Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 2201

 1                           Monday, 30 November 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused Simatovic entered court]

 4                           [The Accused Stanisic appears via videolink]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 2.29 p.m.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Good afternoon to everyone.

 7             Madam Registrar, could you please call the case.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Good afternoon, Your Honours.  This is case

 9     IT-03-69-T, the Prosecutor versus Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

11             Before we continue, I'd first like to verify whether the

12     technical facilities are working well.

13             Mr. Stanisic, I can see you.  Can you see on your screen the

14     Trial Chamber, or at least me as Presiding Judge?

15             Has the telephone line been tested?  Because you have a telephone

16     line which allows you speak with -- to speak with Mr. Knoops.

17             Mr. Knoops, could I ask you whether the line has been tested, and

18     if not, would you please test it right away.

19             MR. KNOOPS:  Your Honour, it has not been tested.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you please test it right away to see if there

21     is any direct communication possible between you and Mr. Stanisic.

22             MR. KNOOPS:  Thank you, sir.

23                           [Defence counsel and accused confer]

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stanisic, do I understand that you can directly

25     communicate through this telephone line with Mr. Knoops in the courtroom?

Page 2202

 1             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] Yes.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you for that.  Then of course the fact that

 3     I'm verifying that all the technical facilities for Mr. Stanisic are in

 4     place doesn't mean that you're not there, Mr. Simatovic, and assisted by

 5     counsel.

 6             There are a few of procedural matters we have to pay attention to

 7     start with, and first I should explain why we had this late start.  The

 8     late start is due to the fact that it turns out up to this moment to be

 9     impossible to have a line with the UNDU and the videolink room in two

10     languages, which means that questions to be put to Dr. Eekhof cannot be

11     put to him through this line.  I asked whether Dr. Eekhof would be

12     available to come to the courtroom so that he can answer any questions

13     here, because, Mr. Knoops, I understand that you have some questions for

14     Dr. Eekhof.  Yes.  May I take that up to the moment that Dr. Eekhof

15     arrives that we can continue with other procedural matters?

16             MR. KNOOPS:  Yes, Your Honour.  Thank you.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Then the Chamber received the -- first of all, the

18     30th of November report by Dr. Eekhof, "Health condition of Mr. Stanisic,

19     Jovica," and I do understand that you have further questions for

20     Dr. Eekhof on the basis of this report.  Then we'll wait until he's

21     there.

22             Then we also received the non-attendance in court form in which

23     Mr. Stanisic expresses that he feels too unwell to attend court in

24     person, that he does not waive his right to attend court in person, but

25     that he has indicated that he wishes to use the video-conferencing link

Page 2203

 1     under the present circumstances, and as is clear to everyone now is that

 2     he is actually using the video-conferencing link at this very moment.

 3             Until we've heard answers from Dr. Eekhof on any questions that

 4     you may have for him, the Chamber also wishes at this moment to proceed

 5     with a few procedural matters.

 6             I'm addressing you, Mr. Bakrac.  The Chamber understands that you

 7     would wish to raise an issue perhaps in private session, an issue which

 8     relates to disagreements between the Simatovic defence and OLAD.  The

 9     Chamber is aware of the issue, but the Chamber prefers to raise it only

10     after the first break, for very specific reasons.  So therefore the

11     Chamber suggests that we proceed at this moment, but that we pay

12     attention to it later today.  I see you are nodding yes, which means that

13     we will proceed as I suggested.

14             There are a few procedural matters which I'll save for tomorrow.

15             There is ...

16                           [Trial Chamber confers]

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  The next issue is that the Chamber would like

18     to issue a brief statement on conducting cross-examinations of witnesses.

19     Since the text of this statement has not been distributed yet to the

20     booth, I'll refrain from giving that statement right away.

21                           [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I'd like to also make a short statement on the

23     agreed facts.

24             The second decision on adjudicated facts is still pending at this

25     moment and will be issued in due course, but I already wanted to address

Page 2204

 1     an issue that came to the Chamber's attention in this respect.  It

 2     relates to the agreed facts, and the Chamber, as it has expressed on

 3     previous occasions, cannot comprehend why the parties cannot agree on

 4     some basic facts as opposed to simply not opposing that the Chamber takes

 5     judicial notice of them.  Matters could be expedited immensely if the

 6     parties focused on matters that are truly in dispute.  For example, will

 7     the Defence want to challenge such basic facts as when Mr. Martic was

 8     appointed to a certain position?

 9             The parties are urged to focus on matters in dispute and try to

10     come to agreements on other matters.

11             In the same vein, the Chamber learned that there may be room for

12     agreement in relation to evidence relating to Witness B-1244.  The

13     Chamber expects the parties to intensify their efforts on coming to an

14     agreement on certain facts, including those related to Witness B-1244,

15     and report back on their progress by December the 18th, 2009.

16             I do understand that it will take some time for Dr. Eekhof to

17     arrive.  Mr. Knoops, is the matter you would like to raise and the

18     questions you would like to put to Dr. Eekhof, would that be an obstacle

19     to already starting with the first witness?

20             MR. KNOOPS:  Your Honour, my questions would not be a problem to

21     be raised if the cross-examination or the examination-in-chief would be

22     limited to 45 minutes, but that not being the case, I expect --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, you say we can proceed for 45 minutes with the

24     first witness.

25             MR. KNOOPS:  Yes.

Page 2205

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we expect Dr. Eekhof to arrive in approximately

 2     half an hour.  So that would be a possibility.

 3             MR. KNOOPS:  Thank you.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stanisic, I noticed that when we entered the

 5     courtroom that you were standing upright.  I can imagine that it's not

 6     very convenient for you to get up and down again, so the Chamber will not

 7     in any way consider it as a lack of respect if you just remain seated

 8     when we entered the courtroom.  So feel free to do so.

 9             Then we'll proceed -- then we'll proceed, and could -- is the

10     Prosecution ready to call its next witness, and -- Mr. Groome, we'll have

11     to interrupt when Dr. Eekhof arrives.

12             MR. GROOME:  Certainly, Your Honour.

13             Your Honour, the Prosecution calls Edin Hadzovic, and the

14     examination will be conducted by Mr. Klaus Hoffmann.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could the witness be escorted into the

16     courtroom.

17             No protective measures, Mr. Hoffmann?

18             MR. HOFFMANN:  No.  And maybe I can raise one issue even before

19     the witness coming in, just to save some time.  Would I tender two maps

20     from the court binder of maps.  Again those are just road maps and a town

21     map of Doboj for orientation purposes.  Those are maps 30 and 31.  I

22     think I have indications from the Stanisic Defence at least that there is

23     no objection as in the past.  I have yet not heard from Mr. Bakrac.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Any objections against admission of the --

25             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.

Page 2206

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Then Madam Registrar will soon assign numbers to

 2     them.  Yes, if you could do it right away, then.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P80 and Exhibit P81, Your Honours.

 4                           [The witness entered court]

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  P80 and P81 are admitted into evidence.

 6                           WITNESS:  EDIN HADZOVIC

 7                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Good afternoon.

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hadzovic, before you give evidence the Rules of

11     Procedure and Evidence require that you make a solemn declaration that

12     you speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

13     Madam Usher will hand out to you the text of the declaration.

14             THE WITNESS:  [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

15     speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Hadzovic.  Please be seated.

17             Mr. Hadzovic, you'll first be examined by Mr. Hoffmann.

18     Mr. Hoffmann is counsel for the Prosecution.

19             Mr. Hoffmann, you may proceed.

20             MR. HOFFMANN:  Thank you, Your Honours.

21                           Examination by Mr. Hoffmann:

22        Q.   Witness, I have just first questions on your prior statements,

23     and I want to ask you if you recall giving a statement to an

24     investigative judge of the Cantonal Court in Zenica in the case against

25     Predrag Kujundzic.

Page 2207

 1        A.   Yes.

 2             MR. HOFFMANN:  I would ask that we could see 65 ter 5172 on the

 3     screen.

 4             Your Honours, I'm just waiting for the B/C/S version to be shown

 5     so he can identify his signature.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  We see now two --

 7             MR. HOFFMANN:  Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 9             MR. HOFFMANN:  If we could go directly to page 7 in the B/C/S,

10     please.

11        Q.   Witness, on the screen before you, you see a document purporting

12     to be a statement given by you on 22nd June 1998, and I will ask you to

13     look at the signature on page 7, whether you recognise it.

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   And is it your own signature, I understand it.

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   And was this statement at the time given voluntary and free of

18     any pressure?

19        A.   Voluntary.

20        Q.   And did you have a chance to review the statement before signing

21     it at the time?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   And did you also have a chance to review the statement again

24     before coming to court today?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 2208

 1             MR. HOFFMANN:  I would then ask that 65 ter 5173 be put on the

 2     screen, please.  It is a statement taken by ICTY investigators on

 3     12 March 2001.

 4        Q.   Witness, do you recall giving a statement to ICTY investigators

 5     on the -- on this day?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7             MR. HOFFMANN:  And if we can please go to the page 10 in the

 8     English document.

 9        Q.   And I will ask you, Witness, if you recognise your own signature

10     on page 10.

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   And also for this one did you have an opportunity prior to

13     testifying today to review a translation of these two statements in your

14     own language?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   And is it correct that you made two little corrections to the

17     ICTY statement, one being on page 7 of the English document.  It's the

18     first paragraph.  In the B/C/S it's the fourth paragraph.

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   It says in the statement "until 18 May, 1992," and you corrected

21     it to "Until 18 June 1992."  Is that correct?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   And you made one other correction.  That is on page 3,

24     paragraph 5 in both languages where you do mention a number of

25     check-points in Doboj, and the second one being at the Catholic church,

Page 2209

 1     and you corrected it that this check-point is actually on the road to

 2     Miljkovac and not on the road to Tesanj; is that correct?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   And subject to these two corrections to the 2001 statement just

 5     made, did your statements that you signed in 1998 and 2001 accurately

 6     reflect what you said to the investigative judge, respectively to the

 7     Office of the Prosecutor?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   And if you were asked the same questions today that you were

10     asked at the time, would you give the same answers?

11        A.   Yes.

12             MR. HOFFMANN:  Your Honours, Prosecution tenders both of these

13     statements from 1998 and 2001, that is 65 ter number 5172 and 5173 into

14     evidence.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Any objections Stanisic Defence?

16             MR. KNOOPS:  No objection, Your Honour.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac for Mr. Simatovic.

18             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No objection.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, numbers to be assigned would be?

20             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibits P82 and P83, Your Honours.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  P28 and P83 are admitted into evidence.

22             Please proceed, Mr. Hoffmann.

23             MR. HOFFMANN:  Thank you, Your Honours.

24        Q.   Witness, in your statement from 1998, which is now Exhibit P82,

25     in English at paragraph 2 -- at page 2 in the last paragraph and

Page 2210

 1     continuing on to page 3, the same in the B/C/S version, you mentioned

 2     some of the main activists in Doboj such as Milan Ninkovic,

 3     Andrija Bjelosevic and Milan Stankovic.  You refer to operation plans and

 4     orders received by local Serbs, and I quote "from higher up in Pale or

 5     Belgrade" the carrying out of a genocide in Doboj and the plan of

 6     annexing it to their Serbian Republic.  Can you tell the Court on what

 7     basis you made that statement.

 8        A.   Doboj had a majority Muslim population, Bosniak population,

 9     accounting for 42 per cent.  The Serbs accounted for 37 per cent and

10     Croats counted for some 7 or 8 per cent.  As the SDS won the elections in

11     the town of Doboj -- the SDA won the elections in Doboj and said the

12     Serbs did not agree with that, and villages with the majority Serb

13     population started separating from the rest of the area and voicing their

14     desire to be annexed to Republika Srpska.  There were all sorts of

15     rallies taking place in Doboj.  Karadzic appeared at many of them.  They

16     called for separation from the Muslim and Croat peoples.  They didn't

17     want to live together with them.  They put pressure on the rest of the

18     population, and some of that was tantamount to terror.

19        Q.   Just one clarification.  On the transcript it reads at line -- at

20     page 10, first, that the SDS won the elections, and then the next line it

21     says the SDA won the election.  Could you just clarify which party did

22     actually win the elections.

23        A.   In the town of Doboj, it was the SDA that won the elections.

24        Q.   And what elections are you talking about?  At what time period?

25        A.   That was the first election in 1990.  The SDA won the elections.

Page 2211

 1     The chief of the municipality was appointed.  He was a Muslim.  The chief

 2     of the police was also a Muslim.  All the leading positions should have

 3     been taken over by the Muslims.  However, that resulted in a dis-balance,

 4     and some of the SDS officials turned down the offer to take over some

 5     positions.  They started boycotting work.  They started avoiding any

 6     obligations, and basically they did not recognise the results of the

 7     election.

 8        Q.   Could --

 9             MR. KNOOPS:  Your Honour.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

11             MR. KNOOPS:  At this point the Defence raise an objection as to

12     the way the witness is answering the very simple question of my learned

13     colleague Mr. Hoffmann, what is the foundation of this particular line in

14     the statement?  Instead of giving the explanation for any such

15     foundation, the witness is giving opinion evidence without giving any

16     foundation for his statement as to quotations like "tantamount to

17     terror," giving percentages of Serbs, and we still do not know any

18     foundation for his explanation of his opinion.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hoffmann, I take it that after this answer you

20     would have sought the factual basis for the answers where it appears that

21     it mixes up to some extent with opinions.

22             MR. HOFFMANN:  I think to -- to some extent there will be more

23     questions in -- in the same direction.  On the other hand, I think he has

24     given some evidence in the statements already.  So I try to focus on some

25     of the issues, and I think he did refer to the rallies and other meetings

Page 2212

 1     of the Serbs in the region, the attendance of Karadzic and what was said

 2     at the time, which is, as I understand, the basis for his statement.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But at the same time, that resulted in a

 4     dis-balance and some of the SDS -- I mean, what was the dis-balance.  And

 5     the SDS turned down the offer.  What offer was there?  So to the extent

 6     the answers are not found in the statement, you are invited to further

 7     explore them.  But at the same time what is already in the statement

 8     doesn't need to be further explored and could be understood by the

 9     parties as providing the factual basis for the answers the witness is

10     giving now.  Please proceed.

11             MR. HOFFMANN:  Thank you, Your Honours.

12        Q.   Just to follow up, Witness, on what the Presiding Judge just

13     said, when you refer to the Serbs did turn down offers, could you explain

14     what you meant by that.

15        A.   The SDA won the elections and was given mandate to appoint people

16     to various positions.  Since the SDA won, he was he titled to the -- it

17     was entitled to the positions of the president of the municipality, the

18     president of the MUP.  Serbs were given other positions and other

19     functions, but they did not want them, and instead of accepting those

20     positions they obstructed the work of all the bodies to which they should

21     have been elected.  They simply started creating their own -- I don't

22     know how to put it.  Their own bodies.  And they called referendums in

23     the villages where the majority Serb population, and that those

24     referendums, those villagers decided that they didn't want to live in

25     Bosnia-Herzegovina but, rather, that they wanted to live in

Page 2213

 1     Republika Srpska.

 2             MR. HOFFMANN:  I'll ask that 65 ter 2595 be put on the screen.

 3     It's a number of decisions of local communities in the Doboj

 4     municipality, all dated 13 October 1991.  It's ERN SA02-2842 to

 5     SA02-2846.

 6        Q.   Witness, did you have a chance to review those decisions prior to

 7     your testimony?

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  You can't hear me at this moment in your own

 9     language?

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can hear you, but --

11             MR. HOFFMANN:

12        Q.   Can you hear me now?

13        A.   I can.

14        Q.   I'll just repeat the question.  Did you have a chance to review

15     those decisions prior to your testimony?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Can you describe what decisions are taken by those local

18     communities?

19        A.   These are decisions by local communes taken at the meetings of

20     their local assemblies and saying that they didn't want to live in Bosnia

21     and Herzegovina, but that they wanted to be separated from

22     Bosnia-Herzegovina and annexed to the former Yugoslavia or, rather, to

23     the Republika Srpska.

24        Q.   Did you know about those kind of decisions at the time?

25        A.   Not at the time.

Page 2214

 1             MR. HOFFMANN:  Can we please go down page 1 to the bottom.

 2        Q.   And, Witness, can you look at the person who signed that first

 3     decision.  Are you familiar with that person?

 4        A.   Yes.  His brother and I worked together in the same company.

 5     Dragan Dejanovic.

 6             MR. HOFFMANN:  And if we can go up to the header of the document,

 7     please.

 8        Q.   Witness, if you look at the header, would you say that this

 9     document appears to be authentic to you?

10        A.   Yes.

11             MR. HOFFMANN:  Your Honours, the Prosecution tenders this

12     document into evidence.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Any objections?

14             MR. KNOOPS:  Your Honour, we don't have a fundamental objection

15     to the document as such, but we question whether the witness is the

16     proper person through which the document could be tendered, because we

17     still do not have any foundation heard in his testimony as far as page 2

18     of the first statement concerns the last paragraph on which the

19     Prosecution has questioned the witness as an alleged basis for the

20     foundation of his knowledge of his testimony.  So in the absence of a

21     clear answer to that foundation question, we oppose the introduction of

22     these documents through this witness unless the Prosecution is able to

23     provide us that foundation through the witness.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Is there any issue in relation to the

25     authenticity of these documents?

Page 2215

 1             MR. KNOOPS:  Not as far as the Defence concerns.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Does the Defence accept that these decisions then

 3     were produced at the time as a result of apparently the bodies which, as

 4     the decisions say, issued these decisions?

 5             MR. KNOOPS:  We won't contest that, Your Honour.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Why not, then, bar table the decisions which would

 7     be -- I mean, in this Tribunal we have a tradition which does not

 8     strictly require the introduction of documents through a witness, and of

 9     course it there's any authenticity issue, then that should be thoroughly

10     looked at.  But if there seems to be not such a matter, then whether it's

11     through this Witness -- I -- it's now on the record that you do not

12     oppose the admission into evidence of these documents, although you put

13     us on notice that you do not consider this witness to be the right person

14     to introduce it.

15             Any objections by the Simatovic Defence?

16             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would like to join my

17     learned friend Mr. Knoops's words.  There is no point in tendering this

18     document through this witness.  He never saw the document before.  He

19     does actually know the person who signed it, but he cannot even confirm

20     the authenticity of the signature.  This is about the municipality of the

21     Doboj, about one of its local commune, and in principle I agree with the

22     words of my learned friend Mr. Knoops.  When it comes to local communes,

23     these are irrelevant decisions.  I don't think that they merit any

24     attention whatsoever.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  That's -- now we're mixing up several matters.

Page 2216

 1     First of all, whether there's a challenge to the authenticity.  It is

 2     understood, Mr. Bakrac, that you say that this witness is not a person

 3     who could authenticate these documents.  At the same time, you share the

 4     views of Mr. Knoops who said there is no challenge to the authenticity as

 5     such, apart from that it may not be this witness who could give that.

 6     And he also said that we not oppose admission of the document into

 7     evidence.

 8             Therefore, if you say, "I share the views of Mr. Knoops," I take

 9     it that there's no objection against it having been admitted, but that

10     you have problems in the way in which it is introduced by the

11     Prosecution, and that a bar table tendering would have been more

12     appropriate.

13             MR. KNOOPS:  Your Honour, if it may assist the Prosecution, also

14     for future potential tendering of documents, we have to remind that this

15     witness was from 1975 till 1992 a bookkeeper in Doboj.  And really the

16     question is, with all due respect to the witness, a bookkeeper is the

17     capable person as a witness to tender documents with a political

18     connotation like this.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, whether a book keeper is excluded from the

20     group of persons who could -- but let's not make matters any more complex

21     than they are already.  I do understand that there's no objection against

22     admission, although there's a challenge as to whether this witness would

23     be the appropriate person to -- to confirm the authenticity of these

24     documents.

25             Mr. Hoffmann, you have tendered this document.  Do you insist

Page 2217

 1     on -- on this witness as the appropriate vehicle to introduce this

 2     document, or would you say, well, it gives some support on the testimony

 3     of the witness, so irrespective of whether he is the person who could

 4     authenticate it?

 5             MR. HOFFMANN:  Your Honours, I think there is -- there's several

 6     points.  Of course we can tender those kind of documents from the bar

 7     table.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 9             MR. HOFFMANN:  That can be done.  At the same time, I think the

10     witness did give some evidence on the document.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Well, he said that he knew the person -- he

12     knew the brother of the person who signed it.  That's the -- I think the

13     only --

14             MR. HOFFMANN:  Well, he actually -- if I may.  Actually, before I

15     even called up the document, he did say on page 12 that the --

16             "The Serbs called referendums in the villages where they had a

17     majority Serb population.  Those villages decided that they did not want

18     to live in Bosnia-Herzegovina but, rather, wanted to live in

19     Republika Srpska."

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

21             MR. HOFFMANN:  It's exactly that context where these decision are

22     in --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's save our energy for the next document where

24     there is a real dispute about whether it should or should not be admitted

25     into evidence.

Page 2218

 1             This document which consists of five pages, five similar

 2     documents, Madam Registrar, the number would be?

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P84, Your Honours.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

 5             Please proceed.

 6             MR. HOFFMANN:  Thank you, Your Honour.  I do have a similar

 7     document which is 65 ter 2596.  It's a document from the SDS board in

 8     Doboj sent to the SDS Main Board on 16 October 1991.

 9        Q.   Witness, if you look at that document, again it's in the same

10     context.  Did you know about the decision mentioned in this document at

11     the time, that is, in October 1991?

12        A.   Yes.  That meeting was held in the bank and was attended by

13     Karadzic as well, and it resounded in Doboj.  It was a bombshell.

14        Q.   Can you just explain what you mean by referring to "it was a

15     bombshell"?

16        A.   At that time unrest started in Doboj.  There was the arming of

17     the army, and the police started separating from the regular police, all

18     sorts of formations starting descending upon Doboj, and we still hoped

19     that everything would come to an end, that the situation would calm down,

20     that there would be no complete separation.  However, when this decision

21     was taken, that was the end, and the Serbs no longer wanted to live

22     together with us.  That's what the decision meant.

23        Q.   Are you familiar with the person who signed this document, which

24     can be seen on the bottom of the page?

25        A.   The SDS president.  He was a teacher in the Doboj secondary

Page 2219

 1     school.

 2        Q.   And just for the record, can you read out the name, please.

 3        A.   Milan Ninkovic, an engineer.

 4             MR. HOFFMANN:  Your Honours, I would tender this document into

 5     evidence.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Same objections to be put on the record, but no

 7     fundamental objection against admission as such?

 8             MR. KNOOPS:  Yes, Your Honour.  Thank you.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Mr. Bakrac, I see you're nodding.

10             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I am.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

12             And, Madam Registrar.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P85, Your Honours.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  P85 is admitted into evidence.

15             Please proceed, Mr. Hoffmann.

16             MR. HOFFMANN:

17        Q.   Witness, in your 1998 statement, in English on page 3, second

18     paragraph; B/C/S page 3, paragraph 2, you refer to Doboj being

19     strategically important.  Can you explain in what sense you think that

20     Doboj was of strategic importance?

21             MR. KNOOPS:  Your Honour, objection.  Witness is not an expert.

22     Also in considering his profession, he is not competent to answer any

23     questions on military strategical issues.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  It depends on how factual the questions are.  Could

25     you please --

Page 2220

 1             MR. HOFFMANN:  I didn't even ask about military context.  It's

 2     his own statement where he says it's strategically important.  I'm just

 3     trying to find out what he means by that, and that's just a factual

 4     question.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I think if this is part of his statement and

 6     it's not factual in itself, then it's even good to ask the witness about

 7     what he meant by that, because then we'll be able to assess whether

 8     there's any factual matter underlying what at first sight seems to be an

 9     opinion.

10             Yes.  So the question then is properly phrased as -- not as in

11     what sense you think that Doboj was a strong of -- strategically

12     important, but what he meant by that.  That's what we're seek, and as

13     factual as possible.

14             Could you explain what you meant by it, and try to explain it to

15     us in terms of what you personally observed or you personally heard or

16     what you personally know.

17             THE WITNESS:  [Interpretation] Doboj, when I look upon it

18     strategically, is an important traffic hub and a railroad hub.  In former

19     Yugoslavia, it's the second most important railroad hub, and it links

20     Banja Luka, Belgrade, Zagreb, and all traffic -- almost all traffic went

21     through Doboj.  And then there is Mount Ozren, and Doboj is at the foot

22     of that mountain, and Mount Ozren was a centre of the uprising.  There

23     were paramilitary units up there, and in the Second World War it was also

24     a well-known refuge of Chetniks and other paramilitary units, so that all

25     traffic that went from or to Banja Luka had to pass through Doboj.  And

Page 2221

 1     the same applies for traffic going to Serbia and to Krajina.

 2             THE PROSECUTOR:  I would ask that 65 ter 1744 be put on the

 3     screen.  It is a newspaper article from 13 February 1992.  And if we

 4     could please go to the last paragraph in the B/C/S original on the first

 5     column of that.  And the relevant translation is found on the English

 6     page, second last paragraph.

 7        Q.    I would like to ask you, Witness, to just read out this one

 8     short paragraph that you see enlarged on the screen now.

 9        A.    "For this reason serious consideration was given also to the

10     necessity to establish communication geographic links.  It is not

11     disputed that Northern Bosnia is a bridge and a natural line between the

12     two Krajinas, the Knin Krajina, the Bosanska Krajina, on the one hand;

13     and Semberija and Serbia proper on the other."

14        Q.   Thank you.  This newspaper article referring to a meeting of the

15     SDS, did you hear about such statements at the time?

16        A.   I haven't hear you well, I apologise.

17        Q.   I was asking, this is a newspaper article about the --

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   -- SDS meeting in Doboj.  And I was wondering if you could tell

20     the Court if you heard about such meetings at the time and what you just

21     read out about the links between the Krajinas and Serbia.

22        A.   Yes.

23             MR. HOFFMANN:  And if we can please look at, in the second

24     column, the fourth paragraph.  I think it's a bit further down.  And in

25     English it's on the page 2, the third paragraph.

Page 2222

 1        Q.   The article does refer to a certain, I quote from the English

 2     translation, "Proposal for population transfers."

 3             MR. JORDASH:  May I formulate an objection.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, perhaps we -- we first listen to the question

 5     and then if there's any need to object to it.  And apart from that, I'm

 6     not very used that two counsel dealing with the same witness.  It's

 7     usually focused on one of them.  Now, you're both equally fine with me,

 8     but two of them is at least unusual.  Usually it's one counsel who, as

 9     they call it, perhaps a bit inappropriate, take the witness.  Now I see

10     that I've got two counsel against one Mr. Hoffmann at the other side.  I

11     don't know whether that's usual in your jurisdiction.  I don't know

12     whether you have experienced this in this Tribunal.

13             MR. JORDASH:  No.  We were simply fortifying our defences against

14     Mr. Hoffmann.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Okay.  Let's -- let's first -- let's first see

16     whether -- what the question is.

17             MR. JORDASH:  Sorry to -- can I just raise another issue, just

18     very briefly.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

20             MR. JORDASH:  And this relates to our client Mr. Stanisic.  We

21     notice 45 minutes has gone past.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Well, to what extent 45 minutes will be

23     finally delivered is still a matter to be determined.

24             MR. JORDASH:  Yes.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  But perhaps we remain on the safe side.  But perhaps

Page 2223

 1     it is good to finish at least that we know whether there is a question

 2     and what the objections to that question would be, and then we'll have a

 3     break, and hopefully then the doctor will arrive meanwhile.

 4             Mr. Hoffmann, what was your question?

 5             MR. HOFFMANN:  Yes.

 6        Q.   Witness, I want to hear from you.  You see in front of you that

 7     there is mentioning of a proposal for a population transfer, and again

 8     it's in the fourth paragraph on the second column in B/C/S.  Can you tell

 9     the Court if at the time you ever heard about such proposals for a

10     population transfer?

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, and the objection is?

12             MR. JORDASH:  The objection is less to the question and more to

13     the manner in which we are proceeding.  I would put the objection in this

14     way:  That this is a newspaper, from where we do not know.  The witness's

15     ability to comment on it, we do not know.  We haven't had it disclosed to

16     us as to this witness's ability to comment on this particular newspaper

17     article, and we submit that putting an exhibit in front a witness,

18     reading a helpful aspect of that exhibit in support of a party's case,

19     and then inviting the witness to add a little bit more is an unfair

20     process.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  It's at least leading.  That's without any question.

22             MR. JORDASH:  Indeed.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Then, Mr. Hoffmann, perhaps you could think during

24     the break about rephrasing your question.  And not to say that under no

25     circumstances contemporaneous newspaper articles could not be admitted

Page 2224

 1     into evidence, but to give it to the witness and then to say, "Is that

 2     what you heard?" is -- without any question is one of the most leading

 3     ways of putting a question.  So therefore if you would consider

 4     rephrasing it.  But we'll first have a break.

 5             Mr. Stanisic, we'll have a break, but I would like to tell you

 6     that if at any other moment you feel that you would need a short break,

 7     then never hesitate either to address me or to give a call to Mr. Knoops

 8     so that we can consider your request, and of course we'll take it very

 9     seriously.  Most likely after the break we'll -- we'll have Dr. Eekhof

10     with us.  Most likely we'll have Dr. Eekhof with us after the break so

11     that we can put further questions to him in relation to his report.

12             May I also invite you, Mr. Stanisic, your last words which do not

13     appear on the transcript.  Now wait until I finish what I said, and then

14     -- even if it is to thank me, but there's no need to do that all the

15     time.  But that you wait until we finish speaking and that you then tell

16     us what you would like to convey to the Chamber so that it also appears

17     on the transcript.  But from what I understand, the previous words were

18     just expressions of gratitude, rather than anything else.

19             We'll have a break, and we'll resume at 5 minutes to 4.00.

20                           [The witness stood down]

21                           --- Recess taken at 3.25 p.m.

22                           --- On resuming at 3.58 p.m.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  I do understand that Dr. Eekhof has arrived.  Could

24     we invite him to enter the courtroom.

25             Before Dr. Eekhof enters the courtroom, is there any party which

Page 2225

 1     consider it appropriate to ask Dr. Eekhof to -- to give a solemn

 2     declaration, or would we just hear his information?

 3             MR. GROOME:  The Prosecution sees no need, Your Honour.

 4             MR. KNOOPS:  No need, Your Honour.  Thank you.

 5             MR. BAKRAC: [No interpretation]

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  I took the last words that you would agree,

 7     Mr. Bakrac, although it was not translated to us.

 8                           [Dr. Eekhof entered court]

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Good afternoon, Dr. Eekhof.  Please be seated.

10             DR. EEKHOF:  Thank you, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Dr. Eekhof we received your report of the 30th of

12     November, 2009, and the Stanisic Defence has expressed a wish to put

13     further questions to you in relation to that report.

14             Mr. Knoops, please proceed.

15             MR. KNOOPS:  Thank you, Your Honour.

16             Good afternoon, Dr Eekhof, thank you for joining us today.  Sorry

17     that we interrupted your busy schedule.  I have a few questions on

18     paragraph 6 of your report today.  And in that report you opined that it

19     was your estimation that Mr. Stanisic can resume -- can participate for

20     periods of at least 45 minutes, and you estimate that he can resume

21     participation in the proceedings after a 30-minute break.  However, this

22     remains unclear without assessment.

23             Now, my question is, how in your professional view could this

24     time-frame be assessed?  And secondly, what should be the frequency of

25     such assessment?

Page 2226

 1             DR. EEKHOF:  Up to now the problem is, of course, it has never

 2     taken place.  He hasn't testified up to now.  So what I have done, I've

 3     looked at the activities and consultations and other things which

 4     Mr. Stanisic has done, and I think it has been proven that he can keep

 5     his attention and function normal intellectual during at least

 6     45 minutes.  That's how I came to the conclusion.

 7             MR. KNOOPS:  And as to the time break of 30 minutes, what is the

 8     foundation for that time break?

 9             DR. EEKHOF:  Well, I say that's more or less just an estimation

10     without -- not based on anything but maybe the idea that after half an

11     hour people can come down to rest and clear their mind, but there's no

12     evidence-based reason for 30 minutes.

13             MR. KNOOPS:  Dr. Eekhof, is it -- is it your opinion that that

14     assessment should be taken place on a daily basis?  Can it, in other

15     words, can it vary from day to day?

16             DR. EEKHOF:  Well, the last weeks we haven't seen many

17     variations, so I think an assessment once weekly would be enough.  But

18     I've been instructed to write a report every day that Mr. Stanisic will

19     appear in court, so will have every day an assessment, unless instructed

20     otherwise.

21             MR. KNOOPS:  Dr. Eekhof, now with respect to the videolink, it is

22     clear that there is medical staff available for consultation in case of a

23     need for reassessment of this time-frame.  Mr. Stanisic has expressed his

24     incentive also to come to court.  How would you envisage that situation

25     in terms of the assessment of the time-limits and the break?

Page 2227

 1             DR. EEKHOF:  Well, there are two points on the time-frames.  One

 2     is what he is physical able to do, and in the last weeks he's been proven

 3     able to go to a hospital in another town, that's for about three hours in

 4     a car, and with about three-quarters of an hour - that's how I come to

 5     the 45 minutes - consultation, and coming back from that town.  That's

 6     how I came to the three-hour frame.  But today I've instructed also the

 7     guard to note exactly all his activity on a logbook so that I can assess

 8     it tomorrow.

 9             MR. KNOOPS:  Thank you.  No further questions.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  I have one question for you, Dr. Eekhof.

11     Is my understanding correct that it is that there are no strict medical

12     standards for the assessments and it's rather, to say it very bluntly,

13     that apart from the basic medical assessment, that, apart from that, it's

14     -- that the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

15             DR. EEKHOF:  As I said it has to be evaluated during -- but -- in

16     fact, there is no -- I can only do it by observation.  I observe and I

17     read the logbooks and see what Mr. Stanisic has done.  I also see him

18     during consultations.  Sometimes I meet him when he's in the smoking

19     room.  So I've got an idea of what he can do.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

21             DR. EEKHOF:  And what I've put it as a maximum, and the proof the

22     eating of the pudding would be the proof how long he can last.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Of course with -- I'm not saying this but

24     being very cautious about the situation of course.  It's not in any way

25     to express a lack of caution.

Page 2228

 1             No further questions.

 2             Prosecution no further questions.

 3             Yes, Mr. Groome.

 4             MR. GROOME:  Your Honour, if I can ask just a couple of questions

 5     and follow up to Mr. Knoops's questions.

 6             Dr. Eekhof, on the 1st of September the Chamber issued -- it's

 7     the latest of one of its articulations about the way in which we should

 8     proceed in trial, and said that we'd have sessions of an hour and

 9     15 minutes.  Do I take from your testimony today that it's quite possible

10     that Mr. Stanisic would be able to sit for an hour and 15 minutes, it's

11     just that you haven't been able to assess that because of the types of

12     interaction you've observed?

13             DR. EEKHOF:  Physically, my opinion is that he would be able to

14     sit for one hour and 15 minutes.  Obvious, of course, psychological span.

15     I can only base it on what I've observed up to now.

16             MR. GROOME:  My only other question to you is -- and maybe this

17     is an obvious question.  But in your view does Mr. Stanisic have the

18     capacity presently to advise the Chamber or his attorney if he feels that

19     he's experiencing some particular difficulty during the course of a

20     hearing or during the course of a day?

21             DR. EEKHOF:  I don't think he'll have any problem with telling

22     people if he's -- if he has a problem.

23             MR. GROOME:  No further questions, Your Honour.  Thank you.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

25             MR. KNOOPS:  One question, Your Honour in re-examination.

Page 2229

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 2             MR. KNOOPS:  Dr. Eekhof, the Prosecution just confronted you with

 3     a time-frame of one hour and 15 minutes.  You just answered, Well,

 4     physically it's possible.  Psychologically --

 5             DR. EEKHOF:  Could be possible.

 6             MR. KNOOPS:  Could.  Could be possible.

 7             As far as his mental state is concerned, did you verify with your

 8     staff, in particular the psychiatrist Dr. Petkovic, whether a time spent

 9     of one hour 15 could be endured by Mr. Stanisic mentally?

10             DR. EEKHOF:  I'm not confident about that expect because a time

11     spent of one hour and 15 minutes is new for me at this moment.

12             MR. KNOOPS:  So from a mental point of view you cannot confirm

13     that Mr. Stanisic can, in fact, endure a time-frame of one hour 15; is

14     that correct?

15             DR. EEKHOF:  Well, I can not also state that he's not able to do

16     it in the moment.  It's only what has been proven up to now in

17     consultations.

18             MR. KNOOPS:  Thank you very much.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Dr. Eekhof, since the Bench has no further questions

20     to you, I would like to thank you very much for coming.  We'll see

21     whether we can resolve the problem that we can use only one language at

22     distance, if that can be resolved that might save you coming to the

23     courtroom, which is, of course, not very pleasant, not the easiest way of

24     communicating.  Thank you very much.

25             DR. EEKHOF:  You're welcome.

Page 2230

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Would you please follow Madam Usher.

 2                           [Dr. Eekhof withdrew]

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  I suggest to you, Mr. Bakrac that, we would briefly

 4     pay attention to the matter you would like to raise at the end of this

 5     session which would prolong the next break a bit.

 6                           [Defence counsel confer]

 7             MR. HOFFMANN:  Can I maybe raise one other exhibit-related matter

 8     before the witness comes in.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Please do so, Mr. Hoffmann.

10             MR. HOFFMANN:  Just again in terms of maybe saving some time, and

11     I just had a quick chance to talk to the Stanisic Defence on it.  One of

12     the next exhibits is a collection of photos that I personally took in

13     Doboj in last year just to identify the locations where people were

14     detained.  It's 65 ter 5169.  It is yet not formally on the 65 ter

15     exhibit list but is pending for admission or amendment to the exhibit

16     list.  However, I understand from at least the Stanisic Defence that

17     there is no objection to the admission of that collection of photographs.

18     So I would simply ask --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

20             MR. HOFFMANN:  -- whether the Simatovic Defence has any issue

21     about that collection of photos.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Mainly to identify locations rather than --

23             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we have not had the

24     time to peruse that collection of photos.  If it is not a problem, we

25     would like to look at that collection during the next break, and we will

Page 2231

 1     be able to state our views during the next session.

 2                           [The witness takes the stand]

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Have they been uploaded?

 4             MR. HOFFMANN:  They have been uploaded.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  So if you know how to use your e-court system, then

 6     you can look at them even during the break, but Mr. Hoffmann, you will

 7     see when -- at what time you'll introduce them and see then whether the

 8     Simatovic Defence has looked at them or not.

 9             We'll continue.  If you're ready, please proceed.

10             MR. HOFFMANN:  Thank you.  Yes.

11             If I can ask the court usher to bring back the newspaper article

12     on the screen, which is 65 ter 1744.

13        Q.   And, Witness, can I ask you if you ever heard about any proposal

14     in 1991 or 1992 relating to a transfer of population or exchange of

15     population?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Can you explain what you learned or heard about such proposals at

18     the time?

19        A.   At that time, Serb -- Serbs asked for those places with a

20     majority Serb population to be separated and that the minority peoples in

21     those places should move out.  In practical terms, that was expulsion.

22        Q.   Do you know if any such proposals were ever implemented?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   Can you explain how, if you know.

25        A.   As soon as they took over, the SDS I mean, all Muslims and

Page 2232

 1     Croats, and I'm talking about Doboj, all Muslims and Croats were fired

 2     from their jobs.  They started blowing up Muslim and Croat cafe bars and

 3     cars.  People started moving out spontaneously.  Arrests started.  We

 4     were being put in camps, and we were exchanged.

 5             I personally and my family were arrested after the shelling of

 6     Doboj, and I was put in a camp.  I managed to escape from one of those

 7     camps where I was.  The others were exchanged.

 8             There was a curfew in Doboj.  Muslims and Croats were allowed

 9     only to walk between 8.00 and 11.00 to go for their supplies.  After that

10     we had to stay home.  In the meantime, they visited the empty houses,

11     looted and took away everything that was in the houses.  They broke in,

12     stole property, and they took us into camps.

13        Q.   Now, what you just told about these things that happened and

14     having reviewed the article in front of you, would you say that what is

15     said in this article is consistent with what you learned about those

16     proposals at the time?

17        A.   Yes.

18             MR. HOFFMANN:  I would tender this newspaper article into

19     evidence.  And just for the record, it is from a local newspaper,

20     "Derventski List" and was published on 13 February 1992.

21             MR. JORDASH:  No objection.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac.

23             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Madam Registrar.

25             THE REGISTRAR:  The article will become Exhibit P86,

Page 2233

 1     Your Honours.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  P86 is admitted into evidence.

 3             MR. HOFFMANN:

 4        Q.   Witness, I want now to draw your attention to your detention in

 5     1992, and especially your detention at the so-called Perco's disco in

 6     Vila which is part of Doboj town.  And I want to ask if you had a chance

 7     prior to coming to court today to review collection of photographs from

 8     various locations in Doboj.

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   And did you recognise the locations that were on those

11     photographs?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   And did you also have a chance to review an index of all those

14     photos?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   And can you confirm that this intention that you reviewed is

17     actually correct?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   Now, Your Honours, I notice what Mr. Bakrac said about this photo

20     collection which is 65 ter 5169.  Normally I would have intended to

21     simply tender that collection into evidence without going through the

22     process of showing individual photos now to the witness.  What I would

23     propose, to give Mr. Bakrac some time, would be to give it a P number,

24     mark it for identification, and then maybe admitted it into evidence

25     after the next session if we have a response by Mr. Bakrac.

Page 2234

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Do you want to rely on these photographers with this

 2     witness, or ...

 3             MR. HOFFMANN:  Yes.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then I take it that if there -- they'll be

 5     marked for identification then.  I do understand that the mere purpose is

 6     to identify locations, rather than anything else.

 7             MR. HOFFMANN:  Yes.  It's basically to identify three detention

 8     locations and their exact location in Doboj.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

10             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we're now talking

11     about the photos and illustrations.  I can now agree for the collection

12     of photos to be admitted into evidence.  And this is just to make

13     everybody's life easier.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I do understand that that's also the Stanisic

15     position.

16             Madam Registrar, a serious of photos, 65 ter 5169 receives

17     number?

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P87, Your Honours.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  P87 is admitted into evidence.  Please proceed.

20             MR. HOFFMANN:

21        Q.   Witness, can you tell us briefly who was actually detained in the

22     disco, the so-called Perco's disco?

23        A.   Croats and Muslim were is detained there from neighbouring

24     villages and from the town of Doboj itself.  And villages in question

25     were those with predominant Croat and Muslim populations.

Page 2235

 1        Q.   Were these men, women, and children detained at the disco?

 2        A.   Only men.

 3        Q.   And were these men civilians, police officers, soldiers, if you

 4     know?

 5        A.   Civilians.

 6        Q.   And were you personally ever given a reason for your arrest and

 7     detention?

 8        A.   No.

 9        Q.   In your 2000 -- in your 1998 statement, which is Exhibit P82, you

10     mention a certain Slobodan Karagic, aka Karaga, coming to the military

11     hangars near the Bosanka company.  Are you able to tell the Court whether

12     this Slobodan Karagic was a member of the regular Serb police or army?

13        A.   He was a member of a paramilitary unit.  I don't know which one.

14     He came to the camp where we were, and he was looking for hidden money,

15     jewellery, gold, and if he found any, that person would be set free.  As

16     far as I know, nobody was as a result of such practices.

17        Q.   And can you describe the Court, if you remember, how this person

18     was dressed.

19        A.   A camouflage military uniform.  A camouflage uniform with a red

20     beret that he wore on the head.

21             MR. HOFFMANN:  I would ask that 65 ter 4840 be brought on the

22     screen.  It's a number of payment lists from the CSB Doboj from the time

23     area -- time period April 1992.  And if we could go in the original

24     directly to page 9.

25        Q.   Witness, can I ask you to look at the list of names that you see

Page 2236

 1     there and tell me if you recognise any of the names on the list.

 2        A.   Slobodan Karagic [realtime transcript read in error "Karadzic"];

 3     Nenad Markocevic, who was a kayak athlete in Doboj.

 4        Q.   Do you know if the second person that you mentioned,

 5     Nenad Markocevic, whether he was --

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   -- if you know, a member of any police or army unit or any other

 8     unit?

 9        A.   He was a member of a unit just like Karaga, but I don't know

10     which.  They wore uniforms and red berets.  And when people were lined up

11     in the form of a human shield, he was on that line where we were.

12        Q.   I just note that a few lines above the name of Slobodan Karagic

13     is actually misspelled, and it says now Karadzic.  If that could be

14     directed.

15        A.   Karagic, yes.

16        Q.   If he could then turn to the next page, and I'll ask you again,

17     Witness, if you recognise any of the names on this second part of that

18     list.

19        A.   No.

20        Q.   If you look at the last four names, any of those are familiar?

21        A.   Milan Kerkez.  He was a guard or, rather, Golub's a deputy in the

22     hangar in Perco's disco club.  He was an employee of the Doboj Izvor

23     company, and he was the chief of the cool depot -- cooler depot.

24             MR. HOFFMANN:  I'll ask that this exhibit be admitted into

25     evidence.

Page 2237

 1             MR. JORDASH:  Could I put an objection on the record, and the

 2     problem is this, that whilst we can accept and don't dispute that this

 3     witness has recognised certain names on this list, what we are troubled

 4     by is the way in which notice of this evidence is given.  What we're told

 5     and what we were told in relation to this witness is this -- this is your

 6     evidence.  These are your statements.  And we are obviously given a

 7     variety of Rule 66 statements.  We're then given, as in this case, a list

 8     of payments to a number of named people from the CSB Doboj.  What we're

 9     not told, what we learn as we sit in court, is the connection between the

10     two.  There's nothing in the witness's statement to say he's going to

11     look at this list and confirm that these names appear on the list, and he

12     knows of them.  We are, in effect, being made to guess at the connection

13     that this witness is going to be asked to make between his witness

14     statement and exhibits which are disclosed to us, yes, but not disclosed

15     to us in a form which is useful so that we can make the various

16     connections before we hear it in the courtroom.  So that's my objection

17     to this general approach to the way in which the Prosecution's case is

18     apparently going to be led.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If you have -- when you saw this list,

20     Mr. Jordash, what came to your mind?  That is a list of what?

21             MR. JORDASH:  Well, the list is -- is obvious in the sense that

22     there are named people who --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

24             MR. JORDASH:  -- the Prosecution would say --

25             JUDGE ORIE:  That's clear.  But I asked you what came into your

Page 2238

 1     mind apart from that you were able to see that this is a list of persons.

 2             MR. JORDASH:  That the witness was going to say that he knew one

 3     or more of the people on this list.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And -- so actually, it happened what you

 5     thought would happen.

 6             MR. JORDASH:  But we were struggling with what's 41 names and not

 7     knowing which one the witness was going to say he knew and what they

 8     meant to the Prosecution case.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  And then I take it that you asked Mr. Hoffmann --

10     I'm a bit confused about what this is all about.  Could you give us

11     further information.

12             MR. JORDASH:  Well, the problem with that is -- I understand

13     exactly what Your Honour is getting at, but the problem with that is we

14     were, in the first instance, had a list sent to us of exhibits which

15     numbered, I think, in terms of pages, over 300 pages.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

17             MR. JORDASH:  So it places us at a real disadvantage to have to

18     go through every single line of those 300 pages, query what might be in

19     the Prosecution's mind, send an e-mail to the Prosecution.  One of the

20     exhibits, for example, was Assembly minutes from Republika Srpska

21     Assembly meeting, 168 pages.  We had no idea what it was in that that was

22     going to be a part of the Prosecution case, or what it was suppose to

23     prove.  We cannot go through, with all due respect, every single line and

24     query each time what it is the Prosecution are trying to say with a

25     particular page and with a particular line.

Page 2239

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  To some extent, Mr. Jordash, I fully

 2     understand what you're troubled by, and therefore one of the solutions

 3     for this would be -- I mean the witness in his statement talks about

 4     Mr. Karagic, and apparently Mr. Hoffmann thinks that this list where the

 5     name of Karagic appears is something worthwhile because it corroborates

 6     the evidence, et cetera.  The easiest way of dealing with these matters

 7     is that, and I'm also looking at you Mr. Hoffmann, is to tender it from

 8     the bar table, and then in accordance with a very specific procedure,

 9     which is accompanied by a joint filing in which you, Mr. Hoffmann, say,

10     What is the relevant portion of that?  Give that in advance to the

11     Stanisic Defence so that they can survive.  You consider page 8 relevant.

12     We are aware of that now.  But for us, page 14 is even more relevant.  So

13     please, Chamber, look at page 14 as well.  So that we get a focused

14     introduction of lengthy documents.  I mean if we are talking about five

15     documents in which it is explained that the SDS has decided that it will

16     follow the wish of the people, et cetera, that's obvious from its

17     beginning.  But if we're talking about these lengthy documents, there

18     must be ways to find a solution which would meet some of the concerns,

19     which I fully understand Mr. Jordash, and also assist the Chamber because

20     we are in a similar position if we have to go through 130 pages.

21     Sometimes it's, of course, after the testimony.  But if you could give a

22     hand to Mr. Jordash, that will save him a lot of time.  It will avoid a

23     lot of problems.  So try to find a solution to say any document from

24     which it is not immediately clear two or three days before the witness

25     comes and testifies, it's already look specifically at this page or that

Page 2240

 1     page because that's the reason why we introduce these documents.  This

 2     will certainly save a lot of time in court.  It will assist Mr. Jordash

 3     in using his time as efficiently as possible, and it doesn't harm you.

 4     Would it?

 5             MR. HOFFMANN:  No, Your Honours, and we're glad to follow that

 6     guidance.  Although I must say --

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  It's a suggestion at this moment, and it's mainly

 8     focusing on documents of greater length.  I also want to emphasise that a

 9     bit of imagination now and then helps already quite a bit.  But 13 pages

10     of names where, apparently, we have only seen now Mr. Karagic and

11     Mr. Markocevic, if you'd say specifically page 9, that would certainly

12     assist.

13             MR. HOFFMANN:  Yes.

14             MR. JORDASH:  And the -- our main concern is the names.

15     Obviously we can use our imagination and will with Assembly minutes and

16     so on.  We wouldn't expect the Prosecution to indicate each and every

17     paragraph and what it means.  We can work it out.  But as we understand

18     the case against Mr. Stanisic, the Prosecution are going to disclose and

19     rely upon names linked to various security centres.  We need to know,

20     respectfully, who it is they say is connected to the security centres and

21     how those security centres are connected to the Serbian DB.  What we're

22     trying to avoid is having names flung into the courtroom linked in some

23     tenuous or some solid way to the security centre and then later on the

24     Prosecution telling us what it all means.  And that's why our main

25     concern is the names.  Who is it the Prosecution say was working for the

Page 2241

 1     DB?  Thank you.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Again, I spent a bit more time on it than I would

 3     usually do, primarily because I would urge the parties to -- to assist

 4     each other in identifying exactly what the focus of this case is.

 5             If I look only at this document, Mr. Hoffmann, at the top of it,

 6     sometimes it says Bosnia and Herzegovina.  Sometimes it says CSB Doboj.

 7     It's -- it's not -- it's clear that people are supposed to receive

 8     advance payment for their salary, but it's -- if you would have said

 9     these are the people who are in the camps, that would certainly have

10     assisted, and I don't think that anything would have been lost.  So I --

11     again, and that's something you'll hear for many more weeks if not

12     months, that let's try to focus on what really is in dispute.

13             Please proceed.

14             I took it also that there's no objection against admission into

15     evidence, Mr. Jordash, but this is very short for what was a longer

16     submission.

17             MR. JORDASH:  Yes.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac, no objections?

19             MR. BAKRAC:  No, Your Honour.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  The document will become Exhibit P88,

22     Your Honours.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  P88 is admitted into evidence.  Please proceed.

24             MR. HOFFMANN:  Thank you, Your Honours.

25        Q.   Witness if we can now turn to the events on July 12, 1992.  In

Page 2242

 1     your 1998 statement at page 5, Exhibit P82, you state that members of the

 2     Red Berets took out 50 prisoners, including yourself.  Can you tell the

 3     Court if at the time when you were taken out of the disco any of those

 4     Red Berets was referred to by name or nickname.

 5        A.   The commander of the Red Berets was called Golub by his men; and

 6     as he had a Montenegrin accent, we inmates called him the Montenegrin,

 7     Crnogorac.

 8        Q.   So Golub and Crnogorac are actually one and the same person?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   And during the actual human shield incident, you state that this

11     Crnogorac killed a certain Kalem.  Can you describe how he was dressed?

12     And I'm referring to Crnogorac.

13        A.   He was wearing a camouflage military uniform with a red beret,

14     and he lined up a human shield.  And to give an example of what to do in

15     order to prevent the people from escaping, he shot a bullet into the back

16     of Kalem's head.

17        Q.   Apart from -- apart from the uniform, can you describe Crnogorac?

18        A.   He had a large scar from his brow to his chin.  It looked like a

19     cut inflicted with a knife.  It was on the right -- actually, on the left

20     side of his face.

21        Q.   At the time you spent in Doboj and especially in detention, did

22     you ever hear of any other man that was referred to or known by the

23     nickname of Crnogorac other than the one you saw on 12 July 1992?

24        A.   No.

25             MR. HOFFMANN:  And if we can please see the next exhibit, which

Page 2243

 1     is 65 ter 5012 on the screen.  It is in fact another payment list, this

 2     one being undated.

 3        Q.   And, Witness, I would ask you if you can read in the B/C/S

 4     original, if you can, the header of that document or the list.

 5        A.   "The group of Crnogorac," if I can see it well.

 6        Q.   And if you look at that list of names, do you recognise any of

 7     those names?

 8        A.   I only know Nenad Kujundzic.  He's Predo Kujundzic's brother.

 9     Predo was the leader of the so-called Predo's Wolves.

10        Q.   Do you know what happened to this Nenad Kujundzic on this list?

11        A.   He was killed in Doboj.  That's what I learned after the war,

12     that he was killed in Doboj and that a shell fired by the BiH Army killed

13     him.

14             MR. HOFFMANN:  Thank you.  Would I tender this payment list as

15     well into evidence, that is 65 ter 5012.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear of no objections.

17             Madam Registrar.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P89, Your Honours.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  P89 is --

20             MR. JORDASH:  Sorry, Your Honour.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

22             MR. JORDASH:  We did object to this prior to the hearing, and we

23     do maintain an objection.  We don't know -- perhaps I'm missing it, but

24     we don't know from where it derives.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hoffmann, could you give any ...

Page 2244

 1             MR. HOFFMANN:  Yes.  The Prosecution received this document from

 2     the RS MUP in a response to an official request for assistant --

 3     assistance, that was RFA 649, a request for any evidence on the unit of

 4     the Red Berets in the possession of the RS MUP.

 5             MR. JORDASH:  We withdraw the objection.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

 7             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Simatovic Defence

 8     has an objection to the authenticity of this document.  If you look at

 9     it, you will see, that is, if you look at the first ten signatures, you

10     will see that it is -- that they are all by one and the same person.

11     It's the same signature.  And there is no date, no visible date,

12     indicating when this document was drafted.  We can only tell that this is

13     the year 2008.  The document isn't dated, and you don't have to be a

14     graphologist to tell that the first ten signatures are exactly alike.

15     They always read Nedeljko Kovac, and the only very last signature

16     Kujundzic is authentic.  And the Simatovic Defence challenges the

17     authenticity of the document and opposes it being admitted.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Two questions, Mr. Hoffmann.  The first, 2008 we

19     find fax headers.  1st of September, 2008; 2nd of September, 2008.

20             MR. HOFFMANN:  Those are obviously fax numbers, which I honestly

21     assume that those are from the RS MUP.  We have gotten this document in

22     that form with those fax numbers from the authorities in the RS MUP.  So

23     our clear understanding is that this doesn't refer to the time-frame for

24     2008 but while the RS MUP authorities collected evidence to respond to

25     the official request for assistance that this document was provided

Page 2245

 1     internally and then provided to the Office of the Prosecutor.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Mr. Bakrac the second matter, you say, it's

 3     not authentic because they're all the same signatures.  Now, if I would

 4     intend to make a forgery, I would not put seven signatures all slightly

 5     different.  So whether this is really a sign of a lack of authenticity or

 6     whether it's just person A signing for receiving money which was intended

 7     for someone else is -- I do not see exactly yet what the authenticity

 8     issue is, because that there are the same names, Nedeljko Kovac, several

 9     times.  That is clear.  I think there could hardly be any dispute about

10     that.  But would that deprive the document of its authenticity, or would

11     it even emphasise the authenticity?

12             Do you agree that if I would like to make a forgery, I wouldn't

13     do it this way?

14             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I believe that what my

15     learned friend from the Office of the Prosecution is true, but before the

16     Defence agrees with the possible admission of this document be shown the

17     request and the reply of the RS.  We can only see the date of the fax,

18     but the document itself is not dated.  It reads:  "The group of

19     Crnogorac."  To us this document seems not authentic.  All the persons

20     from number 1 through number 10 -- or, rather, for all those persons, one

21     and the same person signed.  So if the document should be authentic, it

22     would be logical for it to bear the signatures of the persons mentioned

23     by name here to the right of the all the amount.  So I still oppose the

24     admission of this document, and I ask for the request sent to the RS and

25     their reply to be shown to the Defence so that we can see when and from

Page 2246

 1     whom it was received.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  I suggest that the document will be marked for

 3     identification, that there will be further communication between you,

 4     Mr. Bakrac, and you, Mr. Hoffmann, so that you can see the request for

 5     assistance and that Mr. Hoffmann can inform you about the follow-up given

 6     to that and that the Chamber will meanwhile consider whether with or

 7     without that information the Chamber could decide on admission or not,

 8     and hopefully the matter can be resolved by tomorrow.

 9             Madam Registrar, I think you assigned already a number, but ...

10             THE REGISTRAR:  This will now become Exhibit P89 marked for

11     identification, Your Honours.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

13             Please proceed, Mr. Hoffmann.

14             MR. HOFFMANN:  Thank you, Your Honours.  And just for the record

15     I think even the response from the RS MUP itself is an exhibit and now

16     I'll make sure that we get that information to all Defence teams.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Please do so.

18             MR. HOFFMANN:  And of course -- and of course the same for the

19     RFA itself.

20        Q.   Now, Witness --

21             MR. KNOOPS:  May I remind the Court that the 45 minutes have

22     passed.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

24             MR. KNOOPS:  Thank you.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stanisic, we've been now a little bit over

Page 2247

 1     45 minutes.  I had on my mind to continue for approximately another 10 to

 2     15 minutes and then to have a bit of a longer break.  Is that something

 3     that you could cope with as far as your attention is concerned?

 4             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter cannot -- the interpreter

 5     cannot hear the accused.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stanisic, one second.  The interpreters cannot

 7     hear you.  I don't know what is it, whether it's a technical problem, or

 8     whether it's just the volume of speech, but let's just wait for a second

 9     so that everything you tell us is properly translated.

10             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] I can repeat.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but I first want to seek information that the

12     interpreters can also hear you, and I'm -- if you could just say a few

13     words now so that we first verify whether your voice is heard.  Could you

14     just say a few words.

15             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] I can hear you well, and I

16     can hear the interpreters well.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I now hear perhaps through the English booth

18     whether the interpreters can hear Mr. Stanisic.

19             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter confirms that he can hear the

20     accused.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Would you then please repeat what you just

22     said, Mr. Stanisic, in response to my suggestion that we would go on for

23     another, I think I said, 10 to 15 minutes and then have a bit of a longer

24     break.  Would that be possible for you?

25             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] Yes, but I have a remark

Page 2248

 1     which was not put forward today.

 2             Over for the last seven month -- months I practically spent in

 3     bed, and it is difficult for me to be present even through videolink.  It

 4     was my wish to come to the courtroom today and tell you in person and ask

 5     you to follow the trial through videolink.  So I would like to use this

 6     opportunity to make that request, because it is very difficult for me to

 7     follow the proceedings.  But do continue, and I will do my best to

 8     follow.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, the Chamber has considered your right to be

10     present at trial, Mr. Stanisic.  We have received medical reports of what

11     doctors say you would be able to do.  And as you may be aware, the

12     Chamber has facilitated, of course first of all, your presence in court,

13     which goes without saying, but that if you'd prefer to follow the

14     proceedings through videolink the Chamber has done everything to make

15     that possible for you.  So therefore, the facts that we accepted that you

16     would be in the UNDU and not physically present in this courtroom may

17     already be made clear to you that if -- if this is the way in which you

18     want to follow the proceedings and to be able to participate in that,

19     that the Chamber has accepted that choice.

20             So we go on for another 10 to 15 minutes and then we'll have a

21     break, a break which will be a little bit longer because we'll first deal

22     with a procedural matter, but your presence is not required for that.

23             Mr. Hoffmann, please proceed.

24             MR. HOFFMANN:  Thank you, Your Honours.

25        Q.   Coming back to the 12 July 1992, did you have a chance prior to

Page 2249

 1     your testimony to review a sketch drawn by someone else that shows the

 2     route taken from the disco to the area where you were used as human

 3     shields?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   And was that sketch an accurate depiction of the route from the

 6     disco to the front line?

 7        A.   Yes, it was.

 8             MR. HOFFMANN:  Your Honours, I would tender this document - it's

 9     65 ter 3566 - into evidence.  Again, I appreciate an indication already

10     from the Stanisic Defence earlier on that there is no objection to the

11     admission, so I would not even waste more time to call it on the screen.

12     I would look at Mr. Bakrac now if there is any objection to the sketch

13     being admitted into evidence.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac.

15             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Usher, the marked map would receive number?

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P90, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  P90 is admitted into evidence.

19             Please proceed.

20             MR. HOFFMANN:  Thank you.  And a similar issue arises for the

21     next 65 ter Exhibit, 4872.  It is a video of the actual exhumation

22     process, and again from the Stanisic Defence I understand there is no

23     objection to the admission of this document.

24             I could have a few questions to the witness about it, but I would

25     not intend to play this video.  It's simply a video recording of the

Page 2250

 1     exhumation process in 1998.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm -- and --

 3             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No objection.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Stanisic Defence no objections either?

 5             MR. HOFFMANN:  If Your Honours --

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Is it -- is it --

 7             MR. HOFFMANN:  If you prefer I ask two or three questions without

 8     playing the video, and just for the record that he confirms the --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, I have not seen the video, so I don't know

10     exactly what we could ask the witness what could not be seen on the

11     video.  That's -- I suggest the following:  That -- that you give us an

12     opportunity to look at it and that we'll then invite you or not invite

13     you to put any further questions to the witness in relation to this, but

14     that is one of the disadvantages of this system, that we haven't seen it,

15     so I do not know how useful it is or how -- or whether it's totally

16     useless to play it.

17             MR. HOFFMANN:  If you prefer we could play a very short clip from

18     the beginning that shows just basically the location where it happened,

19     and I think it's important then to ask the witness whether that is the --

20     the location of the incident on 12 July 1992.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  How much time would that take?

22             MR. HOFFMANN:  I think we can play less than a minute from the

23     beginning.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Less then a minute.  Let's do that so that we know

25     approximately what we're talking about.

Page 2251

 1             Is it with text or without?

 2             MR. HOFFMANN:  It's without.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 4                           [Video-clip played]

 5             MR. HOFFMANN:

 6        Q.   Witness, did you have a chance prior to your testimony to review

 7     this video recording of the exhumation process in 1998 in Doboj -- or

 8     near Doboj, to be precise?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   Does that video show the exhumation that actually took place at

11     the location where you were used as a human shield?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   Were you present during that exhumation process at the time?

14        A.   Yes.  I showed them the place.

15             MR. HOFFMANN:  Your Honours, that -- those would be the basic

16     questions I would have for the witness at this time.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  The video could then receive a -- an exhibit

18     number.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P91, Your Honours.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  P91 is admitted into evidence.

21             Please proceed.

22             MR. HOFFMANN:  Thank you, Your Honours.  And just for the record,

23     the video ERN was V000-7608.

24             The next exhibit I want to put to the witness is a list of names

25     of victims.  It has ERN 0672-7955.

Page 2252

 1        Q.   And, Witness, once it appears in court, I ask you, did you have a

 2     chance to review that list prior to coming to court?  And did you mark it

 3     in the first column --

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   -- did you mark in the first column any person, any name that you

 6     personally know?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   And in the second column, any person that you are certain that he

 9     was detained at the Perco's disco with you?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   And finally in the last column, one person that had also been

12     previously detained at the military hangars?

13        A.   Yes.

14             MR. HOFFMANN:  If we can scroll down a bit.

15        Q.   If we look at the number 11 on the list.  Jasmin Makarevic.  Is

16     that the same person that you know and that is mentioned in your earlier

17     statement, the 1998 statement?

18        A.   No.  Jasmin Makarevic, the one whom I mentioned, is still alive.

19     He resides in Germany.  The difference is in the name of the father.

20     This is Hasib Mehmedalija, and this person here is the son of Safet.  The

21     difference lies in the father's name.

22        Q.   And just for a clear record, is it your testimony that then

23     actually two persons with the name Jasmin Makarevic were in prison at the

24     disco?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 2253

 1        Q.   And did you add in handwriting the nickname of Salih Makarevic,

 2     number 13 on this list?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   And if we can go down to the bottom of the document.  Do you

 5     recognise your signature as of today under that list?

 6        A.   Yes, I signed the document.

 7             MR. HOFFMANN:  Your Honours, I tender this list of victims from

 8     Doboj as marked by the witness into evidence.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear of no objections.

10             Madam Registrar.

11             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P92, Your Honours.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

13             Please proceed.  I would say that your next question should be,

14     within the next four or five minutes, should then be concluded if there's

15     anything you could deal with in four to five minutes.

16             MR. HOFFMANN:  Yes.

17        Q.   In your 2001 statement, Exhibit P83, you mentioned the pre-war

18     ethnical distribution in Doboj.  It's in page 2.  Can you tell the Court

19     if you know what the distribution of the ethnic groups was after the war.

20        A.   How are things now?  Or are you asking me about how things were

21     before the war?

22        Q.   No, after the war.

23        A.   After the war, 8 per cent Muslims, 2 to 3 per cent Croats, and

24     the rest about 80 to 90 per cent are Serbs.

25             MR. HOFFMANN:  In light of what you said about the next break, I

Page 2254

 1     would rather now go for the break, but maybe -- I understand from the

 2     earlier objections about the lengthy documents, obviously, I can't give

 3     too much notice now, but at least over the break would I tell the next

 4     Exhibit which is 65 ter 1336.  It's an RS Assembly minutes paper that I'm

 5     interested in one part which is on the B/C/S page 81 and in English it's

 6     page 110.  Thank you.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  I hope that it will assist the Defence.

 8             Mr. Stanisic, we'll deal with a matter which I would say doesn't

 9     affect you in any way, a procedural matter, so I suggest that you take

10     already your break and that we would resume at 20 minutes to 6.00, which

11     is 35 minutes from now.

12             Mr. Knoops, I take it that this has your consent, that --

13             Then Mr. Bakrac, did I understand that you wanted to go into

14     private session for the the issue you wanted to raise, or is it ...

15     Perhaps you first, but then in private session, explain why the matter

16     has to be raised in private session.

17             We turn into private session.

18                           [Private session]

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 2255











11 Page 2255 redacted. Private session.















Page 2256

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3                           [Open session]

 4             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honours.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

 6             Before I would give you an opportunity, Mr. Bakrac, to raise the

 7     matter, I would just tell you what the Chamber is informed about.  Let

 8     me ...

 9             The Chamber was copied on a letter which you have sent to OLAD in

10     which you express your disagreements with the decision taken on

11     remuneration and -- and clarity, as on what basis such a decision is

12     taken.  In that letter, you have emphasised that you would have expected

13     that it was announced that you would already receive a decision not only

14     late last week but at earlier stage you said, and it was more or less

15     promised to you.  And further, now having received this decision, that --

16     that you are unhappy with the decision, with the outcome, and that you

17     give the reasons why.

18             Now, the first question which arises, apart from that this

19     Chamber, if it can offer good services to resolve any problem, it will

20     certainly seriously consider whether it is in a position to do so, yes or

21     no, but the normal remedy you would find in the directive on the

22     assignment of counsel, because we find ourselves in a situation where

23     there's a very delicate and sensitive balance between the authority --

24     and I suddenly become aware that the witness is still with us.  There's

25     no reason whatsoever to keep him here when we are discussing procedural

Page 2257

 1     matters.

 2             Therefore, if you'd rather have a cup of tea or coffee than to

 3     listen to our procedural matters, Madam Usher will show you --

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 5                           [The witness stands down]

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac, so the first question which arises is

 7     whether under the specific rules, you'll find in Article 31 of the

 8     directive on the assignment of counsel, whether for, as Article 31 says,

 9     for settlement of disputes over payments, whether it is appropriate at

10     this moment to address the Chamber or whether it would be more

11     appropriate to seek the remedy, taking it that we're talking about more

12     than 5.000 Euros, the remedy being that your final request for review

13     with the Registrar, who then shall refer the matter to the President for

14     his determination.  And that the President under those circumstances

15     shall request submissions from the aggrieved party and the respondent.

16     So I wonder whether we should at this moment hear your submissions or

17     not.  Also, in view of the case law, the case law which emphasises

18     against the delicate -- the delicacy of this matter, that is, that a

19     Trial Chamber cannot assume any powers which are specifically put in the

20     hands of the President; and the delicacy on the other hand is that the

21     Trial Chamber, whether now immediately or during the follow-up of this

22     proceedings is, of course, responsible for ensuring that Mr. Simatovic

23     receives a fair trial.  So therefore, the first question I'd like to put

24     is whether this is already the time for the Chamber to be seized of such

25     complaints.  And the second issue I would like to add to that is that the

Page 2258

 1     Chamber inquired whether the responsible Registrar official, (redacted)

 2     is present, and it turns out that she's absent today, so if you would

 3     consider that it would be appropriate to raise the matter, which is

 4     certainly not clear if you look at the relevant articles, that at least

 5     that we should then hear from both parties, but the Chamber would still

 6     have to consider whether it is at all in a position to hear such a

 7     complaint before the matter has been raised with the -- by a request for

 8     review.

 9             Yes?

10             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I completely agree

11     with you.  However, you have to understand the delicate matter and the

12     delicate nature of the situation.  We're very happy.  The Simatovic

13     Defence team is happy with the way the Trial Chamber understands our

14     situation with the sequence of witnesses, breaks, and the possibility

15     given to us to prepare together with Mr. Simatovic for his defence.

16             Why do I believe that this is the right moment for me to address

17     this matter?  On the 11th of September my learned friend Mr. Petrovic and

18     I raised the issue, and between then and the 30th of November we did

19     not --

20                           [Trial Chamber confers]

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac, the Chamber is not yet convinced that it

22     is for the Chamber at this moment to be seized of the matter, but if you

23     would like to put on the record just to inform the Chamber of what's

24     going on, what the issue is, and if you would then in view of the

25     existing regulations and the case law as it was developed, especially by

Page 2259

 1     the Appeals Chamber, then would seek the appropriate remedy, then the

 2     Chamber would allow you in three to five minutes to explain what your

 3     problem is, but this is not an acceptance of the Chamber being seized of

 4     any matter at this moment in this respect, but the Chamber will for the

 5     time being understand this as purely informative as you telling the

 6     Chamber that you have a problem with OLAD which you'll try to resolve in

 7     accordance with the applicable rules and the case law as developed by the

 8     Appeals Chamber.  You have an opportunity to do so.

 9             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, may I be allowed one

10     minute more to tell you why the issues are related and why we are

11     addressing you.

12             This Defence team has continued this trial after nearly three

13     months from a hotel room and with one laptop, because for the time being

14     we don't have enough money, and this impacts the efficiency of our work

15     in the courtroom and our obligation to present our client in a

16     professional manner.

17             For two and a half months we did not receive any information from

18     the Registry about the funds available to us.  Why are we addressing you?

19     Of course we have already approached the Registry with the request to

20     review their decision, but we are duty-bound to tell this Trial Chamber

21     that because of the problems we have the Registry, we have a lot of

22     problems putting together our defence and representing the interests of

23     our client and his right to a fair trial.

24             Thank you very much.  We fully hope that you will show

25     understanding for us and that you will assist us in any way possible in

Page 2260

 1     dealing with our problems.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  One thing is for certain, Mr. Bakrac, there is a

 3     dispute between the Simatovic Defence and the level of remuneration that

 4     what has become clear to us while receiving a copy of your letter.  To

 5     the extent the Chamber, without going beyond what its competence is at

 6     this moment and can assist in resolving it, of course, we'll give it our

 7     best efforts.  At the same time, the Chamber will not go beyond what is

 8     clearly in the rules and what is clearly in the case law.  We have to

 9     observe that, because otherwise we're creating more problems than there

10     are already at this very moment.

11             It's at least clear.  It's on the public record at this moment,

12     and if there will be any follow-up which would focus on fair trial

13     issues, of course it may well be that the Chamber, depending on what will

14     be argued, may find the matter at a certain moment, I'm not saying now,

15     within the boundaries of its competence, but that depends also on the way

16     how it's presented, how it's introduced.

17             We leave it for the time being in this way, but the Chamber is

18     fully aware that this is not the end of the story.  That's -- that may be

19     clear to everyone in this courtroom.

20             Any other procedural matter to be raised at this moment?  If not,

21     we'll have a break, and we'll resume at ten minutes to 6.00.  And could

22     the UNDU be informed that the presence of Mr. Stanisic is not required

23     any earlier than ten minutes to 6.00.

24                           --- Recess taken at 5.24 p.m.

25                           --- On resuming at 5.52 p.m.

Page 2261

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Since I see that Mr. Stanisic has arrived but not

 2     yet has put on his earphones, we'll wait for a second.

 3             Mr. Stanisic.

 4             Mr. Hoffmann, are you ready to proceed?

 5             MR. HOFFMANN:  Certainly, Your Honour.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Let me just verify.

 7             Mr. Stanisic, you've got on your earphones now, and you can hear

 8     us in a language you understand?

 9             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] Yes.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Hoffmann.

11             MR. HOFFMANN:  Thank you, Your Honour.  And having given further

12     considerations to the time that we spend in court and the objections

13     earlier on to the lengthy document, I will actually skip the next exhibit

14     and move on to one last subject with this witness.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Please do so.

16             MR. HOFFMANN:

17        Q.   Witness, can you tell the Court what happened to your wife and

18     two kids when you were imprisoned by the Serb forces in Doboj.

19        A.   My wife and two children and my mother-in-law were exchanged at

20     Slavonski Brod on the 4th of September, 1992.

21             MR. HOFFMANN:  If I can ask that we see 65 ter 3609 on the

22     screen.  It is an exchange -- a list of people exchanged on 4 September

23     1992.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  May I take it that you want to establish that the

25     witness was exchanged?

Page 2262

 1             MR. HOFFMANN:  It's actually in relation to his family members.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  I mean his family members, yes.

 3             Is there any dispute about this?  The family members of the

 4     witness being exchanged?

 5             MR. JORDASH:  No.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac?

 7             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hoffmann.

 9             MR. HOFFMANN:  Okay.  Then I would cut it short and ask that this

10     exhibit be admitted into evidence.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  May I take it that there is no, then,

12     objection against it being bar tabled?  I see two times nodding no.

13             Madam Registrar.

14             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P93, Your Honours.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  P93 is admitted into evidence, and as we understand,

16     is a document which corroborates the testimony of the witness that his

17     family members were exchanged.

18             Please proceed.

19             MR. HOFFMANN:  Thank you, Your Honours.  And maybe just for the

20     record, indeed his family members are listed as number 62 until 65, that

21     is, his mother-in-law and his wife and two kids.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

23             MR. HOFFMANN:

24        Q.   And, Witness, I would like to ask you whether you would say that

25     your wife and your children left Doboj in September 1992 on their own

Page 2263

 1     free will.

 2        A.   In the situation that we had both lost our jobs and there was a

 3     curfew in Doboj, that was we were only allowed to move about three hours

 4     a day, and we had no source of income, and she registered with the

 5     Red Cross for leaving Doboj.  When she was leaving Doboj, she was only

 6     allowed to take two plastic bags -- or, rather, a larger bag with some

 7     laundry, whereas the money and the jewellery she had on her was taken

 8     away from her and she was put on a bus.  Whether that is voluntary, if it

 9     can be called voluntary transportation, I don't know.  Voluntary

10     transfer, correction.

11        Q.   Thank you.  The Prosecution will play a short clip from

12     Prosecution Exhibit 65 ter 3536, the video ERN being V000-0406A, and the

13     clip runs from minute 54, 5 seconds; to 58 minutes, 45, of the original

14     tape.

15                           [Video-clip played]

16             MR. HOFFMANN:

17        Q.   Witness, did you recognise this man, Jozo Mandic, from Doboj,

18     shown on this footage?

19        A.   Yes, I did.

20        Q.   And have you seen his name on the list of prisoner -- of people

21     exchanged that we just saw, which was Exhibit P93?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   And would you say that his account that we just heard about the

24     events in Doboj is consistent with your own experience and knowledge of

25     the time-frame in 1992?

Page 2264

 1        A.   Yes, fully.  Yes.

 2             MR. HOFFMANN:  Your Honours, I tender this clip into evidence.

 3             MR. JORDASH:  We do object, Your Honour.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 5             MR. JORDASH:  My learned friend's just effectively introduced a

 6     second witness as a corroborative witness to this witness's account

 7     without going through the usual procedural safeguards which ensure that

 8     the Defence are put on notice and proper notice of the Prosecution case.

 9     That's our objection.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac.

11             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes.  Our objection goes along -- is

12     along the same lines as my learned friends.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hoffmann, apart from that, if I remember well I

14     gave rather precise guidance on how to deal with videos with text on it,

15     that is transcript being provided to the booth and that we would have,

16     therefore -- on the record we would have English and we would have French

17     so that we would have a complete record, whereas now what we have is we

18     can try to find the video again and then read at the bottom what

19     apparently was said.  I didn't check the B/C/S version.

20             MR. HOFFMANN:  If I may on that point, we actually did provide

21     the booth with the transcript.  And when the video started I did actually

22     expect to hear it, but then didn't want to interrupt.  I'm sorry for

23     that; maybe I should have interrupted.  But we did provide as in the past

24     the necessary transcripts to the interpreters.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Apparently the -- you did provide the

Page 2265

 1     transcript also in English?

 2             MR. HOFFMANN:  My understanding is yes.  Yes, both languages.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then apparently we have not developed yet a

 4     routine which I had on my mind which ensures that we have a complete

 5     transcript in English and in French, but perhaps Mr. Jordash is quite

 6     happy with it, because that means that the second witness is not on the

 7     record yet.

 8             Could you please respond to that part of the objection.

 9             MR. HOFFMANN:  I'm honestly, at least as far as there is an

10     objection to notice of the Prosecution case, I'm not quite sure if I

11     understand that, because I think we have clearly given notice of the

12     Prosecution case, and this is just part of the evidence to -- to underlie

13     the Prosecution case, and it's part of the Prosecution case that people

14     were deported from -- from Doboj, and this is related to it.

15             In terms of -- that we see on the video somebody else than the

16     current witness to state the events, it's basically -- and I think to

17     some extent the jurisprudence of the case law here does allow for that.

18     It is a contemporaneous document taken at the time of the events.  We

19     don't have the chance that we have any record of this witness or his

20     family members at the time.

21             This man that is seen on the video gives on the day of the

22     exchange a clear record of what he went through and how he was exchanged.

23             This witness's family members were exchanged on the very same

24     day.  He went through the same events.  In that circumstance, I think

25     it's proper to leave that evidence -- or to admit that evidence.

Page 2266

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, two questions.  The first:  What did

 2     you exactly mean by "without giving notice"?  And the second is, would

 3     this witness have qualified for 92 bis, apart from the attestations?

 4             MR. JORDASH:  Firstly, without giving notice, we have been -- had

 5     this exhibit disclosed to us.  We did know what was on the video.  We

 6     didn't know that the Prosecution would be seeking to rely upon the truth

 7     of what the witness in the video has just said.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  What would you have expected, the colour of the

 9     buses or -- I mean --

10             MR. JORDASH:  The fact that there was a victim.  What instead the

11     Prosecution will do -- what they've done is introduced Arkan in Doboj.

12     The witness hasn't mentioned him.  My learned friend will seek to rely

13     upon that evidence in addition to what this witness has already said

14     about the perpetrator groups, which leads me to the answer on the issue

15     of the 92 bis.  Respectfully, probably not.  It would not be admissible

16     for this reason:  That it goes to the acts and conduct of the accused

17     insofar as the indictment and the -- sorry, not the indictment but the

18     Prosecution's opening has indicated that they say Mr. Stanisic was in

19     control, command and control, of Arkan.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  The Arkan issue, Mr. Hoffmann.

21             MR. HOFFMANN:  I clearly have no objection if we redact that

22     little notice.  In my view --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, if Arkan is taken out does the

24     objection stand?

25             MR. JORDASH:  To this particular video the objection would not

Page 2267

 1     stand, but although the procedure -- we would intend to object in the

 2     future.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  That's clear.  Mr. Hoffmann is put on notice on

 4     that.

 5             I suggest the following solution:  We take advantage of the fact

 6     that we had no routine yet.  Therefore, we do not find on the record at

 7     this moment the exact words spoken.  You provide and you tender in

 8     relation to this document a transcript in English and translation in

 9     B/C/S, and you redact the transcript in relation to Arkan.

10             I'm looking at you, Mr. Jordash.  Would that, for the time being,

11     resolve your problem?

12             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, yes.  Thank you.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac, you shared the objections by

14     Mr. Jordash.

15             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.  I was just going

16     to provide the same explanation, but the matter is resolved now.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, with your agreement as well.

18             Mr. -- so we -- for the time being the video receives a number,

19     but will be marked for identification and we wait for uploading of the

20     transcript.  Perhaps it is uploaded already in two languages.

21             MR. HOFFMANN:  The transcript has been uploaded.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Has been uploaded.

23             MR. HOFFMANN:  It's just now a matter of redacting --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, redacting.  Of course, we wait until we have

25     received the redaction.  Please show it to Mr. Jordash before you report

Page 2268

 1     to the Court that you have uploaded it.

 2             Madam Registrar, the number to be assigned.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P94 marked for identification,

 4     Your Honours.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And that will finally cover both video and

 6     transcripts.

 7             Please proceed.

 8             MR. HOFFMANN:  I have no further questions for the witness.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Hoffmann.

10             Mr. Jordash.

11             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you, Your Honour.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hadzovic, you will be cross examined by

13     Mr. Jordash.  Mr. Jordash is counsel for Mr. Stanisic.

14                           Cross-examination by Mr. Jordash:

15        Q.   Good afternoon.  You've indicated --

16        A.   Good afternoon.

17        Q.   You've indicated in your statement of the 12th of March, 2001,

18     that there was a huge military garrison in Doboj in a place called

19     Miljkovac.

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   And in addition to that, am I correct that there was also

22     warehouses in Potocani, which is in Doboj?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   And can you confirm that there was JNA warehouses also in the

25     south suburb of Usora?  U-s-o-r-a.

Page 2269

 1        A.   There were warehouses at the village of Sevarlije and the village

 2     of Potocani, which is close to Doboj.  There was a barracks where

 3     conscripts would do their military service, and there was a small

 4     facility in the south, and there were also warehouses at Usora where we

 5     were in the camp.

 6        Q.   This was for the JNA, prior to the war, an important military

 7     strategic area.  Would you agree with that?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   And Milovan Stankovic was, prior to the war, the deputy commander

10     of the military garrison in Doboj?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   The commander during -- before the war was a Muslim called

13     Cazim Hadzic; is that right?

14        A.   I'm not sure what his name was.

15        Q.   It's probably not that important, but what is perhaps more

16     important is that when the war broke out, Milovan Stankovic took over as

17     the commander of the garrison?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   And all the equipment and vehicles, armory, and so on, came under

20     his command?

21        A.   I suppose so.

22        Q.   Well, you must have observed, I suggest, that Stankovic was in

23     command of the JNA who remained in Doboj.  Is that correct, from what you

24     observed?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 2270

 1        Q.   And Miljkovac remained the centre of the military activity after

 2     the war broke out in the Doboj area; is that right?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Are you able to confirm that the president of the Crisis Staff in

 5     May of 1992 of Doboj was a JNA captain called Milenko Glikoric [phoen] -

 6     let me spell that for you, G-l-i --

 7        A.   Milovan Ninkovic.

 8        Q.   Yes.

 9             Are you able to confirm that the president of the Crisis Staff

10     was that man who was a JNA captain?

11        A.   Yes, he was the president of the SDA and the president of the

12     Crisis Staff.

13             MR. HOFFMANN:  Just for the record, I think the party he's

14     referring to was actually the SDS and not the SDA.  Maybe that should be

15     clarified.

16             MR. JORDASH:  Yes, I think that must be --

17             THE WITNESS:  [Interpretation] SDS, yes.  SDS.

18             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  This being corrected, please proceed.

20             MR. JORDASH:

21        Q.   And he worked closely with Stankovic from what you observed when

22     the war broke out --

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   -- in controlling the military resources that had been left by

25     the JNA.

Page 2271

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   And you observed - is this right - trucks in 1992 taking the JNA

 3     weapons and transporting them to the barracks in Miljkovac?

 4        A.   Weapons and armaments, ammunition and tanks were taken to

 5     Podnovlje, which is in the direction of Modrica.  And units, that is

 6     paramilitary units, that were coming in from outside were given

 7     accommodation in the barracks.  They were the so-called reservists,

 8     bearded men who rampaged in the city, who provoked, sang Chetniks songs,

 9     et cetera.  So they found accommodation in the 4th of July barracks as

10     reserve units.

11        Q.   Right.  So from what you observed, the volunteers, paramilitary

12     groups who came into the region reported to Stankovic who then ensured

13     they had lodgings in the old JNA barracks; is that correct?

14        A.   Lodgings, yes.

15        Q.   And from there they would receive their orders from Stankovic.

16     Is that something you were aware of?

17        A.   I don't know about that.

18        Q.   Okay.  In March of 1991, you were on your way to Samac, and you

19     observed a check-point 15 kilometres from Doboj; is that correct?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Thank you.  Just remember --

22        A.   Yes, it is.

23        Q.   -- what you're saying is being taped.  And they were dressed like

24     normal soldiers; is that right?

25        A.   They were reserve units.  They wore military uniforms, but it

Page 2272

 1     wasn't the regular army.  They weren't regular units.  They were

 2     reservists.  All reservists had been called up to report at the barracks,

 3     but the -- the Muslims and Croats did not respond to the call-ups because

 4     the president of our recognised country said on TV that nobody should

 5     report or respond to the call-ups by the regular military, but the

 6     Serbian soldiers did -- did report, and they were handed weapons and

 7     stuff.

 8        Q.   Right.  So the response to the call-up meant that irregular

 9     forces or irregular men were coming into the Doboj region, being given

10     military uniforms and acting as reserve soldiers; is that correct?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Men who could, from what you observed, be perhaps better

13     described as paramilitaries dressed in JNA outfits.  Is that correct?

14        A.   Well, let me tell you.  All reservists back then in that system,

15     we were obliged to report and establish regular military units.  So

16     whoever puts on a military uniform is -- is then a member of a unit

17     commanded by the regular military.  We were all reservists.  We had the

18     duty to report at the barracks, and we participated in exercises, and we

19     were under the command of professional military officers.

20        Q.   Yes.  But during the war the situation changed, and those --

21             JUDGE ORIE:  We have problems with the transcript apparently.

22     Could we first fix that.  It seems to be a technical problem.

23             I suggest to the parties that we slowly proceed, and if it

24     becomes really an obstacle for further proceeding, then of course we'll

25     stop.  But often when it's fixed then we have the whole transcript again

Page 2273

 1     because our transcriber is still active.

 2             Please proceed, and if anyone considers that we should stop,

 3     please address the Court.

 4             Mr. Jordash.

 5             MR. JORDASH:

 6        Q.   I think, Mr. Witness, you have described what the process should

 7     be or should have been for the reservists, and what I'm suggesting

 8     happened from what you observed in Doboj was a number of reservists from

 9     different areas and groups answering the call of the SDS in Doboj and

10     entering Doboj and acting as regular military units; is that correct?  I

11     know it's a long question.

12        A.   [No interpretation]

13        Q.   So you as a citizen and you and your fellow citizens --

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. -- "acting as regular military units" creates

15     some confusion with me.  Of course, it could be that the witness is fully

16     aware of what you meant, but I'm not.

17             MR. JORDASH:  Let me --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Therefore, the answer is not clear to me either.

19             MR. JORDASH:  Let me try to clarify that, Your Honour.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

21             MR. JORDASH:

22        Q.   The place where the reservists who came into Doboj -- or came

23     from Doboj would go is to the JNA barracks in Miljkovic; is that right?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   And they would then fall into whatever military formation was

Page 2274

 1     being organised by Stankovic and his JNA commanders.  Is that something

 2     you observed?

 3        A.   Well, I suppose so.  I was not in the barracks.  I don't know

 4     whose command they were under, but I suppose that if he was the barracks

 5     commander, then they were under his command.  I don't know.  I wasn't

 6     there.  I can't -- I was not in the barracks, so I was not in a position

 7     to know.

 8        Q.   Okay.  Let me ask you something you might know then.  Just to

 9     confirm, they would receive their command from whoever was the commander

10     at the barracks.  If you don't know, you don't know.  It's fine.

11        A.   Believe me, I don't.

12        Q.   From what you observed, though, the source of the command was the

13     JNA structures which exist --

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hoffmann.

15             MR. HOFFMANN:  I do object.  The witness has clearly answered

16     that he wasn't present there, so I don't know how we could ask him how he

17     did observe anything in this regard at the place.

18             MR. JORDASH:  I'll take the objection and move on.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Please do so.

20             MR. JORDASH:

21        Q.   What you did observe and you can testify to is that the arming

22     which was being conducted, arms were coming from the JNA to the SDS, the

23     SDS were distributing them to local Serbs and reservists; is that

24     correct?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 2275

 1        Q.   And Stankovic was then working alongside those reservists.

 2        A.   I don't know whether Stankovic was directly involved with the

 3     reservists.  I wasn't there.  I didn't know who was involved in that job

 4     from the officer staff.

 5        Q.   Okay.  Let me ask you something different.  Let me take you

 6     through your account.

 7             Can you recall giving a statement to the Doboj state security

 8     service on the 11th of August, 1992?

 9        A.   Who was that?  Who did I apparently give my statement to?  What

10     did you say?

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hoffmann.

12             MR. HOFFMANN:  I just want to raise one matter.  As far as I can

13     see, we have so far received no notice from either Defence teams what

14     kind of exhibits or even prior statements they might want to use during

15     cross-examination.  I think that was part of the guidelines from the

16     Chamber, that we would be informed at the start of the cross-examination.

17             And regarding the prior statement, I would suggest that it would

18     be proper to put the statement to the witness so he can actually look at

19     it.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, it depends what the questions will be, but if

21     you want to go to the content of that statement, then you still can ask

22     questions.  It's not necessarily to be done in the way that giving the

23     statement to the witness.  I leave that in the hands of Mr. Jordash.

24             Mr. Jordash, but the first objection was that you had not yet

25     provided the Prosecution with your exhibit list to be used during cross.

Page 2276

 1             MR. JORDASH:  Well, as my learned friend perfectly knows, we had

 2     a discussion before cross where I asked one of the Prosecution to load

 3     the statements, one of which I'm about to refer to, into the e-court.

 4     Hence I had assumed Mr. Hoffmann would understand -- but, actually, it

 5     wasn't an assumption.  I said to Mr. Hoffmann that I would use it during

 6     cross-examination.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hoffmann, is that --

 8             MR. HOFFMANN:  Well, maybe it's getting a bit picky here.  But

 9     following some of the objections we had from the other side, yes, we did

10     talk about the prior statements; yes, we were asked to actually upload

11     all prior statements.  There was no indication whether one, all of them,

12     or some of them would be used.  So following the line of objection,

13     actually --

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And you immediately asked Mr. Jordash, "Are

15     you going to use them?" with the same kind of curiosity as I expected

16     earlier to be with Mr. Jordash.

17             MR. HOFFMANN:  Well, the indication we had was then that we

18     should upload all of them just to be on the safe side.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  We're not on the playground.  We in a court of law

20     where we try to seriously deal with matters.

21             Mr. Jordash, could you inform Mr. Hoffmann at this very moment

22     whether you want to use more than one?

23             MR. JORDASH:  I will use the 11th of August, 1992, statement.  I

24     will use the witness's statement of the 30th of November, 2007, and I

25     will use the transcript which arose from the trial, which the statement

Page 2277

 1     had been compiled for, as I indicated prior to cross-examination.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And next time you'll spontaneously tell

 3     Mr. Hoffmann, and if you forget about it, Mr. Hoffmann will ask you about

 4     it; isn't it?

 5             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, yes, of course.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 7             And I do see that apparently the LiveNote has been fixed.  There

 8     is a possibility to reconnect, at least on my computer.

 9             MR. JORDASH:  May I ask for the witness's 11th of August, 1992,

10     statement.  The number --

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't hear a thing.  My -- I

12     don't hear anything.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  If no one speaks, you'll not be able to test.  I'll

14     speak again.  Mr. Usher, I'll speak again, and if you do not hear

15     anything on the B/C/S channel, then we should seek the assistance of

16     our ... technicians, I wanted to say.

17             MR. USHER:  In the background you hear some fuzz or ...

18             JUDGE ORIE:  This reminds me of another matter.

19             Mr. Stanisic, I do understand that you can switch on and off your

20     microphone.  Is that correct?

21             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] Yes.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Would you mind to switch it off when you're not

23     speaking, because it gives some background noise, and I don't think that

24     it interrupts your hearing us.

25             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] I can switch it off, yes.

Page 2278

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And whenever you think you would need to

 2     speak, please switch it on.  We have --

 3             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] Very well.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Do you now -- yes, I see that apparently the witness

 5     hears the B/C/S translation by now.

 6             Therefore, Mr. Jordash, you're invited to continue.

 7             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 8             Could I ask, please, for the witness's 11th of August, 1992,

 9     statement.  The number on the right-hand corner at the top is 03000522.

10     And could I ask for the -- obviously the witness's statement in --

11             THE REGISTRAR:  Could the counsel please refer to the 65 ter

12     number or the exhibit number.  Thank you.

13             MR. HOFFMANN:  Just to assist on that, I think those, because

14     they are not exhibits, they actually have no 65 ter numbers.  So the only

15     thing that is as a reference would be the ERN number, which I think my

16     learned friend just referred to.

17             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you.  There is another number on the

18     left-hand bottom corner which is 0202.  I don't know if that helps.

19     02027929, which is the, I think, ERN number.

20             This is the English version.  Thank you.

21        Q.   Mr. Witness, would you look at the document on the left and just

22     quickly familiarise yourself with -- with it.

23             Do you recall giving a statement on the 11th of August, 1992, to

24     the Doboj state security?

25        A.   This could have only be in Tesanj, not in Doboj.  I was not in

Page 2279

 1     Doboj at the time.  On the 12th of July I fled Doboj, and at that time I

 2     was living in Tesanj.

 3        Q.   Well, let's just deal with -- we'll come back to that in a

 4     moment, but I hear what you're saying, but I want to first deal with the

 5     content of the statement and see if that is a statement you recall giving

 6     at least.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  But why --

 8             THE WITNESS:  [Interpretation] Yes.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  It says on the 11th of August, 1992, on the premises

10     of the Tesanj SJB.  Well, I mean, what's the problem?

11             MR. JORDASH:  I'm sorry, I missed that.  I beg your pardon,

12     Your Honour.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

14             MR. JORDASH:

15        Q.   Do you recall giving this statement to the State Security Service

16     in Doboj?

17        A.   Correct.  Yes.

18        Q.   And you gave this statement to report what had happened to you?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Earlier in that year in May and June and July?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   And the statement you gave the public security station was to

23     state security representatives; is that right?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   Who were interested in recording your complaint; is that right?

Page 2280

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   And the account you gave was the best account you could recall at

 3     that point in time; is that correct?

 4        A.   Yes.  That was 20 days or maybe a month after I had fled.  I was

 5     then treated.  I fled on the 14th of July.  Then I spent 20 days in

 6     hospital, and then they came to fetch me, and then I provided my

 7     statement is them.

 8             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the second witness's microphone please be

 9     switched on.  Thank you.

10             MR. JORDASH:  Sorry, could you please repeat the request again.

11             THE INTERPRETER:  One microphone was not working.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I fled on the 12th of July.  I was

13     fleeing for two days, and then on the 14th of July, I ended up in

14     hospital suffering from the consequences.  Then they came to fetch me,

15     and I was taken to provide that statement.

16             MR. JORDASH:

17        Q.   Thank you.  Let's have a look at this statement.  Could you have

18     a look at paragraph one, please.  Is it right that you told the

19     interviewers that you had fled from the aggression which had started with

20     the arrest by the Serbian Army?  Perhaps the better way for me to do it

21     is just to read the statement and ask you to confirm it.  Did you say:

22              "From the aggression against Doboj until 12th of June this year,

23     when I was arrested by the Serbian Army, I was mostly at home"?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   Did you then say:

Page 2281

 1             "On the 6th of May, 1992, I was arrested by the Red Berets and

 2     taken to the Serbian SUP where I gave a statement"?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   And that was your first reference to Red Berets, am I right, when

 5     you were interviewed at that time?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   Did you, going on through the statement, tell the interviewers

 8     that Faruk Ajanovic, Fehro Mujakovic, and Mustafa Alicic's brother were

 9     brought with you on that day, the day you were arrested?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   Did you tell the interviewers that the Malic brothers and the

12     sons of Milovan Suka looted your house?

13        A.   Milovan Suka, or actually his son, came and they were looking for

14     a pistol that I had, and I had a licence to carry it.  That weapon was

15     registered -- registered with the MUP.  They took it away from me.  They

16     took the pistol from me.  And then from the lower ground they took my

17     child's video games - at the time it was Commodore 64 - and some other

18     things.

19        Q.   Will you confirm that there were locals from Doboj who were

20     working with some of the police officers harassing civilian's such as

21     yourself?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   And some of those police officers and some of those locals were

24     working with the Serbian Army.  Would you confirm that?

25        A.   The locals of Serb ethnicity were either members of the reserve

Page 2282

 1     police or the reserve military.  Some organised themselves in different

 2     ways.  They were known as Predo's Wolves, White Eagles.  They were

 3     independent units that operated around Doboj.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  Let's -- let's read on.  The second paragraph.  Did

 5     you tell the investigators that on the 12th of June, 1992, the

 6     Serbian Army had conducted a search of the area of Orasje, Krcevine, and

 7     Carsija?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Were these local army men also working with these

10     local reserve military during those searches?  During those arrests?

11        A.   A group appeared, and they looked like men from Krajina, men from

12     Banja Luka.  They wore Red Berets, but none of them were locals.  None of

13     them were from Doboj.

14        Q.   Well, we'll come back to that in a moment, because if you look at

15     the second paragraph, you describe the men who conducted the sweep as the

16     Serbian Army who were conducting the sweep.  There's no mention there of

17     Red Berets.

18        A.   For me, for us, all those who arrested us were the Serbian Army.

19     Those things were not done by the Muslim army.  Those things were done by

20     the Serb army.  Whether they were Red Berets or Arkan's men or somebody

21     else, in any case they were the Serb army.

22        Q.   So you use the phrase "Serb army" to describe any military

23     formation of a Serb ethnicity at that time?

24        A.   At that time there was no regular Serb army in the sense that

25     they introduced themselves as such.  They all worked together.  When I

Page 2283

 1     was in prison, I was guarded by reserve police officers, active police

 2     officers, and soldiers, and those soldiers were on the strength of the

 3     reserve army and also the Red Berets.  They all acted as guards.  They

 4     were all one and the same thing.

 5        Q.   So from what you're saying, the Red Berets were working within

 6     other units or as a separate unit?  In what way were you able to

 7     distinguish the Red Berets?

 8        A.   The Red Berets arrived in Doboj, which means that they all came

 9     in an organised way upon somebody's invitation.  Their task was to

10     arrest, to take people from their homes, to ill-treat and beat people.

11     They had been invited.  They could not just come to Doboj without being

12     in concert with the regular army which billeted them in the barracks and

13     in other facilities such as old people's homes and schools.  That's where

14     they slept.

15        Q.   When you gave your statement in 1992, on the 11th of August, you

16     didn't mention the Red Berets on the 12th of June, 1992.  You mentioned

17     the Serbian Army.  Am I correct?

18        A.   For me that was the Serb army, the Serbian Army.

19        Q.   Well, you told us a moment ago that the Serb army was anyone in

20     the Serb military formation.  Wasn't that what your evidence was a moment

21     ago?

22        A.   I said that all formations that were there were the Serb army,

23     starting with the Red Berets and the reserve army, the reserve police.

24     They were all together.

25        Q.   Okay.  Let's move on to your statement.  No mention --

Page 2284

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  One second.  Mr. Stanisic, we -- we usually continue

 2     until 7.00.  Is that okay with you?

 3             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  That would be another seven to nine minutes from

 5     now.

 6             Yes, please proceed, Mr. Jordash.

 7             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you.

 8        Q.   If I can ask you to turn to -- turn to the third paragraph.  And

 9     you mention here Slobodan Karadzic [sic] coming to the camp during your

10     detention on the 12th --

11        A.   Just a moment.  Just a moment.  I can't see that.

12        Q.   Sorry.

13             MR. HOFFMANN:  Just for the record again, I think the misspelling

14     of the name has happened again.  There was a reference to

15     Slobodan Karadzic, but it should be Karagic, if I'm not mistaken.

16             MR. JORDASH:  Sorry, that's my pronunciation.  K-a-r-a-g-i-c.

17        Q.   And you told the - is this right - the investigator at that time

18     that Karagic came to the camp just the once; is that right?

19        A.   He came on several occasions.  He had a notebook, and he asked

20     all of us prisoners whether we had hidden any gold or money, foreign

21     currency mostly.  He asked where those were hidden, and then he promised

22     us that he would let us go if we told him about any hidden jewellery or

23     money.  We offered to give him our property, houses, cars, and he said

24     no, only foreign currencies or gold.  And then after that he never --

25        Q.   Mr. Witness, I'm sorry to interrupt.  I was just asking quite a

Page 2285

 1     specific question, whether you told the investigator at that time that

 2     Karagic came to the camp only once, because that's what --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Just a minute.  Mr. -- there appears to be a -- it's

 4     perhaps your pronunciation.  If you think about a grouse which gives a

 5     better "gee" and a "G."  And that creates the problem.  Again, I'm not

 6     talking about Famous Grouse, but a grouse.  I think that's approximately

 7     the sound you have to pronounce in order to have Karagic on the

 8     transcript rather than Karadzic.

 9             MR. JORDASH:  I will get used to this at some point.  Karagic we

10     are talking about.

11             MR. HOFFMANN:  Sorry, that was actually not my point.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  That was not your point.  I'm sorry, Mr. Hoffmann.

13             MR. HOFFMANN:  I just think that we have to be fair in reading

14     from the statement.  And it does not say that he only came once.  It says

15     he came once, so that the witness obviously is giving the event of one of

16     those visits of Slobodan Karagic.  It is not state as is suggested that

17     the witness at the same said he only came once.  That's not on the

18     statement.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, although it may be that that would have been --

20     first of all, if there is any quote from a previous statement, if there's

21     any chance of even the quote being contested as being incomplete or

22     inaccurate, I invite the parties to quote literally and to give the

23     proper context, and once then a witness has answered a question in

24     relation to that, it would be for re-examination, Mr. Hoffmann, to

25     further clarify that.

Page 2286

 1             Please proceed.

 2             MR. JORDASH:

 3        Q.   Mr. Witness, did you tell the investigator, as is noted on the

 4     first line of this paragraph, that Karagic came once and asked the

 5     prisoners whether any of them wanted to ransom their heads?

 6        A.   [No interpretation]

 7        Q.   And did you reading five lines down say, "He never came again"?

 8        A.   Yes.  Yes, that's what I'm reading here, yes.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  And that's what you told the investigator.

10        A.   Yes, that's what I read here.  That's what it says.

11        Q.   Thank you.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Again, the answer if -- "That's what I read here.

13     That's what it says," is still not answer to your question.

14             What you read there, is that what you said at the time?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At the time, I was speaking under

16     the impression of the 20 days that I spent in the camp.  They were

17     insisting on the names, and I gave them what I remembered, and that's how

18     my answers were recorded, I suppose.

19             MR. JORDASH:

20        Q.   So the impression you had during that 20 days was that Karagic

21     had come only once.  So that's why you told the investigator he'd come

22     only once.

23        A.   Yes, he did come once.

24        Q.   No, that he'd come only once.  He never came again.  Are those

25     the words you used to the investigator?

Page 2287

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hadzovic, the issue is whether Mr. Karagic came

 2     once to the camp and never again, or is that what you intended to say, or

 3     has he been more than once in the camp?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I can remember, he did

 5     come but only once.  I remember that he came once.  I don't know whether

 6     he came any other time, but I know that that time when he came he had a

 7     notebook, and he was looking to purchase our heads.  He was looking to

 8     exchange our lives for money or gold.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, within the next two minutes we have to

10     adjourn, so if you -- but I can imagine that you would want to put

11     another question to the witness.

12             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you.

13        Q.   Just moving down the statement, did you tell the investigator, in

14     the same paragraph, a certain Slavko who used to be a prison guard,

15     worked as guard at the entrance to the camp where you were being held?

16     That was the Percin Discotheque.  P-e-r-c-i-n.

17        A.   Do you want me to answer?

18        Q.   Yes, please.

19        A.   Yes.  He was a retired prison guard in the Doboj prison.

20        Q.   And did you tell the investigator that there was occasional

21     visits from Milan Kerkez?  Formally employed at --

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   -- the Izbor cold storage plant?

24        A.   Yes, he called, he came.

25        Q.   This was a local man?

Page 2288

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash.

 2             MR. JORDASH:  Sorry, Your Honour.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If the witness could answer that question.  He

 4     was a local man?

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, he was a local who had a job

 6     at Izbor in Doboj.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Mr. Jordash, I'm looking at the clock.  If

 8     this ...

 9             MR. JORDASH:  Certainly.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hadzovic, first of all I'd like to instruct you

11     that you should not speak with anyone about your testimony, not about the

12     testimony you've given until now and also not about the testimony still

13     to be given tomorrow.  We'd like to see you back tomorrow morning --

14     tomorrow afternoon at half past 2.00.

15             Mr. Jordash, could I inquire as far as timing is concerned.

16             MR. JORDASH:  I would fully anticipate to finish within 35,

17     40 minutes tomorrow.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Mr. Bakrac, how much time would you need?

19             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, it is difficult to

20     make that estimate because Mr. Jordash has already tackled some issues,

21     and it all depends on Mr. Jordash's future questions, but I don't think I

22     will need more than 45 minutes or an hour.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  We'll then see.

24             Mr. Stanisic, we will adjourn for the day.  I'm addressing you

25     because you're not here with us in the courtroom, but you're there

Page 2289

 1     through the videolink.  We adjourn until tomorrow, the 1st of December,

 2     and we'll not start at quarter past 2.00 as usually, but at half past

 3     2.00 because there is a swearing-in ceremony which may not end before

 4     quarter past 2.00.

 5             We stand adjourned.

 6                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.00 p.m.,

 7                           to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 1st day

 8                           of December, 2009, at 2.30 p.m.