Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 11962

1 Friday, 7 February 2003

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 1.09 p.m.

5 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Good afternoon. Please be seated. And may we

6 hear the case number, please.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon. This is Case Number IT-97-24-T,

8 the Prosecutor versus Milomir Stakic.

9 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you. And the appearances.

10 MS. SUTHERLAND: Good afternoon, Your Honour. Ann Sutherland with

11 Ruth Karper for the Def -- Prosecution.

12 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Okay. For the real Defence.

13 MR. OSTOJIC: Good afternoon, Your Honours. John Ostojic and our

14 case manager, Danilo Cirkovic, on behalf of Dr. Stakic.

15 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you. Then any issues to be discussed

16 before we start?

17 MR. OSTOJIC: Your Honour, there are a couple issues I'd like to

18 raise with the Court. I'd like to do it, though, after this witness just

19 so we could perhaps conclude him. They don't involve this witness, but

20 there are two separate issues that I'd like to raise when it's convenient.

21 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Okay. Let's proceed this way.

22 Prosecution, any issues to be discussed?

23 MS. SUTHERLAND: No, Your Honour, not in relation to this witness.

24 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you. May I then ask the usher to escort

25 the witness into the courtroom.

Page 11963

1 [The witness entered court]

2 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Good afternoon, sir.

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: You are prepared to continue with the

5 examination?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I am.

7 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: The floor is yours, Mr. Ostojic.

8 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Your Honour.


10 [Witness answered through interpreter]

11 Examined by Mr. Ostojic: [Continued]

12 Q. Good afternoon once again, Mr. Rosic. My name is John Ostojic

13 along with Danilo Cirkovic; we represent Dr. Stakic. Once again, thank

14 you for your patience. I only have a couple of areas that I hope to cover

15 with you this afternoon, and then the representation and the Office of the

16 Prosecution will conduct their examination, as will the Honourable Court.

17 I'd like to clarify two points. One involves the travel that you

18 conducted from Omarska to the city/town of Prijedor. Can you share with

19 us if during those travels, you encountered or saw any barricades or

20 checkpoints.

21 A. Well, barricades along the Prijedor/Banja Luka main road appeared

22 as early as April. I saw them in April, not on the road itself but by the

23 side of the road. However, as early as May, barricades were set up along

24 the road itself. Those were old trailers for trucks, and then there were

25 obstacles made of iron.

Page 11964

1 Q. Now, the road that leads -- or the road of Banja Luka/Prijedor

2 that leads into Prijedor, can you just name or identify several towns or

3 villages that appear along that road.

4 A. After Omarska, there is Lamovita, Kamicani, Kozarac, Kozarusa,

5 Orlovaca, and Prijedor, which means that when you set out from Omarska in

6 the direction of Prijedor, at 6 kilometres, you come across Kamicani,

7 which is a predominantly Muslim village. Then there are Kozarac and

8 Kozarusa. And then on to as far as 3 kilometres just outside Prijedor,

9 those are predominantly Muslim villages.

10 Q. And share with us, if you would, whether or not the checkpoints

11 and barricades that you observed were within the towns which were

12 populated predominantly by Muslims; namely, I'm interested in Kozarac and

13 Kozarusa. Do you recall, sir, seeing the barricades while in those towns

14 specifically prior to April 30th, 1992?

15 A. Yes, I remember that. In Kozarusa, if you come in from the

16 direction of Prijedor, in the village of Kozarusa itself, that's on the

17 road at a junction where the road forks off in the direction of Kozarac.

18 There was -- in the direction of Kozarusa, there was a barricade next to

19 the road itself. I wasn't -- I was passing every day, and I saw other

20 things that were even more unusual. People were preparing to block the

21 road. The same thing in the village, when you go from Omarska in Kozarac

22 at the junction, there was a container that had been put there, a metal

23 container used mostly in offices. But there was something there that

24 hadn't been there up to that point, and in Kamicani, too, I noticed,

25 that's about 6 kilometres from Omarska itself.

Page 11965

1 Q. Sir, to the best of your recollection, do you know the individuals

2 who --

3 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

4 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you.

5 Q. Sir, to the best of your recollection, do you know whether or not

6 the individuals who were at these checkpoints and barricades in Kamicani,

7 Kozarac, and Kozarusa, whether they were armed?

8 A. Well, I can say that they were armed, yes. By coincidence, it was

9 exactly at the checkpoint in Kozarusa, a colleague, a driver who worked

10 for communal services was one of the people manning the checkpoint in

11 Kozarusa. I knew this person. I knew him personally. Of course, they

12 were armed. He was carrying a hunting rifle, a double-barrel hunting

13 rifle.

14 Q. Can you, sir, tell us the name of this individual, or would you

15 rather that we go into private session to identify him?

16 MR. OSTOJIC: If I'm permitted to invite the witness to make that

17 decision, Your Honour.

18 A. I don't mind. I can also proceed in open session. Sead Causevic,

19 that's his name. His father's name is Saban. I know this man.


21 Q. And this individual, Mr. Causevic, he worked with you in the

22 Department of Communal Services. Correct?

23 A. Yes, that's correct. He was a driver for communal services. And

24 before the war, he had -- he was in charge of special tasks. He was in

25 charge of catching and killing stray dogs and cats around the town of

Page 11966

1 Prijedor. That was his service. Even back then, he had a weapon and a

2 license for that weapon issued by communal services. Communal services

3 would issue a weapon to people who were in charge of these tasks I have

4 described. As early as the beginning of April, he stopped coming to work,

5 and he never returned the weapon that he had signed for.

6 Q. And -- thank you for that. And that is my follow-up question. As

7 an employee of the Department of Communal Services, was Mr. Causevic

8 terminated, dismissed from his employment, or did he voluntarily resign?

9 A. He left of his own free will. I think in early April, and he

10 never returned to the company where he used to work.

11 Q. Sir, to the best of your knowledge and recollection, do you know

12 why he resigned voluntarily as an employee from the Department of Communal

13 Services?

14 A. I don't think I could tell you why exactly, but he was a member of

15 the SDA. And even during the pre-election campaign, he was working with

16 the SDS [as interpreted]. So I really don't know the exact reason why he

17 voluntarily resigned.

18 Q. Just so we're clear, for Your Honours, on page 5, line 16, I think

19 the witness said SDA. It appears that way immediately above that. But

20 the translator apparently heard SDS, that he was working with the SDS.

21 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I think the best way to correct this is to ask

22 the same question a second time.

23 MR. OSTOJIC: Okay, I will. If you don't mind, Your Honour, can I

24 just clarify that issue with him in the manner which I think is

25 appropriate?

Page 11967

1 Q. Mr. Rosic, just to clarify a point because we're having some

2 trouble with the translation, it states here that you mentioned that:

3 "And even during the pre-election campaign, he - and I'm inserting I think

4 you're talking about Mr. Causevic - was working with the SDS."

5 Was Mr. Causevic working with the SDS?

6 A. No. No. He was working for the SDA, not the SDS. SDA.

7 Q. I understand. Thank you. I'd like to turn to a different issue,

8 if I may, sir. In late 1992, are you familiar with any action that was

9 commenced relating to Dr. Stakic and removing him as being president of

10 the Municipal Assembly of the Prijedor Municipality?

11 A. I did hear about that, but I can't remember the exact date. I

12 can't remember the exact date. Maybe it was in late 1992. However, word

13 was around Prijedor that deputy Srdjo Srdic was saying that Stakic was not

14 fit for his job, that he could no longer keep the same position. So the

15 secretary of the SDS, Simo Miskovic, was negotiating with Srdjo Srdic to

16 remove Dr. Stakic from his position. And he was removed, but I can't

17 remember exactly whether it was still in 1992 or 1993. However, I know it

18 for a fact they were talking about Dr. Stakic not being fit to keep that

19 position.

20 Q. Thank you, Mr. Rosic.

21 MR. OSTOJIC: That's all the questions we have at this time.

22 Thank you, Your Honours.

23 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May I ask the Prosecution, proceed with the

24 cross-examination. Ms. Sutherland, please.

25 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you, Your Honour.

Page 11968

1 Cross-examined by Ms. Sutherland:

2 Q. Mr. Rosic, a moment ago you said that prior to the 30th of April,

3 1992, you saw barricades and checkpoints by the side of the road of Muslim

4 villages between Omarska and Prijedor. And you said that the persons at

5 these checkpoints were armed. They were mixed checkpoints, were they not?

6 A. I don't know whether they were mixed or not. I can't claim what

7 the exact nature of those checkpoints was. I know that there were

8 checkpoints there.

9 Q. There were also checkpoints in Serb villages, for example,

10 Orlovci?

11 A. Yes, in Orlovci, too.

12 Q. I want to turn now to some topics that you gave evidence about

13 yesterday. Are you aware of the exact legal relationship between the

14 Municipal Assembly and its executive council?

15 A. The Municipal Assembly, I believe, are people who have been

16 elected, deputies. And the executive body of government is the Executive

17 Board of the Municipal Assembly. The Executive Board which then has a

18 number of ministries and work units depending on the area of activity.

19 Q. You're not aware of the exact legal relationship in relation to

20 delegated authority and power, are you?

21 A. I'm afraid I'm not able to explain that.

22 Q. Is it true that housing is linked to employment? So, for example,

23 if - and I'm moving now to another topic - if you're employed by a

24 company, and you lose your employment, isn't it also true that you would

25 lose your housing?

Page 11969

1 MR. OSTOJIC: Let me object to the form of the question -- pardon

2 me. If I can object to the form of the question, Your Honour. I'm not

3 sure if she is talking in what time frame, and I'd hate to speculate. And

4 she could just preface for us if it's current, before 1992, during the

5 Federal Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia, or during the period within the

6 parametres of the indictment.

7 MS. SUTHERLAND: I'll take it in two stages.

8 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Please proceed.


10 Q. Sir, under SFRY law, if you lost your employment, you would also

11 then lose your house, would you not?

12 A. No.

13 Q. If your housing was linked to your job, if your housing was

14 provided by your employer, is it not correct that if you lost your job,

15 you would also then lose your house?

16 A. No. The housing would be completely unrelated if you lost your

17 job. It didn't necessarily mean you would lose your flat.

18 Q. Even if it was provided by your employer whom you no longer worked

19 for?

20 A. Yes, same thing. He may have fired me, my employer, but he

21 couldn't take my flat from me. So I was still free to use and entitled to

22 use the flat. No one could take your flat, your house, away from you.

23 Having been fired made no difference.

24 Q. I think I'll move on.

25 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Maybe the witness should have a chance to

Page 11970

1 rethink his answer. Maybe the answer is not plausible, and maybe you even

2 have misunderstood the question.

3 Given the case your employer is the owner of the house you're

4 living in and then you're fired, wouldn't be at the same time that you

5 would have to leave this house or this flat owned by your employer as a

6 fired employee?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think I understood the question

8 fully. If I, for example, worked for a certain company and the company

9 fired me, I left this company and I went to a different company and found

10 a job in this other company, but I kept my right to stay in the same flat

11 that I had been in before. No one could take that right away from me.

12 That was all according to regulations of the former Yugoslavia. I was

13 allowed and entitled even to keep my flat.

14 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Ms. Sutherland, please move on.

15 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you, Your Honour.

16 Q. Mr. Rosic, you, in 1992, were not a member of the SDS, were you?

17 A. That's right, I wasn't. I wasn't, no. I wasn't that in 1992 or

18 before 1992 or after it, nor am I today. I still do not belong to any

19 party.

20 Q. In 1990, were you a member of the reformist party?

21 A. Reformist, no. No, I was never a member of any party.

22 Q. You mentioned yesterday that Dr. Stakic had a brother. What is

23 his name?

24 A. People call him Baco. But his name is -- I wouldn't really know

25 because we all call him Baco, Baco Stakic. Everybody refers to him that

Page 11971

1 way.

2 Q. Did he work at the iron ore mine? No, or you don't know?

3 A. No, I'm sure. No, he did not work there, I'm sure. He worked in

4 Rijeka as far as I know and came back sometime in 1991. I'm not sure

5 about that. What I do know, however, is that he did not work in the mine.

6 Q. So you're not aware that his brother was called Milorad Stakic?

7 A. Could be. We all call him Baco. This is his pet name, his

8 nickname. And that is how I know him.

9 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Sorry to intervene once again. As a member of

10 the family, please concentrate on the question. The question clearly was

11 the name of the brother of Dr. Stakic, Milorad Stakic, yes or no? Because

12 there is a strong likelihood that you, in fact, know the name.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could be Milomir or Milorad. I

14 mean, I can't remember perhaps because we all called him Baco.

15 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Sir, this is not a guessing game. You are under

16 a solemn declaration. And please don't try to tell us that the brother

17 has the same name as Dr. Milomir Stakic. I'm quite sure you know the name

18 of the brother.

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I never said they had the same

20 name. Milomir and Milorad are two different ones. But whether he's

21 Milorad, I cannot really say positively, and that is why I said only

22 Baco. But that is not his name; that is his nickname. That is people

23 call him.

24 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Sir, a final attempt, and please be aware that

25 you're under solemn declaration: What is the name of the brother of

Page 11972

1 Dr. Milomir Stakic?

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't tell you. I can't say

3 positively something that I do not know. I know they call him Baco. If

4 you show me his photograph, I'll tell you yes, that's he. But otherwise

5 anything that I might say would be -- would be incorrect. I don't know.

6 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Please proceed, Ms. Sutherland.


8 Q. Mr. Rosic, when were you first asked to testify in this case?

9 A. Could have been about a year ago.

10 Q. And as a distant relative of Dr. Stakic, you're not happy to find

11 him on trial, are you?

12 A. Of course I'm not happy. Quite naturally, I can't be happy.

13 Q. Sir, you testified yesterday that after the 30th of May, 1992,

14 your work unit had to clean up the area of Prijedor after the attack. It

15 was predominantly Muslim houses that had been destroyed and burnt and

16 looted during this attack, wasn't it?

17 A. No. To that area where the Muslim houses were, we never went

18 there. We were cleaning up parts of the town between buildings,

19 structures, major ones. But we never went into localities. It was our

20 priority to clean up the centre of the town. And we also did it manually

21 because we had no mechanical devices. All we had was a truck that we

22 loaded things on to. Otherwise, we didn't have anything. And all this

23 was rubbish, glass, shattered glass shards and things like that.

24 Q. What sort of buildings were you cleaning up?

25 A. We did not clean up buildings. Next to the buildings, the centre

Page 11973

1 around buildings, next to the buildings, the pavements, parks, streets.

2 But we did not go into those localities where private small houses

3 predominate. We did not go to those areas.

4 Q. Did you see damage to Muslim settlements in Prijedor?

5 A. I did, yes. I did see that, but I didn't go in. What one could

6 see with the naked eye, I saw that there were houses destroyed and...

7 Q. Did you also see the destruction of Stari Grad settlement?

8 A. Yes, I did, but from a distance of about 50 to 100 metres because

9 there is a brook there I didn't cross over.

10 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Please continue.

11 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I would like to go into private

12 session for a moment.

13 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I can see no objections. Private session,

14 please.

15 [Private session]

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 11974

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 [Open session]

21 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May I ask the usher to show the witness out of

22 the bundle, Madam Registrar, please help me, the exhibit number, S235-9.

23 Questioned by the Court:

24 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Could you please explain what document this is

25 you can find on the ELMO right now.

Page 11975

1 A. Jahorina insurance policy.

2 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: And the name?

3 A. I can see "Mil."

4 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: You need not look on the --

5 A. Stakic, Stakic. Milorad. Milorad, yes.

6 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: If it's easier for you, you may look on the

7 document on your right-hand side, please.

8 A. Yes, Stakic, Milorad. Prijedor.

9 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: And the name -- and the place and date of birth?

10 A. 8th of January, 1958, 1958.

11 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: So who would be this person? Would it be a

12 relative of yours?

13 A. Could be. Born in 1958. Could be.

14 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Do you know the age of the brother of

15 Dr. Stakic?

16 THE INTERPRETER: We couldn't hear the witness's answer.

17 A. I think he's younger than Dr. Stakic.

18 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Could it be that he's born actually in 1958?

19 A. I think he's younger than that. 1960-something rather.

20 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Where does the brother live in the moment?

21 A. Now he lives in Prijedor.

22 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: And please, what is the address?

23 A. I wouldn't know the name of the street, but he's in Prijedor, and

24 it's a building behind the electric facility. I don't know exactly what

25 the street is called.

Page 11976

1 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: And please, once again, have a look on this

2 document, you can see an address as well. Could you please read this

3 address aloud.

4 A. This is Prijedor, Raskovica 53, I think, or is it 20 -- but it's

5 Raskovica. The street is Raskavica. No, he's not in that street.

6 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Do you know another member of the family of

7 Dr. Stakic with the name of Milorad Stakic?

8 A. There is one Mico Stakic. He's a relative.

9 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I think my question was clear enough. Is there

10 another member of the family of Dr. Stakic with the name of Milorad

11 Stakic?

12 A. Yes. I mean, in his family, his brother and he, they are first --

13 brothers of the first blood. But there are also other related Stakics.

14 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I have to ask the same question for the third

15 time: Is there any other member of the family of Dr. Stakic with the name

16 of Milorad Stakic?

17 A. There are -- the members of the family are he and his brother.

18 But he has relatives who share the surname Stakic but who are more removed

19 relatives.

20 MR. OSTOJIC: Your Honour, if I may just ask the interpreter just

21 to review the videotape because I think the witness answered slightly

22 differently and said in the beginning of his comment "ne postoji." And I

23 think he answered the Court's question even prior to that. So I would

24 just ask them to look at that issue or just mark it in the record and we

25 could view it at a later time.

Page 11977

1 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: In this case, the formal procedure would be a

2 written request for review of the video.

3 Having seen now this document, the address, the name of -- the

4 date of birth, did you ever discuss the fate of Dr. Stakic with his

5 brother as a member of the family, that he's arrested here in The Hague?

6 A. No, I didn't. I never talked with him about -- that is, we don't

7 see each other often, and it is usually in passing, so that I was never

8 with him to talk about the fate.

9 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Did you ever try to call him by telephone to

10 know what's happening with this person you were acquainted with, person

11 who is a member of your family, your neighbour?

12 A. Why, I didn't by telephone or -- by telephone or -- I don't even

13 know his number. And we only communicate with the father, father Milan

14 and mother Mira. And since he's in Prijedor, I'm in Omarska, so when I go

15 to work or come back, I sometimes meet him.

16 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat the end of his

17 sentence.

18 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May I ask you to speak up or more loudly,

19 please, because it's extremely difficult for the interpreters and also for

20 us to follow you. And could you please repeat the end of your last

21 sentence on the question whether you ever contacted him by telephone or --

22 A. No, I did not communicate with him, with Milomir's brother,

23 never. I don't know his number. And on a couple of occasions, I saw him

24 in passing so that I did not communicate with him or rather discuss with

25 him his brother's fate. But I did go to his father Milan, and we talked

Page 11978

1 about it. "What do you think about it?" "Well, I think" --

2 THE INTERPRETER: Again, we could not hear the end of the

3 witness's sentence.

4 A. I have nothing special to say about that.

5 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May I once again ask you to speak up that we and

6 the interpreters can hear your answer.

7 MR. OSTOJIC: Can the usher also please move the microphones

8 forward a little, please, Your Honour. Thank you.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All right.

10 [Trial Chamber confers]

11 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May the witness please be shown S235-71,

12 S235-70.

13 MS. SUTHERLAND: Microphone, Your Honour.

14 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Can you identify the name and can you identify

15 what kind of document this is?

16 A. I can't see very well. The first part, the name is Milorad

17 Stakic, Milorad. Milo -- this is like --

18 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I can understand it's difficult --

19 A. Stakic, Milovan, maybe. Stakic. Profession -- this is unclear to

20 me.

21 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: In order to save time, can you tell us what was

22 the car that was driven by or owned by the brother of Dr. Stakic?

23 A. I don't know. I can't tell you what the car was because I don't

24 know what car he had.

25 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: You know his nickname. You have met you

Page 11979

1 stated --

2 A. Baco. Baco.

3 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes, you know his nickname.

4 A. Yes.

5 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: But you tell us you don't know the car this

6 person owned.

7 A. I don't know.

8 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May the witness please be shown first the other

9 document.

10 A. MP Autotransport Prijedor, Stakic Milorad, 15 December 2000. The

11 type of goods, tech, quantity 12, price nothing, total nothing.

12 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Apparently these documents do not fresh up your

13 recollection one step further.

14 Document S235-81.

15 Can you identify what kind of document this is?

16 A. Yes, this is a traffic license for a vehicle. It's a traffic

17 license -- a traffic license for a vehicle.

18 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: And who is the owner of the car?

19 A. Milorad Stakic. The identity number 2509965160008.

20 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: And the address?

21 A. The address, Jovana Raskovica, no number, Republika Srpska,

22 Prijedor. The date of issuance, 14 December, and this is 19 -- is it a

23 9? I can't see too well. It's 1998, maybe, or maybe 19 -- 10603.


25 A. The data on the first registration, the 14th of December, 1998.

Page 11980

1 Prijedor. Registration plates number 412-K-087.

2 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: And please continue.

3 A. Passenger. Volkswagen. VW Golf. L/3. Metallic green, light.

4 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Does this ring a bell? Have you ever seen the

5 brother of Dr. Stakic with a Volkswagen Golf in this colour?

6 A. No, I don't remember ever having seen him in a green Golf. I can

7 see here that this is a Golf because all the information is about the Golf

8 car. But I don't have any such recollection.

9 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: You said: "I don't remember ever having seen

10 him in a green Golf." What car did you see him?

11 A. I don't remember having seen him in a car. I saw him in passing,

12 but I don't know what car he drove, what car he had come in.

13 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: So then I may finally ask you to first have a

14 look, and then please to read out at least in part, Document S235-14 and

15 15.

16 By the way, do you know the date of birth of Dr. Stakic?

17 A. The date, I don't know.


19 A. I believe that he was born in 1964, as far as I can remember. But

20 I can't be sure of that.

21 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Could you please first tell us what kind of

22 document this is we have before us.

23 A. Please lower down the ELMO so I can see better. This is a

24 decision, Milan, Milomir Stakic from Prijedor. "Mira Milana Tepica Street

25 Number 19, January 1962 in Prijedor. Profession: Physician. Married,

Page 11981

1 two children. A citizen of Republika Srpska with a university degree,

2 high qualification. Monthly salary: 600 German marks." According to his

3 own statement so far without any convictions nor is he under any

4 investigation. He is responsible and accounts for importing into the

5 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia against the provisions of the law on

6 foreign trade Article 88 and Article 89.

7 He imported a passenger vehicle Golf registration plates

8 412-K-087, the year of production, 1981. The number of chassis,

9 WVWZZZI7Z8W258967. The number of engine, GG158224, which has been

10 registered in the name of Milorad Stakic. And he drove the car -- the

11 same car in Belgrade on the 6th of September 2000. By doing that, he

12 committed a violation pursuant to Article 99, paragraph 1, item 1 of the

13 law on traffic misdemeanours.

14 For that, the commission for customs violations of the customs

15 office in Belgrade finds him guilty and punishes him -- and orders him to

16 pay a fine of 3.000 dinars.

17 Shall I continue reading? "The above -- the aforementioned fine

18 shall be paid within 15 days from the day when this decision comes into

19 force. The fine will be paid into the account of the customs office in

20 Belgrade, number 40818-697-5-2619. If the fine is not paid within the

21 deadline and if the money cannot be collected, then the person will be

22 sentenced to a prison sentence and a special decision will be issued on

23 that.

24 Paragraph 2: "The goods which are the subject of this

25 misdemeanour, in this case, it is a passenger vehicle, Golf, registration

Page 11982

1 plates 412-K-087, previously described in paragraph 1 of this decision,

2 shall not be seized pursuant to Article 100 of the law on traffic

3 misdemeanours. The vehicle will be returned to the owner, Milorad Stakic,

4 in terms of the authorities pursuant to Article 91 of the law on -- the

5 law on -- the vehicle is currently -- has been put under the supervision

6 of the customs office Belgrade under D11162000 dated 12 of September,

7 2002.

8 Paragraph 3: "The accused is bound pursuant to Article 99 of the

9 law of misdemeanours and 26A of the law on compensation of damages in

10 misdemeanours proceedings conducted by the federal bodies, Official

11 Gazette 12/2000, to pay 200 dinars on behalf of the expenses incurred by

12 the proceedings into the giro account of the customs office in Belgrade

13 number 40818-697-5-2619.

14 "Minutes taken by: Members of the commission deputy of the

15 president commission, Mirjana Ostasevic-Lukic.

16 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I think this is enough from this document. May

17 I ask you once again, do you know the aforementioned Milorad Stakic,

18 apparently any close relationship to Dr. Stakic?

19 A. I can't tell you exactly because I don't know whether his

20 brother's name is Milorad. I know that he is Baco. And as for the

21 vehicle, I can see what it is, but I can't tell you who this is all about.

22 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: What was your telephone number in your office?

23 A. (redacted)

24 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: And your private home?

25 A. (redacted)

Page 11983

1 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: What about (redacted)?

2 A. That was before. In the meantime, the numbers have been changed.

3 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Only for the parties, I'm making reference to

4 document S235-48.

5 A final area: Were you ever involved in the decision on the

6 demolition of structures war damaged beyond repair?

7 A. No. I was not involved in that.

8 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Did you in your capacity of being involved in

9 the decision whether or not a gravel pit should be used as a temporary

10 rubbish dump? I'm just trying to find out what is the area of your work,

11 because until now I didn't have a clear picture what, in fact, was your

12 duty.

13 A. My duties consisted of the following: To collect garbage, we used

14 vehicles and manpower for that. We also did sanitation. We mowed lawns

15 in parks. We planted flowers. So we did gardening in parks. That was

16 within my scope of work. And I received my orders from my director. He

17 gave me my tasks.

18 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Once again, the question: When a gravel pit

19 should be used as a temporary rubbish dump, would this be in part your

20 work?

21 A. No, this wouldn't be part of my work. We did not deposit rubbish

22 in gravel pit because we had a very good waste disposal site, one of the

23 best in the region. It was forbidden to deposit garbage in the gravel pit

24 because the drinking water comes from the area of those gravel pits. If I

25 was to make decisions, I wouldn't allow that. But I wasn't the one to

Page 11984

1 decide where rubbish would be deposited.

2 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May the witness please be shown Document S180,

3 item number 37, page number 45.

4 Would you please read out this document from the Official Gazette

5 issued 2/92.

6 A. Here this is in English, I believe. It says Prijedor --

7 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Could the witness please be shown the B/C/S one,

8 and the English...

9 A. Am I supposed to read everything under 37?


11 A. "At its meeting of 9 June, 1992, Prijedor municipal Crisis Staff

12 pursuant to Article 7 of the decision on the organisation and work of

13 Prijedor municipal Crisis Staff adopted the following decision:

14 "Article 1: The unreclaimed gravel pit in the village of

15 Miljakovci which was not been stabilised and which is denoted as KC number

16 79 shall be used as a temporary rubbish dump.

17 "Article 2: The communal services will look after the

18 implementation of this decision.

19 "Article 3: This decision shall enter into force on the day it is

20 adopted.

21 "Number 02-111-162/92. Prijedor. Date: 9 June 1992.

22 "President of the Crisis Staff, Dr. Milomir Stakic."

23 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Have you ever seen this document printed out in

24 any Official Gazette?

25 A. No, I haven't. I didn't read the Official Gazette, and it is the

Page 11985

1 first time I see a document like this.

2 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: So apparently, there seems at least to be an

3 overlap of the work of Dr. Milomir Stakic and your own work. Did you ever

4 discuss these questions with Dr. Stakic?

5 A. No, I have never discussed that.

6 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Did you ever discuss with Dr. Stakic what it was

7 his work as president of the Crisis Staff in Prijedor Municipality?

8 A. No, I never talked about that, nor did I deem it necessary to talk

9 about that. I didn't even ask him whether he was president or not. I

10 heard there was a Crisis Staff, but I never went into that.

11 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Let's leave it with that. But I feel under the

12 obligation to give you a last chance by putting to you once again the

13 question after this attempt to refresh your recollection: Was the name of

14 the brother or is the name of the brother of Dr. Stakic, Milorad Stakic?

15 A. I can't answer that. I know that he is Baco. I'm really sorry,

16 but I can't say something that I don't know. I can call my wife, and I

17 can ask her what his name is, whether it is Milorad or something else.

18 But I myself really cannot remember. Because we never called him by his

19 first name.

20 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Which was the first name or the name you called

21 Dr. Milomir Stakic?

22 A. "Doctor," "Dr. Stakic."

23 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May I ask Judge Vassylenko, any questions?

24 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: What was your reaction on the election of

25 Dr. Stakic vice-president of Prijedor Municipality?

Page 11986

1 A. We were, so to speak, happy that such a young man had been elected

2 vice-president.

3 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: My next question: Did Dr. Stakic continue to

4 live in the same apartment he lived before the election?

5 A. Can you please specify the time period you are referring to.

6 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: Just after the election as the vice-president.

7 A. Yes.

8 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: And I understand you were neighbours, your

9 family and the family of Dr. Stakic lived, as you said, door-to-door and

10 shared one yard. Yes?

11 A. Yes, that's correct. And that was the first house next to my

12 house.

13 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: And you testified yesterday, it's transcript

14 page 91, that on 30th of April, "like every morning, I got up. I got into

15 my car. I turned the engine on. And I waited for him to join me on the

16 ride to Prijedor. He was always a few minutes late, and I decided to go

17 and go and ring his bell. His wife, Bozana, answered the door and told me

18 that Miso left with the police some 20 minutes ago."

19 Had you heard the police car approaching the apartments where you

20 lived? Have you heard some noise, voices inviting Dr. Stakic to join

21 police and to follow them to Prijedor?

22 A. No, no, I didn't hear anything. I didn't hear anything. When I

23 came out of the house, I expected Dr. Stakic, but as I told you before,

24 that means I did not hear anything.

25 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: And before, how often police pick up Dr. Stakic

Page 11987

1 and transported him to Prijedor?

2 A. I don't know whether the police came on several occasions to pick

3 him up or not. But I no longer drove him. He had his own official

4 driver.

5 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: But before the takeover, you testified that

6 each morning, you drove Dr. Stakic to Prijedor.

7 A. Yes.

8 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: Were there occasions when police came to pick

9 up Dr. Stakic?

10 A. No, no, the police never came to pick him up -- at least to the

11 best of my knowledge the police didn't come. I drove him.

12 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: And what was the reaction of the wife of

13 Dr. Stakic, Bozana, that police took him to Prijedor, not yourself?

14 A. There was a reaction. She said Miso had been picked up, but don't

15 be afraid. And I didn't stay there for long because I was supposed to be

16 on my way to work.

17 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: Was she surprised? Upset? Angered?

18 A. Well, she was quite upset. She was not indifferent, of course.

19 Why the police? That sort of thing. But I only asked her: "So, where's

20 Doctor?" And she said he had been picked up by the police, so that was

21 the whole conversation between the two of us.

22 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: But yesterday you testified that "I asked her

23 what had happened, and she said `nothing really.'"

24 A. Well, I asked her why the police had picked him up, what was

25 happening. And she said: "Well, nothing really," but I could tell that

Page 11988

1 she was confused. But I went away then.

2 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: And you didn't ask her what was going on, what

3 had happened?

4 A. Well, I didn't ask. I didn't know. She only said that he had

5 been picked up by the police, and I said: "What for?" And she said: "I

6 don't know."

7 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: The trial stays adjourned until 10 minutes past

8 3.00.

9 --- Recess taken at 2.39 p.m.

10 --- On resuming at 3.16 p.m.

11 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Please be seated. May I ask the usher --

12 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour, please.

13 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: -- to bring the witness into the courtroom. And

14 when the usher has arrived again, may these copies of the revised

15 scheduling order as from today may be distributed. They will be filed at

16 the same time.

17 Judge Vassylenko, please proceed.

18 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: My next question: Have you seen Dr. Stakic in

19 the evening on 29th of April, 1992?

20 A. Yes. I did see him. We were together.

21 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: Now I would like to move to another area. You

22 testified that Dr. Stakic was a member of the People's Radical Party

23 Nikola Pasic.

24 A. Yes.

25 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: And can you explain who was the founder of the

Page 11989

1 People's Radical party Veljko Guberina or Nikola Pasic? Why such

2 difference?

3 A. I don't think I'm able to explain this. I believe Nikola Pasic

4 was only the name of the party, but I don't think any of the members were

5 founding members. Neither Nikola nor Guberina as far as I know were alive

6 at the time when the party was founded. Now, as to who the founder of the

7 party was, I only know that Dr. Stakic was on their electoral list in

8 Omarska, on the list of that party, people's radical party. He was on

9 their list. And as the highest ranking candidate, he garnered the most

10 votes.

11 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: And then Dr. Stakic became the member of the

12 party?

13 A. I can't give you the date. It must have been in 1990 before the

14 elections, because he was a candidate on their list in 1990.

15 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: And what was the position of Dr. Stakic within

16 the people's radical party?

17 A. Well, in Omarska where he was working as a general practitioner, a

18 physician, he was a man who was held in high regard, and he was a

19 scientist, well-respected by all the people of Omarska, and he served as

20 an example to other people.

21 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: Was he an ordinary member of this party, or he

22 was among the leadership of the party?

23 A. He was in the leadership of that party, in the leadership of his

24 party, people's radical party.

25 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: He was president of the party in Omarska area

Page 11990

1 or the president of the party in Prijedor Municipality?

2 A. He was the president for the Omarska area, but I don't know about

3 the Prijedor area.

4 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: And what was the platform of this party?

5 A. I don't know. I wasn't a member, so I couldn't tell. I don't

6 know any of the platforms of any of the different parties.

7 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: And can you explain me how it happened that

8 being a member of people's radical party Dr. Stakic became the

9 vice-president of the Municipal Assembly as SDS representative?

10 A. I don't think I'm able to answer this question. I only know that

11 he was in the party. Now, when he went to the SDS and became their member

12 exactly, I don't know. But I know that before the elections in 1990, he

13 was the president of the people's radical party for the Omarska area.

14 JUDGE VASSYLENKO: Thank you. I have no more questions.

15 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you. Judge Argibay, please.

16 JUDGE ARGIBAY: Good afternoon, Mr. Rosic.

17 Did you have a radio in your car?

18 A. Yes.

19 JUDGE ARGIBAY: Could you listen to Radio Prijedor in your car

20 radio?

21 A. Well, I could. I could listen to it, the local radio station,

22 Prijedor Radio, and all the other local stations.

23 JUDGE ARGIBAY: And did you usually listen to that radio?

24 A. Well, most frequently not. I preferred to play a tape, my own

25 tape when I travelled. So I listened to music.

Page 11991

1 JUDGE ARGIBAY: And the 30th of April, knowing that your friend,

2 relative, and neighbour had been taken to Prijedor by the police, didn't

3 you turn on your radio to know what was happening on that precise morning?

4 A. No, I didn't turn on anything. I was wondering what had happened

5 and why that had happened, but I didn't listen to anything on the radio.

6 JUDGE ARGIBAY: You weren't curious about that?

7 A. I was curious, yes. But it simply didn't occur to me to try to

8 find out on the radio what happened to him.

9 JUDGE ARGIBAY: And when you arrived at your work, did you ask any

10 questions? Did you try to learn what had happened?

11 A. Yes. When I arrived, when I came to work, then I was told that

12 the army and the police had taken over the Municipal Assembly and the

13 MUP. That's what I found out.

14 JUDGE ARGIBAY: And about your neighbour?

15 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Would you please answer that it's reflected on

16 the transcript and not only by gestures.

17 A. I didn't get the interpretation. I couldn't hear the

18 interpretation. That's why I made a gesture with my hands. But yes, now

19 I have managed to hear the question.

20 What my reaction was, I asked what it was about, but no one was

21 able to explain. They only said that the army and the police had taken

22 over the Municipal Assembly and the MUP.

23 JUDGE ARGIBAY: But you knew that the police had taken your

24 neighbour to Prijedor, and you never heard the news what was this all

25 about related to your neighbour?

Page 11992

1 A. Well, at that particular moment at work, among my colleagues, no

2 one was able to explain. It was only later that I heard that the

3 Municipal Assembly had been taken over as well as the SUP. But later on,

4 over the following days, I heard that Stakic had been appointed the

5 president of the municipality.

6 JUDGE ARGIBAY: Didn't you hear an announcement on Radio Prijedor

7 that very morning telling the citizens of Prijedor about the takeover?

8 A. No, I didn't hear anything on the radio at that time because I was

9 at work. But others told me that there had been one, just that I wasn't

10 listening to the radio.

11 JUDGE ARGIBAY: What was your assignment, if you can remember, of

12 work on the morning of the 30th of April, 1992?

13 A. The assignment was as usual; however, on that day, no one was

14 really leaving the perimeter of the company to go to work. Everyone was

15 talking about what had happened.

16 JUDGE ARGIBAY: That's what I supposed. Thank you.

17 I'm turning to another subject. This morning at page 4, line 9,

18 you were talking about barricades, and you told us that had you saw armed

19 men. Your words were: "They were armed?" "Yes." And you told us that

20 you found an acquaintance from school or something like that, and he was

21 carrying a hunting rifle. Isn't it true that all the people at the

22 barricade were carrying these sort of rifles?

23 A. No, not all the people. Not all of them. He caught my eye

24 because he worked in my company. I didn't see that any of the others had

25 rifles. He had taken this rifle from the company, as I said before.

Page 11993

1 JUDGE ARGIBAY: Do you mean to say that the others were armed with

2 other kind of weapons or that the others didn't carry weapons?

3 A. They had other types of weapons, not that kind of weapon.

4 JUDGE ARGIBAY: Can you please kindly tell me what kind of weapons

5 the others had.

6 A. At that checkpoint, they had a pistol. I saw it at a belt, but I

7 can't say of which make.

8 JUDGE ARGIBAY: Every one of the persons at the checkpoint?

9 A. Yes, there were four of them at that checkpoint in a group. And

10 he was the only one who had a rifle, and a hunting one at that, not an

11 army rifle.

12 JUDGE ARGIBAY: Thank you. You asked my last question. So I have

13 no more questions.

14 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Just let me return to Judge Vassylenko's

15 question on page 27, line 21. The question was: "Have you seen

16 Dr. Stakic in the evening on 29th of April, 1992?" Isn't it true that

17 following your testimony you all the days in the morning brought

18 Dr. Stakic to Prijedor and in the evening back to Omarska?

19 A. No. Every morning, I'd take him -- I'd give him a lift. But I

20 didn't always give him a lift back home, and I've already said that. It

21 depended on work. At times, we came back together, but not always. But

22 on the 29th in the evening, we were together -- I mean, we were together

23 in the evening, but I had not come together with him.

24 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I fully understand that you remember very well

25 what happened on the day of the takeover of Prijedor. But how is it

Page 11994

1 possible that you can answer the question put to you by Judge Vassylenko

2 related to the 29th of April in this clarity: "Yes, I did see him. We

3 were together."

4 A. Why? Because we were together. We were together all the time

5 until that 30th, until that fateful day when -- we were there every day,

6 every evening, whenever we were off duty practically. Whenever we didn't

7 work, we were there.

8 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: When was, in fact, the first day after the

9 takeover you met Dr. Stakic again?

10 A. No, I did not. In those early days, I did not see him again. I

11 saw him only -- I saw him again only some time in mid-May.

12 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: [Previous interpretation continues]...

13 Dr. Stakic never again came back to his home in the neighbouring house?

14 A. No, I did not see him come back. I asked Bozana, and she says:

15 "He's on duty. He'll be back." But then they moved house to Prijedor in

16 the latter half of May so that...

17 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I think on the transcript, your sentence doesn't

18 end. It reads: "But then they moved house to Prijedor in the latter half

19 of May so that..."

20 A. So that I did not come across him in Omarska because he was not

21 living there in the neighbourhood next door.

22 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: To avoid any misunderstanding, you answered:

23 "No, I did not see him come back." Let me repeat, when for the first time

24 did you meet Dr. Stakic after the takeover again?

25 A. I saw him in the Municipal Assembly hall because I went there to

Page 11995

1 get my work orders, to the secretariat for public utilities, and then I

2 ran across him in the passageway. But that was sometime around the 20th

3 of May.

4 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Approximately when was this? One or two days

5 after the takeover? A month later?

6 A. Yeah, 20 days after the takeover. On the 20th of May.

7 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: And what did you discuss with the person you

8 were acquainted with, you had met in the past all the day --

9 A. I asked him: "What's this? What's going on?" And he said:

10 "Well, you see how things are." And then I simply asked him about my

11 nephew, my brother's son, and he said let's not talk about that. It was

12 all in the hallway. I mean, we were not together for more than a minute

13 or two.

14 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Didn't you ask where he lived now when never

15 returning home to his house in Omarska?

16 A. No, I didn't. He said: "I've found a flat in Prijedor." And in

17 Omarska, he wasn't living in his own house. He was merely a tenant

18 there. So that I didn't ask him. I knew that he was in Prijedor, and I

19 didn't know the address. I never even asked him.

20 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Did Dr. Stakic find this flat in Prijedor prior

21 to the takeover?

22 A. I wasn't in a position to know. I don't know that.

23 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I have no further questions. Are there any

24 questions in re-examination, please?

25 MR. OSTOJIC: No. Thank you, Your Honour.

Page 11996

1 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: From the side of the Prosecution?

2 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I have four or five questions.

3 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: So please proceed.

4 Further cross-examination by Ms. Sutherland:

5 MS. SUTHERLAND: Usher, can you please move the ELMO machine.

6 Just back, it's in my line of vision.

7 Thank you.

8 Q. Mr. Rosic, what year did you get married?

9 A. 1974.

10 Q. You mentioned in relation to a question put to you by the

11 presiding Judge, Judge Schomburg, you said that Dr. Stakic's brother,

12 Baco, lived in a street with a electricity facility in Prijedor. What was

13 the name of that electricity -- electric facility?

14 A. Well, it's first the electric power supply building. I mean, they

15 have their offices there. That is the building that belonged to the

16 company Elektricno. They were responsible for the distribution of power,

17 but they only had -- it was only their office building. No installations

18 were there.

19 Q. You also said in a question put to you by Judge Schomburg that you

20 knew a person nicknamed Mico whose name was Milorad Stakic, and you said

21 that he was a relative of Dr. Stakic. How is he related to Dr. Stakic?

22 MR. OSTOJIC: Let me object to the form of the question, Your

23 Honour. I think it mischaracterises his prior testimony.

24 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I'm awfully sorry, but I can't hear anything.

25 My headphones don't work in the moment. I have to wait so I can read it.

Page 11997

1 May I ask the Prosecution to break down the question in two

2 portions; one related to Mico and then to Milorad Stakic.

3 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.

4 Q. Mr. Rosic, His Honour asked you about a person called Milorad

5 Stakic, did you know of someone by that name. And you said that you knew

6 someone who had a nickname Mico, Mico.

7 A. I knew Baco, but Mico, Mico is somebody else, and I know him, too.

8 Q. That's correct. You said that he was a relative.

9 MR. OSTOJIC: Same objection, Your Honour.

10 A. The last name is the same.

11 MR. OSTOJIC: May I at least ask that the counsel give me the page

12 number which she is referencing to. I think by the question, although we

13 raised it at that time in connection with the interpretation, I would like

14 the specific page number and line number where she is making that

15 assertion.

16 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: As it is the rule, may I ask Ms. Sutherland to

17 do so.

18 MS. SUTHERLAND: If I can have a moment, Your Honour.

19 The question that was put by Judge Schomburg was "Do you know" --

20 I'm sorry it's on page 15 of the LiveNote. "Do you know another member of

21 the family of Dr. Stakic with the name of Milorad Stakic?" You answered:

22 "There is one Mico Stakic he is a relative."

23 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I hope Defence counsel can now better

24 understand. I already the last time said and asked the Defence counsel to

25 refrain from frivolous objections. I'm quite sure that you followed the

Page 11998

1 transcript. Thank you.

2 MR. OSTOJIC: I'd just like to reserve my right to address the

3 Court on that issue when the witness is not here.

4 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Not in this moment.

5 MR. OSTOJIC: Of course.


7 Q. Sir, you heard the question and answer that I just read to you.

8 How was he related, Mico Stakic, the person that you referred to, how was

9 he related to Dr. Stakic?

10 A. Well, related, I think they are quite close relatives because they

11 have the same last name. And Doctor's father has a house nearby, but they

12 have the same surname. And that is why I think that they are related.

13 But what kind of a relationship there is, I don't know.

14 Q. So you're not sure whether they are blood relatives or related by

15 marriage?

16 A. No, the same surname. If we have the same surname, Stakic, that

17 it could be only on the paternal side, that somehow they are related on

18 the paternal side. But whether Milomir's father and Mico's father are --

19 I don't know how related they are. Are they brothers or cousins once

20 removed, twice removed, I really cannot say. But the surname is the same,

21 so obviously they are blood relations.

22 Q. Thank you for clarifying that for me.

23 Again, in relation to questions by Judges Argibay and Judge

24 Schomburg, you said that you were together with Dr. Stakic on the night of

25 the 29th of April, 1992, the night before the takeover. This is on pages

Page 11999

1 32 and 33, at least Judge Schomburg's questioning. You went on to say

2 that you were "with Dr. Stakic nearly every evening whenever we were off

3 duty practically."

4 First of all, I want to ask you about the 29th of April. You said

5 that you didn't take Dr. Stakic home that evening, but you were together.

6 Where were you and until what time?

7 A. We were in the yard, in mine and my brother's yard, because in his

8 yard there were no tables, and over here there was a table. So we were

9 sitting there in the evening from - I don't know - 7.00 or 8.00 until

10 about 9.00. We were sitting there having a chat, having some coffee, and

11 we were just sitting there together.

12 Q. At that time, Dr. Stakic left your yard and returned to his?

13 A. Yes. I then went in, and he went back to his flat. And I went

14 into my house, of course.

15 Q. Are you sure about the time?

16 A. Yes, I am, because what caught me by surprise that day was that we

17 had not come together and the days that followed we did not travel

18 together, so it stuck in my memory.

19 Q. You said every evening you were together with Dr. Stakic whenever

20 we were off duty, practically every evening. Where did you socialise?

21 A. We socialised mostly in my yard and my brother's yard. We at

22 times spent the whole on weekends playing cards or something. But by and

23 large, it was in the yard. But naturally, if it rained then we would come

24 into our house because there was a lot of room there. His flat was

25 smaller. It was in the loft.

Page 12000

1 Q. Did you play cards together or with others? I mean, did you only

2 play cards with Dr. Stakic or other people?

3 A. No, other people. Other people, too. And he, with him, sometimes

4 three, four, five. Depends. It varied. I can't tell you how many there

5 were when. That evening, there were my brother, he, and myself. And we

6 did not play cards that evening. We were sitting having coffee.

7 Q. When you did play cards with other people, who were they?

8 A. Well, as a rule, I, my brother, the neighbour across the street,

9 and somebody might come by because our yard is open. There's no fence

10 there, so -- and there's a shrub in front, so somebody sees us and joins

11 us.

12 Q. My question was: Who the names of the people that you played with

13 Dr. Stakic.

14 A. Dragoja Rosic, my brother; Dragan Ivanovic, a neighbour. Then

15 another neighbour, Pusac. There are three of them, and they were not

16 always all there together.

17 Q. And you're quite certain that the night before the takeover,

18 Dr. Stakic was at your house between 7.00 and 9.00 p.m.?

19 A. Not in the house, in the yard. That is where we were. We were

20 sitting there. Dr. Stakic, my brother Dragoja, and I. We were not

21 inside. And I know that lights had gone up -- I mean, the public

22 lighting, or rather the lighting in the yard. So we sat there for a

23 little while longer, and then we parted company. I went in, and he went

24 back to his flat.

25 Q. Could you be mistaken about the time, 9.00?

Page 12001

1 A. Well, was it 20 to 9.00 or 9.00, I can't really say. But that is

2 about the time when the darkness falls. That is, past 8.00, half past

3 8.00, it is already dark by that time so it could have been around 9.00.

4 MS. SUTHERLAND: No further questions.

5 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Any further questions by the Defence?

6 MR. OSTOJIC: Actually I do, Your Honour, that emanate from the

7 questions of the OTP, if I may. I would just like the Court to be

8 patient. I would like do this as eloquently as possible with respect to

9 these issues.

10 Further examination by Mr. Ostojic:

11 Q. Mr. Rosic, good afternoon again. Do you recall a name of an

12 individual in Prijedor or in Bosnia and Herzegovina by the name of Velibor

13 Ostojic?

14 A. Velibor Ostojic, yes, I've heard of Velibor Ostojic, but I don't

15 know if he comes from Prijedor.

16 Q. Maybe not Prijedor, but in the former Bosnia and Herzegovina. My

17 question to you, sir, is that this gentleman by the name of Velibor

18 Ostojic has the exact same last name that I do. Can you tell this Court

19 what relation that individual is to me, if any?

20 A. Velibor Ostojic, I know that he was a member of the cabinet,

21 government of Republika Srpska. But what he was, I wouldn't know.

22 Q. And I understand that, sir. But surely if the gentleman by the

23 name of Mico Stakic is somehow related because he bears the same last name

24 as the Stakic family of Dr. Stakic, do you as you sit here that Velibor

25 Ostojic in any way is related to me?

Page 12002

1 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I don't want to allow this hypothetical

2 questions not related to our case. Questions were in a line of questions

3 related to Dr. Stakic apparently relatives as the witness has told us, and

4 therefore, it has nothing to do with abstract names and abstract persons

5 the witness apparently does not know. So please refrain from this line of

6 questions.

7 MR. OSTOJIC: Just if I may, for the record, Your Honour. I

8 respectfully understand the Court's position. I unfortunately disagree.

9 The witness did recognise the name. He even gave the title that he

10 believes that individual bears.

11 My next question was going to be perhaps a little more abstract

12 because there always is a basketball player that plays for Partizan that

13 bears the same last name. It's consist with this witness's testimony,

14 that just if you have the same last name you may be somehow related. But

15 in any event, I'll proceed.

16 Q. Sir, my next question to you is this: What does your wife call

17 Dr. Stakic?

18 A. She calls him Dr. Miso.

19 Q. Is "Miso" his name?

20 A. No. His name is Milomir, but she calls him Miso, my wife. And I

21 call him Dr. Stakic.

22 Q. I understand. And now, ever since you joined the family or ever

23 since you became married in 1974 or 1972, I think you said approximately

24 if I may be given that latitude at least, have you ever heard anyone call

25 Dr. Stakic by the name of Milomir, or is it, in fact, sir, that everyone

Page 12003

1 who knew him at a personal level and were familiar with him called him, in

2 fact, Miso?

3 A. Yes, as far as I know, everybody called him Miso, Miso Stakic.

4 Few people called him Milomir.

5 Q. You described this individual called Mico who has the same last

6 name as the family Stakic. Can you describe that individual for us.

7 A. Well, I can. He's slightly older than Dr. Stakic, but he's

8 younger than I. Of about my height. Well, he's not that stout.

9 Q. I won't go there. Can you describe Dr. Stakic's brother, Baco.

10 A. Baco, I can, yes. Baco is a slim guy, tall, slightly taller than

11 I am but much slimmer.

12 Q. I'm going to ask you another question but I'm going to preface it

13 because, Your Honour, with your permission I'd like to go into this area

14 although it doesn't specifically emanate from the OTP's questions.

15 And, Mr. Rosic, just be patient I just don't know if there's going

16 to be an intervention, so before you answer the question.

17 Sir, I'd like to know on how many occasions prior to this week did

18 you have an opportunity to meet with the Defence team of Dr. Milomir

19 Stakic, on how many occasions, if I'm allowed?

20 A. I didn't understand this about the time.

21 Q. I'll try to restate the question. My apologies to you. You

22 testified previously that the first time you were contacted from

23 representatives of the Defence team was approximately a year or so, if I

24 recall it properly. Within that given year, can you tell us the number of

25 times that you met with different representatives of the Defence team of

Page 12004

1 Dr. Milomir Stakic.

2 A. Once as far as I know, and now, here.

3 Q. And tell us with whom did you meet? Was it with Mr. Lukic, to

4 speed things up, if I may?

5 A. Yes, Mr. Lukic.

6 Q. Sir, at that time, did you take notes or record the conversation

7 that you and Mr. Lukic had?

8 A. No, no, I didn't take any notes. No, nothing. We talked, I

9 accepted to come. "Would you like to come and testify?" That was that.

10 I didn't take any notes. I didn't think it was necessary.

11 MR. OSTOJIC: That's all the questions I have. Thank you, Your

12 Honours.

13 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I can see no other request for further

14 questions. So thank you for coming to The Hague. Thank you for answering

15 the questions. And you are excused for today. May I ask the usher to

16 escort the witness out of the courtroom, please.

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

18 [The witness withdrew]

19 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: During the break, I learned that there were some

20 issues I think from the side of the Defence to be discussed, but please

21 briefly that we can continue immediately.

22 MR. OSTOJIC: Well, I'm not sure that I could cover them all

23 briefly, Your Honour, quite candidly. I'll do the best that I can.

24 I have approximately four issues I would like to address with the

25 Court, and perhaps I will do it in reverse order because of the time. The

Page 12005

1 Court asked this Mr. Rosic, the witness that just testified, for his

2 personal telephone number. We would ask, if possible, that that be

3 redacted from the record so that it doesn't get publicised. I'm not

4 sure -- the Court has it and for your purposes, for whatever which they

5 may be, the Court is welcome to it. We just wouldn't like to open up an

6 opportunity where there is any solicitation of the witness.

7 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: No discussion with this, the telephone number

8 would be redacted from the transcript, both of them.

9 MR. OSTOJIC: I also have a request with respect to the next

10 witness. We have about six documents that are both in Cyrillic and Latin

11 characters that we will be presenting through the witness. The

12 translation of those documents are not complete. We have tendered them to

13 the Madam Registrar, and we are just waiting to get them. However,

14 counsel for the OTP and I have spoken this afternoon in connection with

15 this witness. It doesn't look that we can conclude him today. However,

16 he is unavailable to proceed on Monday. He informed me of this only early

17 this morning. The Court obviously is welcome to ask this witness that.

18 So we're kind of in a bit after dilemma. The Defence would like the right

19 to continue to go through some of the articles, since we are still

20 gathering evidence, with this witness. If the witness does commence his

21 testimony, we are obviously restricted by -- appropriately so by the

22 guidelines set forth by the Court. So we're at a bit of a dilemma on that

23 issue.

24 If I may proceed to the next issue.

25 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I think as to the fact that you mentioned this,

Page 12006

1 there would be maybe a limited time only for this witness. We can

2 postpone the translation and the question of admission into evidence, and

3 based on the fact that one of the Judges understand and can follow that

4 what is shown on the Kozarski Vjesnik articles, I think it's time that we

5 immediately start and let the discussions and other issues open for

6 Monday.

7 So --

8 MR. OSTOJIC: There's two other critical issues, if I may, Your

9 Honour.

10 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: With a link to the next witness?

11 MR. OSTOJIC: No, Your Honour.

12 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Then let us wait. We have a long waiting list

13 of persons wanting to take the floor in this case on several issues, and I

14 ruled that this has to wait until Monday.

15 MR. OSTOJIC: Fair enough. Your Honour, this witness cannot be

16 here on Monday, and that's what I'm advising the Court.

17 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I fully understand. But therefore, we shouldn't

18 waste time. May I ask the usher to escort the witness into the courtroom.

19 So in practical terms, it would mean to introduce these articles

20 separately, maybe on Monday, with the assistance of a person able to read

21 out these documents as we did it previously when we needed two

22 translations, and refrain from asking questions based on these concrete

23 articles.

24 [The witness entered court]

25 MR. OSTOJIC: Just to the record is noted. We do object to that,

Page 12007

1 and I think we have a right to ask on these articles this witness. He can

2 read them but --

3 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: The question is only not to read out the

4 documents. I think you have understood.

5 Good afternoon, and sorry that you had to wait such a long period

6 of time. Can you hear in a language you understand?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon to all. Yes, I can.

8 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Could you please be so kind and give us your

9 solemn declaration.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak

11 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

12 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you. Please be seated.

13 Before we start the examination-in-chief, may I ask you, I learned

14 that you would have some time problems, especially on Monday. Could you

15 please explain the reason why you would not be available if so on Monday?

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The first reason is that I have a

17 wedding in the family on Saturday at 1400 hours. The second reason is

18 that I am the owner of a private company, and I have ten employees. I

19 have postponed all of my meetings and everything else for Monday. So I

20 have urgent issues to deal with for my company. I was told that my

21 testimony would be over before Saturday. That's why I have arranged my

22 timetable in accordance with that. And I have arranged all of my business

23 obligations in accordance with that.

24 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: So I think we should start immediately and try

25 to have a fair split of the remaining time. What is your time estimate,

Page 12008

1 if you can try to speed up as far as possible?

2 MR. OSTOJIC: I'll try my best to speed up. We estimated that it

3 would take two hours. We think that it will take longer with the

4 articles. Again, understanding the Court's ruling, we won't go into those

5 articles at this time, but we think they are significant and we think they

6 are rather relevant --

7 THE INTERPRETER: Would the counsel slow down, please.

8 MR. OSTOJIC: Yes. And we'll try to do the best we can. If the

9 Court wants, this witness in his proffer sets forth specifically the items

10 that we're going to cover with him.

11 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: We are aware of this. And may I ask you,

12 please, to start. And aim at concluding maybe after 90 minutes or so.

13 Let's at least try that the witness has not to come back once again to The

14 Hague.

15 MR. OSTOJIC: Fair enough, Your Honour. Thank you.


17 [Witness answered through interpreter]

18 Examined by Mr. Ostojic:

19 Q. Good afternoon, sir. Mr. Plemic, can you just state your name for

20 the record. I'm not sure your name is reflected in the record.

21 A. My name is Milenko Plemic.

22 Q. Mr. Plemic, good afternoon. My name is John Ostojic, along with

23 Danilo Cirkovic, we represent Dr. Milomir Stakic.

24 Briefly, sir, can you give us your personal background, date of

25 birth, marital status, and place of current residence.

Page 12009

1 A. I was born on 18 September 1958 in Prijedor.

2 Q. And currently --

3 A. I have a degree in economics. I am married. I have two

4 daughters.

5 Q. I think you said adult children. Correct? Two adult daughters.

6 Correct?

7 A. Yes, correct.

8 Q. The translator didn't hear it, apparently. I would just ask that

9 you keep your voice -- or try to answer the question a little louder so

10 that everyone can have a complete understanding of that what you're about

11 to testify to.

12 Sir, where do you currently reside?

13 A. I currently reside in Prijedor. That is my official residence.

14 But I commute between Prijedor and Belgrade because I have one company in

15 Belgrade and one in Prijedor.

16 Q. Sir, in the spring and summer of 1992, where did you reside?

17 A. In Prijedor. Up to the end of May.

18 Q. Sir, can you tell us briefly what your employment history is

19 immediately following the completion of your education. Just take us in a

20 very brief and succinct manner the time period and exactly where you

21 worked.

22 A. I graduated in 1983 in Belgrade. In 1984, I started working in

23 the Ljubija iron ore mines, and I was the head of sales there. I stayed

24 there until 1989. To be more precise, until August 1989. That is when I

25 opened my own company. I started my own business. The company's name is

Page 12010












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

13 English transcripts.













Page 12011

1 Santurskomerc. Its main activity is services in the field of tourism,

2 which means the organisation of holidays, winter breaks, travels.

3 In 1990, I opened a company Lvor in Ukraine. The name is -- it

4 was a joint venture with a citizen of Ukraine. Up to 1991, the main

5 business activity of my company was the organisation of travel for

6 students and pupils, as well as the organisation of boat trips by rivers

7 in Ukraine and Russia, the Volga and the Dniepr Rivers. I also organised

8 students' final-year trips in many cities of Russia, Kiev, Moscow,

9 St. Petersburg.

10 After the year 1991, for the reasons well-known to everybody,

11 including yourselves, my main activity was transport because my last

12 cruising group was in September 1991. That was the last cruise I

13 organised. I don't know whether you would be interested in anything else,

14 but it would be mostly that.

15 Q. Thank you. I'll put a question to you. Subsequent or following

16 September of 1991, can you tell us in what occupation you were in and what

17 exactly you did as a private entrepreneur in the Prijedor Municipality?

18 A. In 1991, one could already feel that there was a need for the

19 organisation of travel. People started asking for tickets. They wanted

20 to travel abroad. They also wanted to travel domestically, and we were

21 amongst the first in Prijedor to open a direct bus line to Zagreb. As far

22 as I can remember, but I can't give you the exact date, this may have been

23 the end of August 1991.

24 After that, we established contacts with different haulers. One

25 of them was Bosnalivno, a Livno-based company. And we were their

Page 12012

1 ticketing agents for the area of the town of Prijedor. They had daily

2 departures of their regular bus line to Switzerland and Germany. I sent

3 my employees for a course in the JAT education centre in Belgrade. JAT

4 was a Yugoslav air carrier. We were then authorised to sell their tickets

5 as well. That will be that.

6 Q. Now, with respect to the period following September of 1991, am I

7 correct that you were essentially a travel agent that acted as an

8 intermediary to facilitate the purchase of tickets from your clientele who

9 desired to buy a ticket to reach a different destination. Correct?

10 A. Partly. We sold bus tickets to Zagreb for our own bus. My agency

11 at that time had one bus, one coach, which up to that time had mostly

12 served to transport tourists from Zagreb to Budapest. The tourists who

13 then proceeded to go on various cruises. The majority of my passengers at

14 the time were booked through the company called Astratours, a Zagreb-based

15 company.

16 As for the tickets that we sold as mediators, we were the agents

17 for Bosna from Livno. We got commissions for those tickets. Our

18 passengers did not have to go to Livno to purchase those tickets. They

19 could do it in Prijedor.

20 Q. During the time period following September 1991, could you cite

21 for me to the best of your recollection some of your other competitors.

22 A. Well, if you mean the sale of tickets, every travel agent sold bus

23 tickets. So that was very simple. It was simpler to sell bus tickets

24 than air tickets because for air tickets you needed an authorisation, a

25 license. In Prijedor, more specifically, the travel agency which had a

Page 12013

1 longer history than my agency which started doing business with Bosnalivno

2 before my agency was Olympic Tours. Among more significant agencies,

3 there was also the agency called Autotransport Prijedor. That was the

4 agency which was a part of the Autotransport transport company from

5 Prijedor.

6 Q. With respect to Olympics transport that you mentioned, can you

7 tell us during that time period what the name of the director was of that

8 agency?

9 A. As far as I can remember, Emsud Crnalic.

10 Q. Can you tell us, sir, what his ethnic background is.

11 A. Probably a Muslim or a Bosniak, whichever way you wanted.

12 Q. Fair enough. And your ethnic background, if I may ask?

13 A. I'm a Serb.

14 Q. Did this Olympus -- what's the name of the company again? Help

15 me.

16 A. It is a company that operated as a part of the ZTP Sarajevo, ZTP

17 stands for the railway of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It was their official

18 agency that sold tickets for rail transport. They also sold bus tickets.

19 As far as I can remember, they also sold air tickets, but I am not sure of

20 that.

21 Q. This company, did it also sell the bus tickets, railway tickets,

22 and airline tickets the same period that you did, I mean following

23 September 1991 all the way the spring and summer 1992?

24 A. Since they existed, they must have been selling them. I don't

25 know exactly what they did. They were open. They kept their business.

Page 12014

1 What their business was, I can't tell you exactly. I don't know even know

2 whether they did any business or not.

3 Q. At any time, sir, in the spring -- at any time in September of

4 1991, were you approached by any representatives from the municipal

5 government or the Municipal Assembly who instructed you to form such a

6 company and to start selling tickets to people who wanted to leave the

7 area?

8 A. I already gave this question. I was independent when I opened my

9 business. Nobody ever tried to influence my business in any way

10 whatsoever.

11 Q. I appreciate that. But for our purposes, it may be significant,

12 and I apologise for having to ask you that. Did any political party at

13 any time in 1991 instruct, order, or request from you that you open a

14 company and start transporting people who wanted to leave the area?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Sir, were you at that time a member of the SDS?

17 A. No.

18 Q. Sir, were you at any time up to the present a member of the SDS?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Can you tell us, sir, at any time if you held any political

21 affiliations.

22 A. At any time. Up to 1989, I was a member of the League of

23 Communists.

24 Q. And after that, sir, were you -- pardon me.

25 A. After that, in 1990, I became a member of the party of private

Page 12015

1 initiative which rallied around the self-business people, people who were

2 mostly in business.

3 Q. And who was the president of the party of private initiative at

4 the time in which you were a member, sir?

5 A. As far as I can remember, the last name is Murselovic. I can't

6 remember his first name. We all called him Mursel.

7 Q. How long have you known this individual called Mr. Murselovic?

8 A. A long time. A long time. That means that I knew him at least

9 from 1977. Maybe even before that because this gentleman ran a

10 restaurant. He had a restaurant, a restaurant that I frequently went to.

11 Q. Did you also, sir, know Mr. Murselovic's wife?

12 A. Yes. She was a waitress in that same restaurant.

13 Q. Help me with this: From September of 1991 and through the spring

14 and summer of 1992, at the time, did you have an opportunity to employ

15 other people in your private company?

16 A. I don't know which are the first, which are the second. I can

17 only say that there were many ethnic backgrounds amongst the people who

18 worked for me. I can't even remember at this point in time. But this

19 really is not important. My answer is yes, there were people of other

20 ethnic backgrounds. But let me tell you that this was not a requirement

21 or a condition for employment in my company.

22 Q. Did you, sir, at any time discharge, terminate, or fire any

23 employees who were of a different ethnic background than yourself who were

24 previously employed in your company?

25 A. The only reason for firing somebody in my company was the

Page 12016

1 following: If somebody fails to meet their obligations, if somebody

2 doesn't deliver what they are supposed to. And nobody was ever fired for

3 being of a different ethnic background.

4 Q. Did anyone, sir, in the municipal government of Prijedor at any

5 time request, demand, or order you to fire individuals in your private

6 company who were non-Serbs?

7 A. No.

8 Q. Did anyone, sir, from the party SDS request, demand, or order you

9 to fire, discharge, or terminate the employment of any employees who were

10 non-Serbs from your company?

11 A. No.

12 Q. Did at any time, and the time period we're focussing on again, is

13 from September 1991 throughout the spring and summer of 1992, did at any

14 time the municipal civilian organs of the municipality of Prijedor have

15 any influence over you or your company as to which people could purchase

16 tickets and which people can travel to other destinations?

17 A. To begin with, I don't remember that I've ever had any contacts

18 with the institutions you have referred to. And that would also imply the

19 answer to your question. No one ever influenced in any way the work of my

20 company.

21 Q. Describe for us, if you will, to the best of your recollection and

22 based upon your personal experience and observations, how is it that the

23 people came to you after September 1991 seeking tickets to leave the

24 area? Where were your headquarters? How many people would come by? What

25 was the price of the ticket, et cetera?

Page 12017

1 MR. OSTOJIC: If I'm allowed to ask a compound question like that.

2 A. The headquarters of my agency was at the Prijedor Hotel in

3 Prijedor. A branch office was at the Balkan Hotel in the centre of

4 Prijedor town. As concerns the modality, how people bought their tickets,

5 we did the same as all travel agencies throughout the world. You go to an

6 agency, you inquire whether there are any tickets available for a

7 particular destination, and if so, if we are able to meet the client's

8 demands, we sell the ticket according to the official price list,

9 regardless of the fact whether it's a ticket from Bosnalivno, for which we

10 had official prices. Regardless of the fact if it was an air ticket for

11 which also there were fixed prices, or a ticket for Zagreb which also had

12 a fixed official price. I'm not sure you want me to start enumerating

13 specific prices related to specific destinations. I think I could

14 probably remember a couple of specific prices.

15 Q. And that might be helpful. But at this time, if you don't mind,

16 I'd like to ask you a specific question. If you could just tell us to the

17 best of your recollection what the route was, meaning the destination,

18 that your company Santurs was offering during that time period for the

19 citizens and residents of the municipality of Prijedor.

20 A. First of all, there was a interim exceptional line taking people

21 to Zagreb on a daily basis. It would leave Prijedor in the early morning

22 hours. I can't remember the exact time of departure. It was, I think,

23 around 5.00, 6.00, or even 7.00 in the morning. And the same bus would

24 leave Zagreb at 3.00 or 4.00 in the afternoon, I think. As I already

25 said, we also sold tickets for Bosna Livno. They had regular bus lines to

Page 12018

1 Switzerland, Germany, and Austria. There were air tickets, too.

2 Departures could have been from Banja Luka, Belgrade, or Zagreb, I can't

3 remember specifically because the agency had authorisation to sell tickets

4 from those particular airports -- with departures from those particular

5 airports.

6 Q. Specifically with respect to your company, did you -- I think you

7 mentioned you had a bus that the company owned, and you started selling

8 tickets for that bus, correct, in the -- September 1991?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Just explain that route to us if you don't mind. Was it daily?

11 Several times a week? And the destination of that route?

12 A. As concerns our own transport, there was a daily line

13 Prijedor/Zagreb, Zagreb/Prijedor.

14 Q. Thank you. My apologies. Were those tickets that the people were

15 given to travel on your bus line, sir, purchased by the municipal

16 government of Prijedor at any time?

17 A. No.

18 Q. Tell this Court how those individuals purchased those tickets

19 since you were the ticket agent that sold them the ticket and transported

20 them.

21 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May I ask Defence counsel to concentrate on the

22 fourth amended indictment and to the areas purportedly being the

23 destination of people leaving Prijedor.

24 MR. OSTOJIC: I think all the questions quite frankly, Your

25 Honour, are strictly confined to that based on your prior comments.

Page 12019

1 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes. But I can't in the presence of the witness

2 discuss certain areas mentioned in the fourth amended indictment. I would

3 like you to concentrate on these areas.

4 MR. OSTOJIC: My focus, so the Court knows, is specifically

5 paragraph 8 of the fourth amended indictment which addresses, I think as

6 I've elaborated earlier. But I'm not sure -- unless the Court wants to

7 give me the paragraph, I'll be happy to move on. But we're covering those

8 areas as indicated in our proffer.

9 Q. Nevertheless, sir, help me with this: You were the person among

10 other individuals in your company who sold tickets to people who were

11 leaving the Prijedor Municipality. Correct?

12 A. Sometimes.

13 Q. And there were other companies that were selling tickets also for

14 people who wanted to leave the Prijedor Municipality. Correct?

15 A. Yes, as I've said before.

16 Q. Just trying to get to where we need to go. Can you tell me, sir,

17 with any specificity whether the people that left the Prijedor

18 Municipality, whether they left voluntarily or involuntarily?

19 A. Can you please clarify the concept "involuntarily."

20 Q. Did anyone, to the best of your knowledge, sir, forcibly transport

21 or deport any of the individuals that you transported, that you provided a

22 mode of transportation for, out of Prijedor during the time period that

23 you had your agency and during the time period specifically outlined in

24 the fourth amended indictment?

25 A. This question, I will try to be very succinct and very clear,

Page 12020

1 too. Because I think this question refers to everything, ticket sales for

2 all the other destinations, too. This means that people who wanted to

3 travel through the assistance of my agency would simply come to my

4 agency. They would inquire about destinations that we were able to get

5 them to. And whenever they saw fit, they purchased tickets and left for

6 their chosen destinations. What this means is that no one at any time was

7 forced to go to my agency. No one was at any time forced by anyone else

8 to go to my agency and purchase a ticket.

9 Purchasing tickets from my agency was exclusively on a voluntary

10 basis.

11 Q. Sir, can you tell us what was the ethnic background were of the

12 individuals that you provided the mode of transportation through your

13 company.

14 A. My clients -- among my clients there were members of all three

15 ethnic groups. Again, I must say that before a ticket was purchased, and

16 as the ticket was being purchased to a person, I never asked for the

17 person's name unless it was really necessary. Because, for example,

18 whenever persons travelled abroad or by plane, I needed their names, too.

19 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: We need a break, but before we have a break, may

20 I ask Dr. Stakic, do you feel well in the moment or do you have any

21 problems?

22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I do have a

23 slight headache, and my head is swooning slightly. I think I could use a

24 break, yes.

25 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you.

Page 12021

1 Then before the break, I have to ask you, on page 46, line 7 of

2 today's transcript, you mentioned the reasons for not being available on

3 Monday. The first reason you told us is that you have a wedding in the

4 family on Saturday at 1400 hours. May I ask who are those persons having

5 the honour to have marriage tomorrow?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's my brother.

7 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's the brother of my uncle who

9 lives in Belgrade, my cousin.

10 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Based on the comments given by the witness, I

11 expect submissions by both parties as to the question whether or not the

12 reasons given by the witness are sufficient for excusing him from being

13 present on Monday.

14 The trial stays adjourned until 5:15.

15 --- Recess taken at 4.45 p.m.

16 --- On resuming at 5.21 p.m.

17 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Please be seated.

18 May I first of all ask Dr. Stakic, do you feel better now that you

19 can follow the proceedings?

20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Thank you. I've

21 managed to refresh myself a little bit. I had a cup of coffee, and I

22 think I can make it to the end of this hearing.

23 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you very much.

24 May I hear the brief submissions by the parties related to the

25 question whether or not the apologies to be found on page 46 of the

Page 12022

1 transcript are sufficient. The Defence, please.

2 MR. OSTOJIC: The Defence does submit that we think the reasons

3 stated by the witness are sufficient, and I would just like to remind the

4 Court if at all possible, although we do not have the transcript and the

5 specific page, but to recall the testimony of Mr. Mevludin Sejmenovic who,

6 for economic reasons which the OTP cited, was given specifically a leave

7 of two weeks for interruption of his evidence on direct and then leave for

8 his cross. Similarly, I think other witnesses were also provided and

9 extended the same courtesy. And in that vein, we would respectfully

10 request, although unbeknownst to us until this morning literally with

11 respect to this witness, that the same courtesies be extended to him.

12 Thank you, Your Honour.

13 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you. The Prosecution, please.

14 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you, Your Honour. There's two issues here,

15 whether the Prosecution would make a submission to postpone his

16 cross-examination due to the proffer being given to us, the amended

17 proffer being provided at approximately quarter to 12.00 this morning

18 which raised one new issue in paragraph (q).

19 Secondly, it's the eight documents that we don't have translations

20 for which were provided this morning. The Prosecution submits that the

21 Defence could have these documents read into the transcript, but we would

22 then require some time to cross-examine then because we would only know

23 what the documents were about as the witness was stating the contents

24 thereof.

25 The second [sic] point is whether he should come back on Monday.

Page 12023

1 The Prosecution submits we don't want to unnecessarily inconvenience

2 witnesses, and that the court process should take priority over most other

3 kinds of obligations and duties and that there normally would have to be a

4 balance struck. Normally the parties reach agreement. And as my learned

5 friend has just informed the Court, there was a Prosecution witness where

6 that was done. But I leave it for the Court to decide whether the reasons

7 given, i.e., the witness had postponed certain meetings until Monday and

8 has some urgent issues to attend to decide whether, in fact, he should

9 come back on Monday or to be cross-examined at a later date. Those are my

10 submissions, Your Honour.

11 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: So in principle, the Prosecution would be

12 prepared to cross-examine this witness at a later date. Correct?

13 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, depending what the witness says in

14 relation to what's stated in paragraph (q) of the amended proffer, we may

15 seek to postpone the cross-examination. And it's also in relation to the

16 untranslated documents which were served on us at 1.00 today.

17 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: We will decide as soon as possible and

18 practical. But let us continue. May I ask the usher to escort the

19 witness into the courtroom.

20 MR. OSTOJIC: Your Honour, just before the witness comes, although

21 he's bringing him in, I would just like to submit to the Court that these

22 were articles that were given to us --

23 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: We shouldn't discuss the articles right now. We

24 know about the contents, and we want to hear the witness. Thank you.

25 MR. OSTOJIC: As he's bringing him in, if I can just say, they

Page 12024

1 were provided to us by the OTP. So they are not new to them. They have

2 had them. They didn't translate it. But that's fine, we will proceed.

3 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, if I may, they were provided to the

4 Defence upon the Defence's review of all the Kozarski Vjesnik articles.

5 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: We are well aware of this fact.

6 Before we start, may I ask the witness: Do you want to add

7 anything related to the question of your return to former Yugoslavia

8 during the weekend? Would it be possible for you to come back on Monday

9 in principle?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In principle, I would not be able to

11 come back on Monday. Middle or the end of next week would be fine. On

12 Monday, I have three appointments scheduled with people who are not from

13 Belgrade or from Yugoslavia.

14 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you. We will decide on this issue as soon

15 as practicable. But please proceed, Mr. Ostojic.

16 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

17 Q. Mr. Plemic, if we may continue, help me with the appreciation and

18 understanding of exactly the time period because there might be some

19 confusion. From September 1991 up through and including the end of May

20 1992, you continued to provide transportation for people who wanted to

21 voluntarily leave the Prijedor Municipality. Correct?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Sir, you sold them tickets, and you also knew the place where they

24 were going to ultimately go to. Is that right?

25 A. Yes.

Page 12025

1 Q. And in addition to your company, there were other companies that

2 you previously mentioned who provided the same services as your travel

3 agency. Correct?

4 A. Yes. Yes.

5 Q. Help me with this: During that time period as outlined in the

6 fourth amended indictment, and I recognise you don't have that, but for

7 our purposes, can you tell me during that time period, September 1991

8 through late May 1992, whether or not the police -- whether or not the

9 police instructed, influenced, ordered, or requested that you, as a

10 private entrepreneur with your travel business, that you provide

11 transportation to Bosnian Muslims or Bosnian Croats out of the Prijedor

12 Municipality?

13 A. As I've already said, no one interfered with the work of my

14 agency. And I can state this with full responsibility. I don't know of a

15 single case where someone ordered me to provide transport for anyone

16 else. I never got any such orders from the army or from the police.

17 After all, they were not really relevant factors for my business at that

18 time, the army and the police.

19 Q. Did the people who were leaving the Prijedor Municipality, sir, at

20 any time during this same time period as outlined in the indictment, did

21 they, sir, at any time advise or inform you that the reason they were

22 leaving the Prijedor Municipality was because of propaganda that was

23 inciting and referring to the Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats as

24 fanatics?

25 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May I kindly ask Defence counsel not to make

Page 12026

1 reference to the indictment not available for the witness.

2 MR. OSTOJIC: Fair enough. I was just doing it for the Court and

3 the OTP. Thank you, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Would you please repeat your question and refer

5 to the concrete period of time.

6 MR. OSTOJIC: Specifically so, Your Honour.

7 Q. During the entire period of time, Mr. Plemic, from September 1991

8 through the end of May 1992, did at any time any of those individuals who

9 sought to voluntarily leave the Prijedor Municipality, did they at any

10 time tell you that the reason they were leaving because there was some

11 sort of propaganda referring to the Bosnian Muslims and the Bosnian Croats

12 as being fanatics?

13 A. I will try to be as concise as possible. The reasons why those

14 people travelled, I will try to explain them in as concise a manner as I

15 can and to the best of my knowledge. The only time that I knew personally

16 about someone's reasons for travelling, it happened in September 1991 when

17 some friends of mine, a group which included both Serbs and Muslims,

18 wanted to avoid their regular military service. It was a very small

19 number of passengers.

20 After that, in October, November, or December 1991, people

21 travelled as usual. There weren't very high tensions. I had no reason to

22 ponder why those people were travelling, why they were leaving Prijedor.

23 The only thing I did notice during that period was that the bus which

24 returned from Zagreb contained mostly Serbs who were leaving Croatia. But

25 none of them told me that anyone had forced them to leave. They, too,

Page 12027

1 were leaving voluntarily their places of residence. None of those people

2 ever told me that they had been under any pressure to leave.

3 Q. If I can ask you, sir, did you at any time during the time period

4 of end -- or September 1991 through the end of May 1992, did you, sir,

5 hear or learn, observe, or personally experience during the interactions

6 that you had with the individuals and the citizens of the Prijedor

7 Municipality that they were involuntarily leaving the municipality or that

8 there was some sort of preconceived plan which required that there be a

9 forcible transfer or deportation of Bosnian Croats and Bosnian Muslims?

10 A. No. There were no such cases. When you are referring to the

11 period that you mentioned, there wasn't a single such case.

12 Q. Let me turn to another issue, if I may, Mr. Plemic. Are you

13 familiar with - I'm just going to lead here with the permission of the

14 Court and the OTP - did you ever hear of a plane, a Croatian plane by the

15 name of Kikas?

16 A. The plain, the plain is the wrong word. Kikas was an aircraft

17 plane, a passenger aircraft which the Yugoslav People's Army troops seized

18 in Croatia and which was loaded with weapons. It was in all the

19 information programmes on television. That plane had been seized by the

20 army and turned over for management to the Yugoslav airline, that is JAT,

21 because they were the only ones who had pilots trained for that particular

22 aircraft and the servicing facilities for that aircraft. That is how that

23 plane gained notoriety. That is what I can tell you. That is what I know

24 about it.

25 Q. Let me see if I can find out any more about it. Did you, sir, at

Page 12028

1 any time sell any tickets for this plane called Kikas?

2 A. No, no, there were no seats on that plane, and the tickets that we

3 sell -- now I won't go into the manner how one sells tickets. There is a

4 so-called central booking service in Belgrade, and they will approve or

5 not every seat that we could sell or not sell. And I sold only JAT

6 tickets for which we had license with seats with numbers and indicated

7 names. And the fares had been set by the Yugoslav airlines.

8 We, of course, had a commission which was usual for those who

9 intermediated when selling tickets. Now how much it was, I don't

10 remember. And I say with full responsibility that never, at any moment, a

11 single employee of mine ever sold a single ticket for the plane that you

12 mentioned or was engaged in any transport in relation to that plane. And

13 I don't know what else you wanted to ask me about it.

14 Q. I'll get to it, thank you. My question next to you, sir, is that

15 plane, were you able to observe that plane and the passengers that were

16 boarding that plane in the Banja Luka airport when you were there after

17 May 30th, 1992?

18 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Sorry to intervene. I can't see the relevance

19 of the line of these questions. May I direct then Defence counsel,

20 please, to cover the period of time of the fourth amended indictment and

21 to the accusations in this indictment, that is the period following the

22 30th of April through September 1992. And especially related to

23 transports of persons by Autotransport Prijedor. I think it's not helpful

24 to discuss in general one single aircraft opposed to all these buses the

25 witnesses before had told us.

Page 12029

1 MR. OSTOJIC: With respectfully, Your Honour, if the Court looks

2 at the testimony of the witness that testified in open court on page

3 6.771, the Court perhaps will -- at least I'll make my record that this

4 witness has reliable and credible information that goes specifically to

5 the credibility of that witness. But if the Court is not willing - and

6 that's your decision - to hear the testimony, that witness specifically

7 identified that aircraft, there was specific conclusions made by that

8 witness in connection with the aircraft. And I think that it's necessary

9 to have a complete appreciation that we address those issues.

10 I will move on, and we are talking about the period within the

11 indictment, specifically since this individual worked all the way through

12 May 30th, so that covers the 30 days before and it covers more than just

13 counts 6, 7, and 8 of the indictment; it specifically covers count 1, as

14 well as count 2. But if I may, I'll proceed in accordance with the

15 Court's instructions.

16 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Please do so.

17 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

18 Q. Mr. Plemic, let me just try because of the necessity of time and I

19 appreciate your patience on this, and I apologise for having to have you

20 present during the exchange and dialogue with the Court. With respect to

21 the period after May 30th, 1992, can you tell us what, if anything, you

22 did professionally.

23 A. Well, even after the 30th of May, when I was in Belgrade, I had

24 the same travel agency, that is, I was still involved in tourism, or

25 rather, in transportation, covering the Belgrade/Budapest itinerary and

Page 12030

1 also I leased buses.

2 Q. Did you, sir, at any time after May 30th, 1992, up until September

3 30th, 1992, provide any transportation, meaning on a intermediary basis,

4 someone else would bring the individuals to the Belgrade area and then you

5 would transport them to another destination as requested by your

6 clientele, did you provide that service to people from the Prijedor

7 Municipality?

8 A. If you're asking me if this has to do with Belgrade, I really

9 cannot tell you where the passengers came from because as somebody who was

10 telling tickets, I didn't have to know that. I didn't know where somebody

11 came from. All I needed to know was the name. That is, one didn't have

12 to submit one's IDs to buy tickets. So who are the passengers from

13 Belgrade, I really don't know, what was the structure there, because I

14 wasn't directly involved in the sale of those tickets nor did I drive

15 those buses.

16 Q. Let me ask you, sir, from the period of time that you did provide

17 transportation to citizens in the Prijedor Municipality, were your bus

18 lines and tickets that you sold in full capacity?

19 A. If you are asking me and as far as I could understand your

20 question, that you were asking me about passengers from Prijedor, if that

21 is what you're asking me, you'd also have to indicate for what period of

22 time you are referring to. Because there were periods of time when I

23 directly transported passengers from Prijedor to Zagreb, Austria, Germany,

24 by bus. And there were also periods of time when I could not organise the

25 services in that manner so that in my buses, I would take passengers who

Page 12031

1 had flown in from Banja Luka, accommodate them in the buses, put them on

2 the buses, and take them to whatever destinations they required. One bus

3 went to Austria and another one to Germany.

4 Q. Why don't you tell us what that time period was.

5 A. I am talking about April 1992. Now, ask me what you want to

6 know. The period that I'm talking about when I was going to Germany by

7 bus from Prijedor, that was January, February, March, possibly April, also

8 1992. I'm talking when I organised the transport as such, that is not

9 when I was merely selling tickets for somebody else. But those were

10 extraordinary trips to Austria and Germany.

11 MR. OSTOJIC: Your Honour, I understand with your permission, I'd

12 like to just show the witness one exhibit with the limited time just so

13 that he could identify that that's his company because it appears in other

14 exhibits. So since the witness is here, I would just like to lay a proper

15 foundation in accordance with the rules that he identify - and it's a

16 very, very short submission.

17 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Please do so.

18 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you.

19 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: What would be the exhibit?

20 MR. OSTOJIC: It's 65 ter number 29, if the usher would be kind

21 enough -- Defence exhibit 65 ter number 29.

22 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May I in the meantime ask the witness: Why do

23 you make the distinction especially stating that this was the case

24 January, February, March, possibly April. What happened then when you

25 excluded, for example, May? What changed, happened in Prijedor? I make

Page 12032

1 reference to page 68, line 10 of today's transcript.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I think it is easy to

3 explain. The bus transportation is road transportation. Now, in the

4 middle of that particular road, there was an obstacle so that the buses

5 could not get around it, and that is the so-called corridor. So that it

6 was impossible to use buses as there were combat operations there and it

7 was too dangerous for passengers, and as a travel agency we did not want

8 to assume the responsibility for the lives of those passengers. And I

9 believe it was around Brcko -- that was the name of the town. No, I think

10 it was Brcko. That corridor was closed. And also the corridor leading to

11 Croatia was also closed so that the only way was if we wanted to organise

12 transportation by bus. Now, I'm referring to April and May. I'm certain

13 about May. I'm not sure about April, but I'm quite positive about May.

14 In other words, it was technically impossible.

15 It had nothing to do with the state of affairs in Prijedor.

16 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: We'll come back to this later on. And may the

17 Defence proceed, please, on that basis.

18 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

19 Q. Mr. Plemic, you're looking at the ELMO, Defence Exhibit Number 65

20 ter number 29. Can you just identify for the Court the publication in

21 which this exhibit is and the date on which it appears.

22 MR. OSTOJIC: I would ask the booth if they can just zoom in on

23 the top left-hand corner, if at all possible.

24 A. 27th of September, 1991.

25 Q. On the right-hand side, sir, do you see an advertisement that is

Page 12033

1 being provided in this --

2 A. I do.

3 Q. Whose advertisement is it?

4 A. My agency's.

5 Q. To the right of that, sir, there's certain indications and certain

6 material that's on this publication. Can you just quickly by gleaning to

7 the left of your publication, can you just tell us generally what is it

8 that is being published in this Kozarski Vjesnik on the date that you

9 provided us in 1991? What is that?

10 A. If you mean other advertisements, I can read it to you. Velika

11 Gorica Prijedor, I'm changing and selling a flat. Velika Gorica is in

12 Croatia. These are advertisements, and these advertisements include some

13 of the services that I offered. And I already told you that there were

14 regular lines to Germany, Switzerland, and Austria. And I was in this way

15 subcontractor. There was an extraordinary line leaving to Zagreb, leaving

16 at 6.00 in front of the office in the Balkan Hotel, that was my bus, and

17 then below it says airline tickets for the JAT Airways.

18 Do you want to continue reading advertisements?

19 Q. In light of the time, Mr. Plemic. No, I thank you.

20 MR. OSTOJIC: And the Defence at this time does not have any more

21 questions of you. Thank you.

22 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May I ask, the Prosecution, please.

23 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, could we have a short 15-minute

24 break before I start cross-examination -- or 10-minute break if we start

25 back at 6.00.

Page 12034

1 MR. OSTOJIC: No objection, Your Honour.

2 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: It also gives us time to have the necessary

3 deliberations. So the trial stays adjourned until 6.00 sharp.

4 --- Break taken at 5.52 p.m.

5 --- On resuming at 6.08 p.m.

6 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Please be seated.

7 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, may I just apologise for keeping you

8 for ten minutes.

9 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May I ask, first of all, the Prosecution --

10 sorry, the Defence, it was on purpose that the Defence did not cover

11 additional areas mentioned in the amended proffer we received only this

12 morning?

13 MR. OSTOJIC: In part, Your Honour, but it was also the Court's

14 constraints on the time parametres that were outlined for us. So we also

15 wanted to give adequate time for the OTP to conduct their

16 cross-examination so that the witness can be excused today, so in part it

17 was, and in part it was based on the Court's instruction.

18 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: So from your point of view, you can't see any

19 prejudice for your client due to the time limitations?

20 MR. OSTOJIC: No, that's unfortunately, Your Honour, not for me to

21 conclude. So no, I cannot conclude that.

22 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I just wanted to state that you, in fact, did

23 not exhaust the time given to you in total, and this should be reflected

24 on the transcript. So therefore, it would have been for you and it would

25 be for you to cover another area if you so want. I want to avoid in the

Page 12035

1 interest of the witness that later on, the one or the other party submits

2 that he would have needed this witness for additional purposes to cover

3 additional areas. We went through the entire portions, and I think it was

4 on purpose that, for example, you didn't cover the area under (q).

5 MR. OSTOJIC: I apologise, Your Honour. But I thought I tried,

6 and the Court intervened and prohibited me from inquiring about the areas

7 involved in (q). And I cited the specific page number of the transcript

8 that I was going to deal with, 6.770 and 6.771. I truly cannot do any

9 more than be that specific. And I spent approximately an hour -- to my

10 estimation, an hour and five minutes. I wanted to extend the same

11 courtesy to my learned friend of the OTP, and that is why I ceased, among

12 other reasons as stated, the direct examination.

13 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: So based on these remarks, let's proceed with

14 the cross-examination. Maybe you can limited yourself in the same way.

15 If not, let us please know. Then we would have to decide how to proceed,

16 whether or not the witness would have to come back or to stay in The

17 Hague.

18 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you, Your Honour. I'm just a little

19 confused at the moment because on the discussion that I had with my

20 learned friend from the break, it was -- and he can correct me if I

21 misstate. His intention was to admit -- seek to tender all of these

22 documents. If they are admitted, I would like to have the opportunity to

23 cross-examine the witness on them. But of course, I can't today because I

24 don't know the contents because I haven't been able to sit down with a

25 language assistant because I have been on my feet all afternoon and since

Page 12036

1 they were provided to us.

2 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I think we can all agree that these documents

3 can't be translated today, nor can they be read out by the witness. So in

4 any event, this area can't be covered. And if there should be additional

5 important and relevant questions, then it might be that we would have to

6 ask the witness to come another time to The Hague. So please continue

7 based on the area covered by the examination-in-chief.

8 Cross-examined by Ms. Sutherland:

9 Q. Mr. Plemic, isn't it true that there was a lot of Serb propaganda

10 on both the television and the radio prior to May 1992?

11 A. Are you waiting for my answer? You have finished with your

12 question, madam?

13 Q. Yes.

14 A. Could you please explain, then, what kind of propaganda do you

15 have in mind? What is your question about? You asked me whether there

16 was any Serbian propaganda on television by Serbs? What do you mean by

17 that?

18 Q. Instilling fear in the non-Serbs.

19 A. No.

20 Q. You don't recall seeing any propaganda at all by the Serbs on

21 television or hearing any propaganda on the radio?

22 A. I would just like to say that I am not one of those people who

23 watched television much. I use all my time -- at that time, that is, I

24 used all my time to engage in my business. Most of the time I was away on

25 business. And to be honest, I still do not understand what do you mean

Page 12037

1 when you say "Serb propaganda instilling fear." What is that supposed to

2 be? Would that be showing some killings or things like that? What do you

3 mean by propaganda? Can you give me an example and illustrate what such

4 kind of propaganda would look like, and then I may be able to tell you

5 whether I heard or saw something like that.

6 Q. Killings, racial slurs.

7 A. I never saw something like that. I claim that in full

8 responsibility. I never saw a footage of somebody being killed on

9 television. But again, it depends on what television you have in mind.

10 There were different channels. You could watch programmes from Zagreb,

11 from Belgrade, Bosnian channels as well. Let's make the long story

12 short. I've never seen anything like that.

13 Q. You've never heard anything on television about the number, the

14 percentage of Muslims that should be allowed to stay in the Krajina area?

15 A. Excuse me, what Krajina? Which Krajina? There are several

16 Krajinas. Are you referring to Bosanska Krajina?

17 Q. The Autonomous Region of Krajina in Bosnia.

18 A. Thank you. No, I've never heard anything like that on either

19 television or radio, nor have I read anything like that anywhere. I did

20 listen to the radio, though.

21 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I have no further questions.

22 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: This gives, no doubt, the possibility for the

23 Defence to add those questions not covered during the

24 examination-in-chief, and hereby I reopen the examination-in-chief for the

25 Defence.

Page 12038

1 Your witness, Mr. Ostojic, please.

2 MR. OSTOJIC: Your Honour, I'm put in a very difficult position.

3 And I'm not sure -- in any event. We're going to tender to the witness

4 the following exhibits for purposes of identification under the Defence 65

5 ter number as previously submitted to the Madam Registrar and I believe to

6 the Court, and disseminated to the OTP. Exhibit 65 ter number Defence 11,

7 29, 78, 79, and 81. We're asking the Court to admit those documents in

8 evidence.

9 In light of the witness's very own testimony on the bases that he

10 set forth, the Defence does not at this time have any questions of this

11 witness and will reserve its right and will make the necessary and

12 appropriate application in due time.

13 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Until now, you have tendered document 65 ter

14 number Defence 29. This will be provisionally marked D71B.

15 Objections?

16 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour, we do object.

17 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: On what basis?

18 MS. SUTHERLAND: Because we don't know what the document says.

19 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: It would be admitted in those parts read out by

20 the witness only. Admitted in those parts read out by the witness as

21 D71B.

22 And then may I ask the Defence to use the time the witness is here

23 in order as previously said, we want to avoid that this witness has to

24 come once again. A number of areas have not yet been covered, so please

25 it's your time now.

Page 12039

1 MR. OSTOJIC: I understand that, Your Honour. But help me

2 understand this, if I may. The Defence is prepared to stay here all night

3 to finish this witness. This Court has instructed if we ask about these

4 exhibits, the OTP has insisted they wanted additional time to inquire on

5 these exhibits. If they are completed with their evidence, we will

6 attempt even though the OTP gave us the Kozarski Vjesnik, because it was

7 in their possession after they subpoenaed and took those documents, for

8 them to claim that as an issue we will deal with later. At this time, we

9 do not have any further questions of this witness.

10 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: So it's your submission that the only remaining

11 questions would be based on these articles of Kozarski Vjesnik given to us

12 under Exhibit Numbers 11, 34, 78, 79, 81, and then another article on the

13 previous admitted document S4. But I think it's possible to base a number

14 of questions as you wanted and as your proffer shows not linked to these

15 articles.

16 MR. OSTOJIC: I appreciate that. Just so that the record is

17 clear, the articles are not just from Kozarski Vjesnik, there's one from

18 Oslobodenje -- or two articles from Oslobodenje just so that the Court is

19 clear on that, and those are articles that other witnesses will

20 hopefully -- will try to tie up.

21 I will not proceed with the direct examination based on the

22 constraints. The Court set the equal time for the parties with respect to

23 this witness. The OTP has chose to waive their right to cross-examine.

24 We think we have enough. We're not going to reopen the case so that the

25 OTP can revisit their questions and put new questions to the witness. I

Page 12040

1 respectfully would submit that if the Court deems these documents to be

2 relevant, which we do, that the Court ask the witness questions revolving

3 around counts specifically 1 and 2 of the fourth amended indictment, as

4 well as counts 7 and 8 of the fourth amended indictment.

5 Population and census is a very important factor in this case.

6 The OTP was given an opportunity to have a demographer to testify about

7 that. The Defence was denied that right. We're attempting to show

8 through documentary evidence the accurate status of the population and the

9 demographics as they existed in the Prijedor Municipality in 1992. With

10 all due respect, the Court also gave the OTP the rights to have

11 individuals who purport to be with the International Red Cross testify --

12 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Would you please stop to abuse the time for

13 these arguments. I asked you to please to proceed with the

14 examination-in-chief, those areas as you previously mentioned that might

15 cause prejudice to your client.

16 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I'm sorry. If I may interrupt.

17 MR. OSTOJIC: I'd rather that --

18 MS. SUTHERLAND: I'm sorry. I don't mean to be difficult, Your

19 Honour, but the Defence has just sought to tender the remainder of the

20 articles. I'm making an application now to put off cross-examination of

21 this witness on any of these articles if they are going into evidence

22 because I can see for the very short time that I've had to look at them,

23 there's handwriting scribbled on some of these documents in numbers. For

24 example, on 81, there's a number of handwritten numbers on what looks like

25 ads to me, but I don't know. I respectfully request that further

Page 12041

1 questions can be asked of this witness by the Prosecution and that he not

2 be released.

3 MR. OSTOJIC: I represent the defendant, number one. But number

4 two, Your Honour, I invite them to see from the original documents that

5 they gave us those are the same numbers that appear. Also, which is why I

6 choose to tender to this witness specifically Defence exhibit under 65 ter

7 number 29 so that he can identify his company. That company, in my

8 opinion, is plainly revealed on this document with the date which we think

9 is significant, and that is the area that we were going to question him

10 on. I think it's self-evident. I think the Court since they marked most

11 of the documents provisionally -- I wasn't --

12 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May I correct you. Until now, none of the

13 documents is marked provisionally. They are -- only one is admitted into

14 evidence.

15 I asked you please to proceed with questions not linked to these

16 documents because apparently, you had these documents in your possession.

17 We asked you several times during the last months whether you had the

18 necessary translation. And I can understand the other party that they

19 first want to go into details of these documents. And so therefore,

20 please proceed with those questions having no link to these documents. And

21 please understand that the Judges already have examined these documents

22 and we know what the issue is.

23 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Your Honour. I appreciate that. Your

24 Honour, all the testimony that I -- and all the questions I would ask this

25 witness are directly linked to these documents. And therefore based on

Page 12042

1 the Court's ruling, we do not have any more questions, and respectfully

2 would advise the Court of the same.

3 [Trial Chamber confers]

4 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: There are no further questions from the Bench.

5 I take it that there are no further questions with the caveat we from the

6 Defence. There are no other questions from the side of the Prosecution

7 for the reasons everybody can read in the transcript. And therefore, we

8 have to conclude your testimony. We have to apologise that you had to

9 stay such a long period of time due to reasons you are not responsible

10 for. And you are excused for today, but unfortunately, you have followed

11 the discussion, it might be necessary to invite you another time to come

12 back to The Hague. But in the limited time, about 30 minutes, it wouldn't

13 be possible adequately to cover these documents, first of all, because

14 they are not translated in a language that is not an official language of

15 this Tribunal. And secondly, unfortunately, against our rules, the

16 Defence provided the Trial Chamber with a proffer - that means a

17 preparation of your testimony - scheduled for Tuesday or Wednesday only

18 this morning. And therefore, it might be necessary for these shortcomings

19 by the side of the Defence to recall you once again to The Hague. I hope

20 this will not be necessary, but I can't exclude this.

21 So therefore, you are excused for today, and I wish you a safe

22 trip home. I hope you will be in time back for this marriage as you told

23 us that will take place. Thank you once again for coming to The Hague.

24 Have a safe trip home.

25 May I ask the usher to escort the witness out of the courtroom.

Page 12043

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

2 [The witness withdrew]

3 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: It's now to decide how to proceed on Monday.

4 May I ask the Defence whether or not there is an additional witness

5 available for Monday?

6 MR. OSTOJIC: Regretfully, Your Honour, there is not.

7 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: So we would then have to proceed with a number

8 of issues already announced by both parties. There was a request by the,

9 in the moment, absent lead counsel of the Prosecution to be heard on some

10 issues. There was a request by the Defence to be heard on some issues.

11 We have some documents. May I ask for submissions by the parties on the

12 question how to proceed on Monday. What has priority? It's the Defence

13 case, so please, Defence first.

14 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Your Honour. The Defence would submit,

15 as we did during the 65 ter conference, to the extent that we could

16 conclude the witnesses that are present at The Hague, that the Court not

17 convene on Monday, February 10th, since apparently we've concluded with

18 the witnesses that are here. We did yesterday, in light of the length of

19 the prior witness and the other issues that developed this previous

20 Monday, we called and rescheduled the witnesses who were going to arrive

21 today for Monday, and as the Court said, possibly Wednesday although that

22 was changed.

23 We at this time do not believe that there are any pressing issues

24 relating to this case that would necessitate the Court to convene on

25 Monday respectfully. There is one issue that during the initial start of

Page 12044

1 these proceedings today I asked to be heard on. We would just like to

2 make a quick reference to it if permitted so that it's on the record, and

3 it's an issue that was raised during the 65 ter conference. If I'm just

4 permitted to raise it, and then the Court can decide whether or not you'd

5 like to hear more on that issue or not.

6 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I'm aware -- you mentioned two issues, but let's

7 first decide what is the submission by the Prosecution related to a

8 hearing on Monday or not. Please be aware about the costs of a precious

9 day here in the courtroom, deplorable not used for the purposes of a

10 hearing if we can't proceed on Monday. So may I ask, what is your

11 submission?

12 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, if we don't have any witnesses, we

13 can't proceed apart from the hearing that the senior trial attorney has

14 requested. I can speak with her this evening on the telephone and advise

15 your legal officer whether she would like to be heard on Monday or whether

16 it can be put off.

17 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you. May I then first address proprio

18 motu another issue. As said previously, we can't continue in this way

19 that we receive the proffer for the upcoming witness that same morning

20 when the witness is heard in the afternoon. The witness was called. He

21 came on Tuesday, and I'm quite sure it was possibly to have an adequate

22 proffer ready for today earlier, and this would have avoided all these

23 problems we are facing today. Especially it would have been possible, and

24 I advised Defence counsel several times, whenever there is a problem with

25 a translation, please indicate this to the Trial Chamber, and as you may

Page 12045

1 recall, yesterday always there will be a way to overcome these problems.

2 So if you would have told us that it would be absolutely necessary

3 for the hearing of this witness, no doubt it would have been possible to

4 translate these documents in a language we understand and which would give

5 the other party the opportunity to follow this and maybe come to other

6 parts of the same document.

7 So therefore, the Defence should know that in future, we will only

8 proceed with the consent of the other party and the consent of the Judges

9 when we are in the possession of the necessary proffers as late as it was

10 the case this week. The ruling was that the proffer should arrive at

11 least - and it was already in a special advantage for the Defence - at

12 least two days prior to the hearing in order that the other party and the

13 Judges can prepare the hearing of this witness.

14 So please take care that the proffers arrive in this due time.

15 We'll say no later than two days before the witness appears. And we would

16 only continue with the consent of the Prosecution and the Judges if these

17 documents do not arrive in due time. Whenever you want to make use of

18 documents in the moment only available in B/C/S and for reasons we don't

19 know, these documents are not yet translated, please tell us also two days

20 in advance that we take the necessary measures that these will be

21 translated in due time. Otherwise, we would have to skip and to cancel

22 the hearing, and this would go on the account and to the detriment of the

23 Defence.

24 The time is absolutely limited. You know the time limits; you

25 know that the Secretary-General of the United Nations already has ordered

Page 12046

1 the beginning of the next trial. He has already assigned the Judges for

2 the next case to hear these cases here in The Hague is a precious good,

3 and we shouldn't waste any time.

4 And if a party fails to obey the rules, unfortunately it's to the

5 detriment of this party. We discussed this already previously.

6 I hope that the fact that we have a break next week will serve

7 this purpose, and we will continue in a more civilised way after this

8 break. But let's make use of the time later on to discuss the issues you

9 wanted to raise. But I can see the representative of the Prosecution was

10 first on her feet. Please.

11 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, it may assist the Defence if

12 whatever exhibits they are going to use with the witnesses, if they

13 haven't been translated, to even provide us two days before with the

14 numbers, and then we can have a language assistant look at those actual

15 Rule 65 ter documents and it may have alleviated -- if we were told of the

16 numbers for today, I could have had a language assistant look at those

17 documents and I may have had questions or I may not. But that's just one

18 suggestion of maybe providing the numbers two days before, and we can have

19 a look at them.

20 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you for this additional hint. And it may

21 serve the interests of the Defence. So please make use of all these

22 offers given to you.

23 So may I hear your intervention on the two issues you mentioned

24 previously.

25 MR. OSTOJIC: Yes, thank you. Your Honour. If I may just respond

Page 12047

1 very, very briefly on the other issue. I think it's in the transcript

2 from yesterday, we did mention the time constraints that we were under and

3 we did mention with respect to this specific witness the proffer was

4 late. We do recognise the rules that have been set in this case, and we

5 are grateful that the Court has been flexible in terms of submitting our

6 proffers.

7 With this particular witness, I think the transcript will

8 reflect - if my memory serves me correct - that we would make the

9 submission to the Court and to the OTP by 11.00 yesterday evening. We

10 did, because I was involved in it personally, did ultimately conclude the

11 typing of that proffer after meeting with the witness for several hours,

12 and submitted it to the Court and to the OTP through I think Ms. Karper at

13 approximately midnight. We recognise that and brought it to the Court's

14 attention yesterday. That was when we received it.

15 We did not meet with this witness beforehand, as we told the

16 Court, because as Mr. Lukic identified other restrictions were placed on

17 him. We accept the Court's suggestion and invitation that those items be

18 cured. But up to this point they were an obstacle for the Defence. So we

19 would have to sit with the witness for that extended.

20 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, may I respond. There doesn't need

21 to be two Defence counsel in the courtroom. That's why there's

22 co-counsel. One counsel can be out speaking with the next witness to come

23 along. In relation to receiving the proffer at midnight last night, I

24 specifically asked Defence to email it to myself because I knew Ms. Karper

25 was not going to be at her computer first thing this morning. And hence,

Page 12048

1 that's why I didn't get it until quarter to 12.00 today.

2 MR. OSTOJIC: And I can clarify that very quickly. I think

3 Ms. Sutherland gave it to Mr. Lukic who, based on representations just

4 shared with me, did misplace her email address. We apologise for that

5 inconvenience. I believe Ms. Sutherland can verify she did not give me

6 the email address. But in any event --

7 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: There's an old Roman saying "minima non curat

8 praetor," the Judges are not interested in those details.

9 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

10 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: We should discuss only general problems. Please

11 continue.

12 MR. OSTOJIC: The Defence would like to once again raise the issue

13 that we raised in our 65 ter conference with the OTP's, in our opinion,

14 respectfully to the Court, intimidation of the Defence witnesses.

15 Specifically we raised during the 65 ter conference that the investigators

16 and the OTP have contacted a witness that has previously given sworn

17 testimony to this Court. Specifically, that witness is now being called

18 and has been called on numerous occasions, and it is our understanding

19 that the OTP has now made personal contact with this witness, despite the

20 fact that the Court was rather clear on Tuesday as to how we should

21 proceed relevant to that witness. That witness we believe gave essential

22 elements relating to the fourth amended indictment. The OTP is going --

23 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Let's, please, into private session.

24 [Private session]

25 (redacted)

Page 12049












12 Pages 12049 to 12056 redacted private session














Page 12057

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 [Open session]

14 MR. OSTOJIC: It's simply not true. Likewise, the OTP insists

15 although they know because they have the personal identification numbers

16 of all the individuals who worked at that Detention Centre, that the

17 Milorad Stakic that is referred to that goes by the name of Mico and not

18 Braco is a totally different and unrelated person. That individual's

19 father has the name of Vlado. That evidence is known to the OTP. And I

20 think that it is by virtue of their questions that they are not simply

21 clouding the issues before this Court or making a mockery by asking lay

22 witnesses whether or not someone with the same last name would be related

23 or not. But quite candidly, the Defence is prepared on that issue if the

24 OTP is likewise to be prepared to suggest that they will withdraw their

25 indictment if there's any evidence to remotely suggest that Dr. Stakic's

Page 12058

1 brother was at any time at the Omarska Detention Centre. Facts not

2 introduced into as evidence lead us to only speculation and conjecture.

3 It is respectfully submitted that it is a --

4 THE INTERPRETER: Would counsel please slow down for the

5 interpreters, thank you.

6 MR. OSTOJIC: It is respectfully submitted that it is a complete

7 waste of time to continuously raise frivolous issues that the OTP know and

8 are aware of since they litigated the Omarska and Keraterm cases in full,

9 are familiar with all the parties, all the members who were involved

10 there, and have never raised either through the indictment, their

11 pre-trial brief, or any witnesses that they have called despite the fact

12 that there were in excess of 52, any evidence to suggest that.

13 Why now are we permitted to raise facts not in evidence? If they

14 have a fact to suggest that Dr. Stakic's brother was at any time at the

15 Detention Centre, tell us who the witness is, identify when you believe

16 that he was there, and bring the witness in. Gladly we will allow them to

17 reopen the case. It is simply not in our view respectfully appropriate to

18 have now the Defence go out and find this Mico, state completely his

19 lineage with respect to whether or not there's any relation to Dr. Stakic,

20 and also now call his brother as a witness so that he can deny bald

21 assertions with no bases supported by any facts whatsoever.

22 It happened on no less than three occasion. We're merely asking

23 for guidance that since we were prohibited from asking questions without

24 specific articles, citations of all their witnesses that they likewise, if

25 they are going to put a question to a witness as to whether or not there's

Page 12059

1 any evidence to support that, let them present it to the Defence and let

2 them present it to the witness. There is undoubtedly no evidence

3 whatsoever to suggest that Dr. Milomir Stakic's brother was ever in

4 Omarska. If they believe that it was true, they would have brought forth

5 that evidence. They truly and honestly in their heart know that the

6 Milorad Stakic that's identified in the fuel consumption records that the

7 Court examined, which I believe is S375, is not Dr. Milomir Stakic's

8 brother and is not related to him in any manner.

9 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: To the second question, my only comment is I

10 can't see anything about Dr. Milomir Stakic's brother in the fourth

11 amended indictment. If it would be the Prosecution's case that this

12 Milorad Stakic mentioned in this document is or would be the brother of

13 Dr. Stakic, then it -- the burden of proof no doubt would be for the

14 Prosecution and it's nothing, and absolutely nothing for the Defence to

15 reject by evidence this attempt to identify the person mentioned in the

16 document as the brother of Dr. Stakic. Therefore, it's absolutely nothing

17 to do for the Defence. And they shouldn't waste -- the Defence shouldn't

18 waste the time by continuing or trying to prove that this was not the

19 brother. The burden of proof is quite clear.

20 And as regards the second point, it's also quite clear, and there

21 was a ruling by this Bench that it's absolutely irrelevant what was the

22 reason why Dr. Stakic travelled after 1992 to what area so ever,

23 especially after the indictment, after the issue of the arrest warrant.

24 We can't draw any inferences from this fact whatever Dr. Stakic did. So

25 therefore, it's absolutely irrelevant, and we ruled that we will not admit

Page 12060

1 any evidence on this point.

2 I hope the next week will, in fact, help us to continue during the

3 end of the Defence case more precisely and more accurately concentrated on

4 the main question of this case. And this is the link, Dr. Stakic, to the

5 alleged charges of the fourth amended indictment and to that what happened

6 at that point in time in Prijedor. And we should, in fact, not waste our

7 time with side issues. And this was also one aspect of our rulings of

8 today when we heard this witness.

9 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, just about Monday, do you want me to

10 contact Ms. Korner and ask her about --

11 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I think as to the fact that there is no witness

12 available on Monday, we should resume only on Monday, that is -- don't let

13 me make a mistake - the 17th of February as scheduled. You have received

14 the just-filed revised scheduling order, and there it reads that we then

15 would continue Monday, the 17th of February, 9.00 --

16 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I'm not sure, but I don't know

17 whether Ms. Korner is available on the 17th and 18th of February. I think

18 she has got other obligations.

19 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I think there are counsel enough from the

20 Prosecution. And as you mentioned correctly to the other side, one

21 counsel in fact is enough. So therefore, unfortunately her statement or

22 comments have to be postponed until she is available again for the purpose

23 of this case.

24 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, I'm sorry, Your Honour, it's just that you

25 mentioned that she had wanted to raise a matter, and therefore I was just

Page 12061

1 advising when she was going to be available.

2 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I think for the for -- for these purposes, it is

3 absolutely not necessary to have an entire day in Court. So therefore, we

4 will proceed Monday, the 17th of February, 2003. And I want to alert the

5 Defence that that is the latest day for any 92 bis motion, and especially

6 with the necessary prerequisites to be found in the Rules of Procedure and

7 Evidence under 92 bis(A) as we previously ruled.

8 MR. OSTOJIC: Your Honour, I'm not -- just one minute, please.

9 Quickly, if I may. The Court I thought previously ruled and our

10 understanding was February 24th. I believe it was in the transcript as it

11 indicated. We would just say because we are doing a number of things with

12 the videolink, that we be given until at least mid-week. We will attempt

13 even before that date to identify the individuals and to tell the Court

14 and the other party the area in which they will offer this statement.

15 Because there's 24 specific witnesses that we hope to present in 92, we

16 won't be able to get the entirety of the 92 bis statement prepared within

17 that one-week period. But we can give you certainly the topical area and

18 the identification of the witness.

19 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: We can't accept this. The ruling was quite

20 clear. The deadline for the 92 bis motion is already overdue, is set for

21 Monday, 17th of February, 2003. And we can't prolong this. It's already

22 doubtful now whether the procedure necessary to decide whether or not it's

23 possible to hear these witnesses under 92 bis, to assign a presiding

24 officer, can be done in the short time limited we have to our disposal.

25 So therefore, we can't change. Once again, as we ruled previously, the

Page 12062

1 deadline is and will be the 17th of February.

2 Let's call it a long day. And the trial stays adjourned until

3 Monday, 17th of February, 2003, 9.00.

4 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned

5 at 7.19 p.m., to be reconvened on Monday,

6 the 17th day of February, 2003,

7 at 9.00 a.m.