?

21 A. No, that's not correct, they never degraded this information in

22 this context but I do agree that it was used also for certain arrests

23 later on and it was also used to control the public security station,

24 which was the subject of testimony of Mr. Slavko Paleksic and I presume

25 that this was the basis for finally looking at what was going on at the

1 public security station.

2 MR. PANTELIC: Could I have just a few seconds to reorganise my

3 papers? And I will almost finish the examination.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

5 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you. Yes, thank you, Your Honour.

6 Q. [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Zaric.

7 MR. PANTELIC: I am finished with the cross-examination of

8 Mr. Zaric. Thank you.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, very well. The Prosecution?

10 MR. RE: Your Honours, before I start, could I just say something

11 in relation to the Prosecution's interpretation of Rule 90(H) and putting

12 our case to a witness called who gives a contrary case to the Prosecution

13 case? Your Honours will have heard over the seven days in which Mr. Zaric

14 gave his evidence in chief that his evidence conflicted in a number of

15 ways with a large number of Prosecution witnesses. Often in small ways

16 but others in larger ways. The Prosecution's interpretation of Rule 90(H)

17 is that where it is an accused who has heard all the evidence and has had

18 a chance to put his own version of those particular events doesn't

19 necessarily require the Prosecution to put each and every aspect of its

20 case where one of its witnesses has given a contrary version to the

21 accused's. If the Prosecution -- if that is the -- that's the

22 Prosecution's interpretation, and if that's acceptable to the Trial

23 Chamber and the Trial Chamber will accept for the purposes of my

24 cross-examination that Mr. Zaric will have -- Mr. Zaric's case is opposed

25 to us on some points, thus relieving us from the obligation to put each

1 and every single allegation, of which there are probably hundreds, in

2 relation to everything, for example, Mr. Tihic said, Mr. Lukac, there are

3 many witnesses, there are some things I would like to ask him about but in

4 my submission, the Prosecution does not needs to take Mr. Zaric to

5 everything. Otherwise, we will be here for a very long time.

6 [Trial Chamber confers]

7 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, if I could have only one word to

8 what Mr. Re said, our only concern is that if such situation occurs here,

9 I don't want Mr. Zaric to be confused because when Prosecution -- well,

10 all right, put some quotations or something that was said during the

11 testimony of their witnesses, I would feel grateful if they put to

12 Mr. Zaric who is the witness who said that because otherwise, I mean, we

13 have been through most of the episodes that were mentioned which

14 Mr. Zaric's name was mentioned, for some of the episodes we didn't find

15 important of them to be mentioned in his testimony. As my learned

16 colleague from the Prosecution said, this would take an additional time of

17 at least two more days but some of these incidents we believe that by now

18 most of the evidence in this Tribunal already covered some of these

19 incidents but I just don't want Mr. Zaric to be confused in case the

20 Prosecution puts some quotations before Mr. Zaric. This is the only

21 position that the Defence of Mr. Zaric would like to raise.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: The Trial Chamber is quite sure that the Prosecution

23 does not intend to confuse Mr. Simo Zaric. They are only concerned with

24 whether or not every minute detail which appears to contradict which some

25 of the Prosecution witnesses said should be put to Mr. Zaric. What the

1 Trial Chamber would like to say to the Prosecution is that the Prosecution

2 is aware of the important aspects of their case or salient features of

3 their case which they in cross-examination they should concentrate on.

4 The Trial Chamber has also observed that there are many, many details that

5 have been given by Mr. Zaric perhaps in his effort to be thorough and also

6 to feel he has completed his case which are not necessary in this case and

7 which also are not contentious. It's really looking at the main features

8 of the Prosecution case and then extracting that supporting evidence from

9 Mr. Simo Zaric. Obviously, if you're going to quote any witness, you make

10 sure that the quotation is correct so that the witness -- Mr. Zaric is not

11 confused, as Mr. Lazarevic fears and he's not the first accused to be

12 cross-examined any way. He's in fact the last one. So the Prosecution

13 can proceed.

14 MR. RE: May it please Your Honours, I thank you for your

15 guidance, your direction.

16 Cross-examined by Mr. Re:

17 Q. Mr. Zaric, I'm going to ask you the questions as briefly as I

18 possibly can and I want you could concentrate on the questions and I know

19 it's your own Defence and I know you've been wanting to tell your side for

20 many, many years but please, you must listen to the question and answer it

21 and please as precisely as possible. You understand that?

22 A. Yes, I will try.

23 Q. On Tuesday, Mr. Zaric, -- when you finished your evidence you

24 finished it with an apology, an apology for the sufferings for which you

25 wished to express your sincere apologies for the sufferings of every

1 witness who was a victim of the war went through. You said it was your

2 sincere apology, and it was, wasn't it?

3 A. Yes. The apology with the expression of sympathy for these

4 victims.

5 Q. Your apology of course isn't only directed towards those who gave

6 evidence, is it? It was for all victims of what happened in Bosanski

7 Samac, wasn't it?

8 A. Absolutely.

9 Q. Because you heard these people, the victims, who were witnesses

10 give moving and harrowing testimony of what they went through, didn't you?

11 A. Yes. And if any witness from Samac had come and spoken, if every

12 witness had come from Samac and spoken, I would have spoken individually

13 to every single one to express my sorrow with regards to what happened.

14 Q. Of course you heard these people, the victims, who were witnesses

15 here, give evidence of arrests, detentions, beatings, murders, rapes,

16 looting, and deportation. You heard their own moving accounts of what had

17 happened to them and the people around them, didn't you? The people from

18 your community?

19 A. Yes, I did hear.

20 Q. And you heard them give evidence of what is now popularly known as

21 ethnic cleansing, didn't you? These victims, who were witnesses, who came

22 to court?

23 A. Yes. I heard these stories, yes.

24 Q. And today, in your evidence, you even referred to helping what you

25 called "miserable people exposed to all sorts of hardship" and people you

1 referred to as "wretched people". Those victims who gave evidence and the

2 people those victims spoke of, they were in that category, weren't they,

3 of miserable people, exposed to all sorts of hardship and wretched people?

4 A. Yes. I agree with you.

5 Q. And in light of your sincere apology for what happened to all the

6 people, to those people, the victims, the witnesses and the victims of the

7 war and what happened, I'm going to ask you a few things. You understand

8 that?

9 A. Yes. I understand.

10 Q. And in light of your sincere apology to these people, Mr. Zaric,

11 you don't deny, do you, having heard their moving and harrowing tales of

12 what happened to them, that many non-Serbs were persecuted in Bosanski

13 Samac in 1992 and 1993? You don't deny that, do you?

14 A. No. I'm not denying that. It's true.

15 Q. You don't deny, do you, that hundreds of Muslims and Croats were

16 arrested in Bosanski Samac, only based upon their ethnicity? You don't

17 deny that, do you?

18 A. No. No. I'm not denying that. I agree with you.

19 Q. And you also agree that many of these people who were arrested

20 based upon only their ethnicity were beaten and some of them tortured

21 while in captivity? You don't deny that, do you?

22 A. That's correct, it happened, yes.

23 Q. And you don't deny the beatings and torturing were a form of

24 persecution of these non-Serbs, unfortunate enough to be locked up against

25 their will, do you?

1 A. I agree with you.

2 Q. And similarly, you must agree, Mr. Zaric, mustn't you, that

3 non-Serbs were murdered in Bosanski Samac in 1992 and murdered only

4 because they weren't Serbs and murdered by Serbs?

5 A. I'm sorry, I didn't understand the question very well.

6 Q. I will rephrase it. You don't deny or you would agree with me

7 would you not, that --

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Re, that question, especially the latter part of

9 it when you say murdered by Serbs is a bit, it goes beyond the

10 circumference, because if you say murdered by Serbs, it's like all the

11 Serbs. So if you can rephrase it and be specific, without including --

12 without meaning the nationality itself.

13 MR. RE: I entirely take Your Honour's points.

14 Q. Mr. Zaric, I will leave that question. You don't deny, do you,

15 that non-Serbs were murdered only because they were of a different

16 ethnicity, do you?

17 A. They were murdered but whether that was exclusively the reason, I

18 wouldn't be able to state 100 per cent but it is a fact that non-Serbs,

19 some non-Serbs, were killed, in the area of Samac, that cannot be denied.

20 Q. You can't deny that non-Serbs in police custody were murdered and

21 the reason for their murder was because of their ethnicity, such as Dikan

22 and Taser [phoen]? You can't deny that, can you?

23 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honour, I believe that now Mr. Re is calling

24 Mr. Zaric to speculate. What Dikan had in mind, what Mr. Lugar had in his

25 mind when he murdered that person, this is really something that Mr. Zaric

1 cannot comment.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: There is nothing wrong to the -- with the question.

3 The Prosecution is putting to Mr. Zaric. Mr. Zaric can deny or agree or

4 explain.

5 MR. RE:

6 Q. You understand the question, don't you?

7 A. Yes. I understood. If I take that the relationship between Lugar

8 and the one he killed, then I would agree with your assessment.

9 Q. You don't deny either, based upon your sincere apology to the

10 victims, that the Serb forces who took over and imprisoned these hundreds

11 of Croats and Muslims in facilities in Bosanski Samac, inflicted cruel and

12 inhumane treatment on them only because of their ethnicity?

13 A. It's correct.

14 Q. And you don't deny that their confinement was under inhumane

15 conditions and this was inflicted upon them by their captors only because

16 of their ethnicity? You don't deny that, do you?

17 A. I am not denying that.

18 Q. You also of course don't deny that Muslims and Croats were forced

19 to do labour, forced labour, against their will, only because they were

20 Muslims and Croats? You don't deny that either, do you, based upon your

21 sincere apology to the victims who testified here?

22 A. For a number of people, I agree, generally speaking, I couldn't

23 accept for a number of people in that context, I agree that they were

24 exposed to work obligations, and I -- as you would use to forced work,

25 forced labour, which was a lot harder than elsewhere in other

1 circumstances.

2 Q. And you don't deny, do you, that non-Serbs were forced out of

3 their jobs only because of their ethnicity after the takeover, in light of

4 your apology, you can't deny that, can you?

5 A. It's a fact that a large number of non-Serbs remained without a

6 job, but in those circumstances, conditions of war, a number of -- a large

7 number of Serbs were also without jobs. It was a new situation brought on

8 by the war. And the assessment that this was only relating to non-Serbs

9 could not be reflection of the real situation but it is a fact that many

10 remained without jobs but of all ethnicities, factories ceased working and

11 many other things as well.

12 MR. RE: It's a quarter to 6, Your Honour, if this is the time?

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. We'll take our break and continue at 18.05.

14 --- Recess taken at 5.46 p.m.

15 --- On resuming at 6.06 p.m.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Re.

17 MR. RE: Thank you, Your Honours.

18 Q. In light of your apology to the victims who gave their evidence

19 here and the other people of Bosanski Samac who suffered as a result of

20 what happened during the war, in 1992 and 1993, you don't deny that there

21 was a takeover on the night of the 16th and 17th of April, 1992, by Serb

22 forces? You don't deny that and you apologise to the victims for that,

23 don't you?

24 A. I do not deny the fact that on that day, there was a takeover, but

25 I wanted to apologise to the victims for what they lived during the war.

1 It doesn't mean that the takeover had to cause casualties but that's what

2 happened.

3 Q. But as it did cause casualties, and a great many casualties, it

4 inflicted a great deal of untold human misery, stories that will never be

5 known, now that you know that, you apologised to those people for the

6 takeover and all that occurred as a result of the takeover, don't you?

7 JUDGE MUMBA: In fairness to Mr. Simo Zaric, Mr. Re, he has

8 explained in his earlier answer that the takeover could have happened but

9 it didn't have to cause casualties, and also, the Trial Chamber is of the

10 view that his apology is really in the general sense, it shouldn't be

11 taken as an admission of the allegations against him. I think it's better

12 to be fair to the accused along those lines.

13 MR. RE: In fairness to the accused I'm not suggesting that the

14 apology is an admission but I'm asking him to explain his apology and

15 whether it includes various --

16 JUDGE MUMBA: No, I think in fairness to Mr. Zaric, let's leave

17 the apology as he stated it. Just go ahead and cross-examine him without

18 linking it to his apology. I think it's normal for him. He felt the way

19 he felt and if you remember during the Prosecution case, almost at the

20 beginning of the cross-examination of each Prosecution witnesses,

21 apologies were offered by the Defence counsel on the instructions of their

22 client. I think it's better that the Prosecution respects that.

23 MR. RE: May it please Your Honours.

24 Q. Mr. Zaric, you've agreed there was a takeover, you agree that it

25 was a forcible takeover, don't you?

1 A. Yes, I do agree with that.

2 Q. Forcible takeover by armed Serb forces of an area which previously

3 or at the time had a non-Serb majority, wasn't it?

4 A. If you are thinking of Samac as a municipality, statistical data

5 testify to that effect. The majority of the population was non-Serb on

6 the municipality of Samac.

7 Q. So the short answer to my question is yes, is it, that it was a

8 forcible takeover by armed Serb forces of an area which statistically had

9 a non-Serb majority at the time? Is your short answer to that yes?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Of course, as far as you know, the non-Serbs living in Bosanski

12 Samac on the 16th and 17th of April, 1992, didn't want to be taken over by

13 armed Serb forces, did they, sir?

14 A. I absolutely agree.

15 Q. The armed Serb forces then installed a Serb-only regime, didn't

16 they, Mr. Zaric?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And that Serb-only or the new Serb regime took control of all the

19 vital facilities in the Samac district, didn't they?

20 A. I do not know what do you mean by vital facilities but that the

21 complete control of power was in their hands, well, one part of the

22 municipality of Samac, from an earlier period, that's the fact, but I know

23 what I consider to be vital facilities in Samac myself.

24 Q. All right. Well, I must confess I too have a difficulty with what

25 vital facilities means and I thought that it might be a term that was

1 commonly used but I won't use that one any more. I'll just confine it to

2 total control of the municipality. Those armed Serb forces took control

3 and installed a Serb-only regime which then took total control of Samac.

4 That's correct, isn't it?

5 MR. LAZAREVIC: I believe that the witness in his answer already

6 gave one part of municipality of Samac. This is what he said in his

7 answer. So after that stating that it was the whole municipality, this is

8 something different to what the witness gave as his answer. His previous

9 answer. Here maybe I can clarify this. On page 73, on line 6, one part

10 of the municipality of Samac. This is what the witness answered. And now

11 again we are asking about the whole municipality of Bosanski Samac.

12 [Trial Chamber confers]

13 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Yes. Mr. Lazarevic, referring to Mr. Zaric's

14 answer, page 73, lines 5 to 8, I don't find the answer that clear because

15 he talks about one part of the municipality of Samac, from an earlier

16 period. That's the fact.

17 Frankly, I'm not too certain what that means so maybe Mr. Re can

18 clarify that in some way for us.

19 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes, of course, but Your Honour I believe that I

20 understand completely what is -- what was it about. We are talking about

21 two municipalities here. The pre-war municipality of Samac and then the

22 municipality of Samac, Serb municipality of Samac, that existed during

23 war. And then we have a third municipality of Samac that became into

24 existence after -- after the Dayton peace agreement, and all right. A

25 little bit earlier. All right. I'm corrected by Mr. Pisarevic.

1 Definitely what we know from the testimony of Prosecution

2 witnesses is that some parts of the pre-war municipality of Bosanski

3 Samac, such as village of Prud, then Domaljevac, Bazik and some other

4 settlements inhabited by Croats, were actually never, never occupied by

5 Serb forces, and this is the meaning of the answer so quoting him that

6 whole municipality of Bosanski Samac and putting this to the witness is

7 simply confusing him, because he was referring obviously to some part of

8 pre-war municipality.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The explanation is I think in accordance with

10 what the evidence has been and I think it's better to be precise.

11 MR. RE: I'll rephrase the question.

12 Q. Mr. Zaric, all I'm asking you is -- will Your Honours just excuse

13 me for a moment? The question has entirely gone.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

15 [Prosecution counsel confer]

16 MR. RE:

17 Q. I think what I was asking you a moment ago was that the takeover

18 led by armed Serb forces installed a Serb-only government or regime which

19 then assumed control of a large portion of the pre-war municipality of

20 Bosanski Samac, and when I say control, I mean total control.

21 A. When you say total control is a disputable word. The portion of

22 the municipality of Bosanski Samac which were held after the 17th by Serb

23 forces was under the control of Serbs. Aside from one part of the former

24 municipality of Samac, which was under control of the forces of the HVO

25 comprised by the Croatian Muslim corps.

1 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Previous interpretation continues] ... according

2 to what I heard that Mr. Zaric said on page 75 line 6: "When you say

3 total control is a disputable word." He didn't say that. He said, when

4 you said a large portion, it's a disputable word. This is what I heard

5 that Mr. Zaric said.

6 MR. RE:

7 Q. What I'm getting at is when the Serb -- the armed Serb forces took

8 control of those parts of the pre-war Bosanski Samac municipality, they

9 installed their own regime and introduced and implemented a series of

10 discriminatory policies against non-Serbs, didn't they?

11 A. This Honourable Trial Chamber has to evaluate if everything took

12 place the way you're trying to suggest but the authorities are in the

13 territory of the municipality of Samac, which was under the control of the

14 Serb forces, which remained under the control of the Serb forces, took

15 certain measures according to some regulations which were established by

16 the Republika Srpska as the new entity. That is a fact. Now, if all

17 these measures were such as you're saying, that's disputable. I believe

18 that all the measures that were applied by the Serbian authorities did not

19 have a discriminatory character.

20 Q. No, sir. I'm not suggesting all of the measures but a little

21 earlier before the break, you agreed with me that the arrests and

22 detentions, the confinement in inhumane conditions and so on were all

23 discriminatory or persecutory against the non-Serbs. You're not going

24 back on that answer now, are you, sir?

25 A. No. I do not wish to go back to that but I wanted to give short

1 answers to the questions you were posing, and I was expecting you to ask

2 me what I think, and why those arrests took place but I'm not disputing

3 the fact one single moment that those people who were detained were

4 exposed to torture and to everything else that you've mentioned earlier.

5 Q. You said that the measures that -- I'm sorry, you said that they

6 took certain measures according to some regulations which were established

7 by the Republika Srpska as the new entity. Do I take it from that that

8 you are referring to the arrests, the detentions, the beatings, the

9 confinement under inhumane conditions, the torture? Are you saying that

10 the new Serb authorities did that pursuant to Republika Srpska regulations

11 or --

12 A. Regarding the official documents, ascertaining that, I have never

13 seen emanating from the official authorities of the Republika Srpska. It

14 is uncontestable that all the sufferings and all the crimes that you

15 mentioned is something that happened on the municipality of Samac. I

16 cannot confirm this because I have never seen a document of that kind that

17 somebody from the top would give an order to perform arrest, to a rape, to

18 kill, I have never seen such documents.

19 Q. But you're certainly not aware of any punishment or inquiry being

20 directed by the Republika Srpska organs of government in relation to

21 arrests, torture, detention, beatings, of people only because of their

22 ethnicity, are you, Mr. Zaric, that occurred in Bosanski Samac? You're

23 not aware of that, are you?

24 A. During that first period, such an activity is not known to me.

25 Q. That's because, Mr. Zaric, it just didn't happen, did it? The

1 Republika Srpska organs of government just did not do anything to punish

2 those who committed those terrible crimes in Bosanski Samac in 1992 and

3 1993, did they?

4 A. I only know because I have heard, that a certain number of

5 detainees who were in Bosanski Samac were sent through the military court

6 in Bijeljina or were tried there and that some civilian military tribunals

7 heard cases and persecuted people who committed crimes in 1992 and 1993,

8 but I had not any particular knowledge of that. Maybe some things

9 occurred for which I had no knowledge, but I do not know that anybody was

10 doing anything in that direction.

11 Q. Mr. Zaric, it was well known at the time that Crni and Lugar and

12 the paramilitaries were responsible for the Crkvina massacre, wasn't it?

13 If you want to give a short answer, you can give a short answer for that

14 one.

15 A. I know for Lugar and another member, I cannot generalise because

16 it was just a few people. I know that those two men participated in that

17 massacre but I cannot say that generally speaking it relates to all the

18 specials, because only two men committed such crimes, or Lugar himself, so

19 one can put this crime -- link this crime to him. Whether Crni was there,

20 I do not know.

21 Q. Mr. Zaric, you went to Belgrade to speak to some very important

22 people about this particular massacre --

23 MR. LAZAREVIC: I apologise, but the answer was not properly

24 recorded. Mr. Zaric said, as for Crni, I can confirm to you that he was a

25 chief of Lugar. This is what he said, and here we said, whether Crni was

1 there, I do not know and there was one sentence after that that wasn't

2 recorded. Maybe this --

3 JUDGE MUMBA: I think it's better that he repeats the answer.

4 Then we get it all in.

5 MR. RE:

6 Q. Could you please, possibly, Mr. Zaric, repeat the answer to the

7 question? The question was -- my question was, it was well known at the

8 time that Crni and Lugar and the paramilitaries were responsible for the

9 Crkvina massacre, wasn't it? It just wasn't clearly interpreted.

10 A. The crime in Crkvina was committed by Slobodan Miljkovic, also

11 known as Lugar. This is the information that I had, and it is

12 indisputable that he was a member of the team of volunteers which

13 [Realtime transcript read in error "245"] was headed and brought to our

14 area by Dragan Djordjevic, also known as Crni. And by that, he is also

15 held responsible. So if that is the case, then obviously, you are correct

16 when you say that these two men committed the crime.

17 MR. LAZAREVIC: This number, I apologise, 245, on page 78, line

18 21, I don't know what it stands for and it is not what Mr. Zaric

19 mentioned.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. It wasn't mentioned so it's just one of those

21 things that I think that popped up. You can continue, Mr. Re.

22 MR. RE: Thank you, Your Honour.

23 Q. Look, Mr. Zaric, what I'm just asking you about quite simply is

24 you know that the perpetrators of that massacre were never brought to

25 justice by Republika Srpska authorities, were they?

1 A. That is a fact, a fact that I'm aware of.

2 Q. It's also a fact that Mr. Todorovic and Mr. Milan Simic were never

3 brought to justice by Republika Srpska authorities for the horrendous

4 crimes they committed in Bosanski Samac and admitted to before this

5 Tribunal? That's a fact, isn't it?

6 A. They were never tried. No proceedings were ever instigated

7 against them.

8 Q. It was of course a matter of common knowledge throughout Samac

9 what had happened at Crkvina and what had happened in the detention

10 centres, wasn't it? The arrests, the beatings, the tortures, the murders,

11 it was common knowledge in Bosanski Samac, wasn't it?

12 A. Maybe at the beginning, this information was available to fewer

13 people, but as time went by, I believe that this information was available

14 across the board to all of us who lived in the area.

15 Q. Of course, in 1992, 3, 4, 5, 6 and so on, there has been a justice

16 system with a police force, and functioning courts, in the Republika

17 Srpska?

18 A. Yes. As far as I know, there has -- there have been such things.

19 Q. And a massacre of 16 people is no small matter in any part of the

20 world, is it, sir?

21 A. I agree with you.

22 Q. Nothing that you know of prevented the civilian authorities or the

23 military authorities at any time after the 7th of May, 1992, from

24 investigating the Crkvina massacre and bringing to justice those

25 responsible for it?

1 MR. LAZAREVIC: First of all, I am objecting to one. First of all

2 we have the date of 8th of May.

3 MR. RE: I object to this. I really do. I really do.

4 MR. LAZAREVIC: Why? Why?

5 JUDGE MUMBA: What is the problem?

6 MR. LAZAREVIC: That the massacre is Crkvina happened on the 8th

7 of May.

8 MR. RE: With respect, that is --

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Let the Prosecution put their case to the

10 witness. He can answer. You don't have to correct them. It's their

11 case. Yes, Mr. Re?

12 MR. RE: May it please, Your Honours.

13 Q. Mr. Zaric, nothing that you know of prevented the civilian

14 authorities or the military authorities at any time after May, 1992, from

15 investigating the Crkvina massacre and bringing to justice those

16 responsible for it, correct?

17 A. I'm not sure. Whether the days following that massacre were

18 conducive to start any proceedings, but that doesn't mean that proceedings

19 should not have been started at some other time. There is no -- these

20 crimes are not time-barred and the investigations are not time-barred,

21 concerning the circumstances when this happened, and who perpetrated it

22 and the fear that we all experienced at the time, I'm not sure whether

23 this was not done only to cover up all that situation, but also because

24 there was a fear amongst official and non-official structure linked to the

25 behaviour of these people [as interpreted]. I agree with you that there

1 is no reason for not instigating proceedings. However, the conditions

2 immediately upon the perpetration of the crime were not conducive to

3 starting the proceedings in a safe and legally regular way.

4 Q. You -- Mr. Pantelic has an objection.

5 MR. PANTELIC: Page 81, line 8, Mr. Zaric did not say the

6 following, "There was a fear amongst official and non-official structures

7 linked to the behaviour of these people." He said, "Because of the

8 behaviour of these people" so maybe we can clarify what these people are

9 and because of the general state of fear due to the actions of this group

10 of people. And this is a really serious mistake here on page 81, line 8,

11 and I first of all would like that Mr. Zaric is speaking slowly, to help

12 our court recorder and our interpreters, and also I know everyone of us

13 are quite tired, it's at the end of the day, but I hope that our friends

14 from interpreter booths will be a little more and better concentrated what

15 was said here. Thank you.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pantelic, you don't have to go that far. So far

17 we've been receiving good services from the supporting staff, including

18 the interpreters. It's just a question of asking the witness to repeat

19 his answer slowly.

20 MR. RE:

21 Q. Mr. Zaric could I just ask you to repeat slowly, as slowly as you

22 can, the bit of your answer about your perception of why the perpetrators

23 of the Crkvina massacre have never been brought to justice by the

24 Republika Srpska authorities?

25 A. I said that I don't dispute the fact that proceedings should have

1 been started against Lugar and others who committed this crime but it is

2 also my opinion that immediately upon this massacre, the preconditions

3 were not created, there were not conditions for a normal legal procedure

4 against them because many formal and informal structures, official and

5 non-official structures, in the territory of municipality of Samac, were

6 afraid of these people who were prepared to commit such a crime, and their

7 behaviour even before Crkvina was very bad, and along the same lines but

8 later on, I believe that these proceedings should have started to -- if

9 for nothing else than for the government to save the face.

10 Q. When I asked you a few moments ago about regulations or decrees

11 emanating from the Republika Srpska, your answer was, "Regarding the

12 official documents, ascertaining that I have never seen emanating from the

13 official authorities of the Republika Srpska, it is incontestable that all

14 the sufferings and crimes that you mentioned are something that happened."

15 I just want to clarify something from your answer. Are you saying that

16 you've never seen anything from the Republika Srpska in relation to

17 discrimination amongst the ethnicities? Or were you saying something

18 else?

19 A. I've never seen a single document that would directly instruct

20 anybody to take discriminatory measures against non-Serbian population.

21 Secondly, I was not in the position to be close to the authorities to see

22 any documents, originals of those documents. All throughout the war I was

23 just a soldier.

24 Q. But -- you'd agree of course or you'd have to that a strategic

25 objective of the Serbian people that was to "establish state borders

1 separating the Serbian people from the other two ethnic communities" was

2 of itself a discriminatory policy or document, wouldn't you?

3 A. Truth be told, that document and those strategic goals within that

4 context as they were expressed and passed allegedly by the People's

5 Assembly of Republika Srpska, I saw that for the first time here when I

6 was brought to detention unit here in The Hague.

7 Q. I'm not asking you about when you first saw it, I'm just asking

8 you to comment on my proposition that a decision sorry, "Decision on

9 strategic objectives of the Serbian people in Bosnia-Herzegovina, which

10 says, "The strategic objectives or priorities of the Serbian people in

11 Bosnia and Herzegovina are to, 1, establish state borders, separating the

12 Serbian people from the other two ethnic communities," you would have to

13 agree, wouldn't you, that that is a discriminatory policy passed by the

14 Bosnian Serb Assembly?

15 A. I remember this document because it was an object of the testimony

16 by a number of witnesses. If I was to comment only this position that you

17 have put forward, then one could conclude that it was politically

18 inappropriate and that -- that it led to very severe consequences later

19 on.

20 Q. Yes. Like ethnic cleansing. That's what it led to, didn't it?

21 Or persecution?

22 A. Yes. That is something that was typical of the entire state of

23 Bosnia-Herzegovina, including our Samac, where we were in some of the

24 elements. I'm sure that was the case.

25 Q. You agreed a little earlier that the takeover was a forcible

1 takeover by armed Serb forces of parts of municipality. You'd also agree,

2 don't you, that as a result of that takeover, the authorities or the new

3 regime, allowed looting of the property of non-Serbs to occur, wouldn't

4 you?

5 A. Looting was for everybody plain to see and that is part of every

6 war. There are a lot of crimes committed during the war. Amongst the

7 troops and the civilians, there were individual cases of excesses and

8 there was also some organised looting. That's what I would call it. In

9 other words, looting and robberies were an integral part of what one may

10 call the consequences of the war, that war that raged on the territory of

11 Samac municipality.

12 Q. This organised looting was condoned by the new regime, wasn't it?

13 A. I saw certain things from my own perspective as a human being, and

14 I gave them the name that I gave them. I don't know, and I didn't know

15 then, that these negative phenomena were investigated. I personally did

16 not investigate any case of robbery and I can't give you any reliable

17 information that this was organised or backed by the authorities or

18 whether it was an individual phenomenon committed by individual criminals.

19 However, the way I perceived things, I perceived them as something that

20 was generally happening and that's the way I explained it here.

21 Q. Mr. Zaric, non-Serb property was looted, including dwellings,

22 businesses, personal properties, and livestock, wasn't it, in 1992 and

23 1993? Just concentrate on non-Serb, if you please.

24 A. It is correct that during this period and especially during 1992,

25 the cases of the number of robbery cases increased.

1 Q. Well, the question I was asking you was during 1992 and 1993,

2 non-Serb property was looted, including dwellings, businesses, personal

3 property, and livestock?

4 A. Yes. This indeed did happen.

5 Q. And it was organised looting, some of it was organised looting by

6 Serb forces in control of parts of the municipality. You agree with that,

7 don't you? You've only got to go to P127, the 13 signatories, where you

8 and the other members of the Posavina command referred to organised

9 looting. It was the document you spent two months researching.

10 A. Yes. But I did confirm that there was organised looting, there

11 was also individual looting. I don't know what else do you want me to say

12 to fully answer your question.

13 Q. As far as you know, this organised looting of non-Serb businesses,

14 dwellings, personal property and livestock was directed at the property of

15 non-Serbs because they were non-Serbs, wasn't it?

16 A. I know that most of the assets plundered by non-Serbs, but there

17 was also looting by some abandoned Serbian territories, so it is not

18 disputable that most of the looting was done in the villages abandoned by

19 non-Serbs.

20 Q. The looting, the organised looting, by Serbian authorities or Serb

21 authorities was directed at non-Serb -- or sorry, property owned by

22 non-Serbs because they were non-Serbs. That is, it was an ethnically

23 based looting, wasn't it?

24 A. A crime does not have borders of that sort. When I spoke about

25 plunder, I was speaking about Odzak municipality. I had a very decisive

1 opinion about that. I even gave you some examples to illustrate that.

2 Maybe it would be good to look at this thing separately, and to look

3 separately at the municipality of Samac and the municipality of Odzak. I

4 remember that this is exactly what I said to your colleagues

5 investigators, in 1998.

6 Q. We may come back to that at some other point. I just want to ask

7 you about the people who were living in pre-war Samac and you've already

8 said that there was statistically a non-Serb majority at the time of the

9 takeover. You don't deny, do you, that women and children and elderly

10 people were moved from their homes and villages by force, intimidation and

11 coercion, those people were non-Serbs? You don't deny that, do you?

12 A. I don't deny that, but those who left, they did not all leave by

13 force.

14 Q. No. There were a number of ways people could leave Samac during

15 the war. People could swim across the river, couldn't they?

16 A. Yes. That was one of the ways but they could also go to the Red

17 Cross, they could register there, and they could express their wish to

18 leave. That was another way.

19 Q. Yes, they could also get themselves some false identity papers and

20 go off through Serbia. That was another way, wasn't it?

21 A. Yes, absolutely.

22 Q. And of course, the people who were held for long periods of time

23 in the schools, or the SUP or the TO, and subjected to extremely inhumane

24 conditions, who were offered the chance of leaving by exchange, you don't

25 suggest that those who went by exchange were leaving voluntarily, do you?

1 Having heard the evidence of the victims and witnesses who testified here

2 about the reasons they left Bosanski Samac.

3 A. Well, you're talking about this group of people, and between --

4 when one is between a rock and a hard place, I believe that they left for

5 these reasons, as you have just mentioned. If I had been in their shoes,

6 I would have left as well. That's how my relatives left Odzak.

7 Q. And because their arrest and detention was only on ethnic grounds,

8 their reason for leaving assisted by the Serb authorities was also on

9 ethnic grounds, wasn't it? Maybe that question is not very clear. If I

10 could perhaps rephrase it.

11 What I'm saying is you've already agreed that the arrest and

12 detention of hundreds of people occurred only because of ethnicity. The

13 people who you've just agreed left because they were between a rock and a

14 hard place, they left with the assistance of the non -- Serb authorities.

15 One of the reasons the non-Serb authorities assisted them to leave was on

16 ethnic grounds to remove these people from Bosanski Samac.

17 A. The reason why people were detained, whether I agree with that or

18 not, was not only because they were Croats and Muslims, but also because

19 many of them possessed illegal weapons, and before the beginning of the

20 conflict, they belonged to paramilitary formations such as the HVO and the

21 Muslim forces, and they showed hostility towards the Serbian people, and

22 this is an indisputable fact.

23 Q. I'll just go back to what I was asking you, and that is this, the

24 people who were arrested and detained, you've already agreed were treated

25 and subjected to the most inhumane conditions, whatever crime they may

1 have committed, and you've agreed they were Muslims, predominantly Muslims

2 and Serbs [sic], and the people in the schools were given a choice of

3 going to an exchange and leaving or remaining behind and being subjected

4 to discrimination that was occurring. In those circumstances, their

5 leaving wasn't voluntary, was it?

6 A. It seems to me that you have mentioned that Croats and Serbs were

7 detained or Muslims and Serbs. The persons who were detained were Croats

8 and Muslims. That is one small correction.

9 Q. I'm corrected. I meant Croats. I apologise.

10 A. And as -- yes, you meant Muslims and Croats. I agree with you

11 that they did not leave of their own will, that it was not their whim to

12 leave Samac. They left because of the conditions that they were subjected

13 to, they were detained. Let's put aside whether they were responsible of

14 any crimes, but in light of the treatment they were subjected to in the

15 detention centres, I agree that the best choice for them was to leave this

16 area. Those who decided to remain in Samac later on were not exposed to

17 any discrimination or to be more precise, I don't know of any such case,

18 and that is a fact.

19 Q. But those who left, as you have just said, because of the

20 conditions they were subjected to and their detention, and their best

21 choice was to leave, you agree that the circumstances of their leaving was

22 discriminatory, wasn't it? This forcing, this lack of choice, that was

23 discriminatory, wasn't it?

24 A. I believe that while they were detained, they were subjected to

25 all sorts of discriminatory methods, they were beaten, they were exposed

1 to all sorts of suffering, they were not given enough food and so on and

2 so forth. We've heard testimonies here that I don't want to question

3 because I did not participate in any of the exchanges, and I did not talk

4 to the people who were given the opportunity to say during the exchange

5 whether they wished to return or not. They were asked what they wanted to

6 do and they expressed their opinion, they expressed their wishes. As a

7 human being I understand the reasons for which many of them did not want

8 to go back. I absolutely appreciate the reasons for which they didn't

9 want to go back.

10 Q. What I'm asking you was or suggesting to you, this forcing or this

11 lack of choice for those people who left in that way was discriminatory,

12 wasn't it?

13 A. Are you trying to force the answer out of me? I don't know

14 whether that is fair. But I try to give you my sincere answer in my

15 previous sentence. I tried to be as sincere as I possibly could.

16 Q. Well, are you saying that the circumstances of their leaving, as

17 you've just explained, isn't discriminatory?

18 MR. LAZAREVIC: I believe that the witness already gave his

19 answer. If you want to force him to give you certain answer that you have

20 in your mind, maybe, I don't know, maybe -- I don't think it's

21 appropriate.

22 MR. RE: I press the question. I've asked the question, a

23 specific part of the question. Mr. Zaric just hasn't answered it. He can

24 answer it but he hasn't. I press that part of the answer. His view was

25 that discriminatory, given in light of all the evidence he's given over

1 the last eight days.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, but his answer earlier in which he has

3 explained in my view is sufficient. I think it's a question of

4 conclusion.

5 MR. RE: That's right. I'm asking him to draw a conclusion based

6 upon what he saw and what he heard. And his experiences there. He's

7 already expressed opinion on other aspects, other things that happened in

8 Samac as being discriminatory. I'm merely asking him in relation to the

9 departures, that's all. It's just another aspect of what he's already

10 agreed to.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Well, yes, perhaps he can answer.

12 MR. RE:

13 Q. Mr. Zaric, Her Honour said perhaps you could answer.

14 A. Then I'll repeat what I've already stated. I believe that people

15 who had been detained and who had been exposed to all the torture, ill

16 treatment, malnutrition, poor conditions, I believe that those were

17 discriminatory conditions while they were detained. The act of their

18 departure, either through the local or International Red Cross, and the

19 opportunity given to them to say whether they wanted to leave or not, I

20 cannot say that this is an act of discrimination. On the other hand, I

21 fully appreciate the reasons for which the majority of them decided to say

22 no, "I'm not going back to Bosanski Samac."

23 JUDGE MUMBA: We shall adjourn.

24 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour, before we adjourn, just for the

25 record, I don't want to be misunderstood with my comment regarding the

1 issue of the translation. I reiterate again that I'm very grateful to our

2 friends and colleagues from interpreter unit and also court recording, so

3 that there is no misunderstanding there.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. Yes.

5 The Trial Chamber has been looking at the sitting hours, in view

6 of the medical reports that the Trial Chamber has received, which have

7 been filed and I'm sure the parties have seen them. The Trial Chamber is

8 only asking the parties to sit extended hours for tomorrow, Monday and

9 Tuesday, in order to try and complete the evidence of Mr. Simo Zaric. I'm

10 sure that it's also in his interest to get over with it. So the extended

11 hours will be only with regard to tomorrow, when we are sitting morning

12 and then one and a half hours in the afternoon and Monday and Tuesday.

13 And the break will be half an hour to accommodate the request of the

14 accused persons. That is when we finished sitting at 1345 we will

15 continue our proceedings in the afternoon at 1445 up to about -- 1415 up

16 to about 1545, that is Friday, Monday and Tuesday and hopefully, Mr. Zaric

17 will complete his evidence, including re-examination. We will rise now

18 and continue our proceedings tomorrow.

19 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at

20 7.03 p.m., to be reconvened on Friday,

21 the 16th day of May, 2003, at 9.00 a.m.

22

23

24

25