Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 17489

 1                           Thursday, 1st September 2011

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.

 5             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Good morning to everybody in the courtroom,

 6     especially to you, Mr. Vanderpuye.  We haven't seen you for a long time.

 7             Mr. Tolimir, we are in the middle of the cross-examination of

 8     witness Ewa Tabeau.  A long time ago you indicated that you will need

 9     five to six hours for your cross-examination.  You have used a bit more

10     than three and a half hours.  Therefore, you should try to finish in two

11     hours your cross-examination.  And we all should try to conclude the

12     examination of the next witness today as well, if possible.

13             The witness should be brought in, please.

14             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Good morning, Mr. President.

15             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Good morning.

16             MR. VANDERPUYE:  I just have a bit of information for the

17     Trial Chamber and that is we have translations uploaded for the following

18     exhibits:  P1677, we have the B/C/S translation uploaded; P2162, we have

19     a replacement English translation for this document; and for P2265, we

20     have an English translation; as well as for P2444; and for P2447, we have

21     an English and B/C/S translation, the original of that document was in

22     French.

23                           [The witness takes the stand]

24             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you very much.  We will come back to that

25     at a later stage in order to save court time today.

Page 17490

 1             Mr. Gajic.

 2             MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I would like to talk

 3     about two submissions based on Rule 92 quater, that the Prosecution

 4     submitted.

 5             On Monday or on Tuesday at the latest, the Defence will be ready

 6     to submit written replies.  I hope this will not be too late for -- for

 7     this Trial Chamber.  The schedule has changed a bit since we have

 8     declared that we will not pursue Rule 98 bis, that we will not provide

 9     arguments according to that rule.

10             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you very much.  I am not aware of the exact

11     time-limit for your response, but if I remember correctly, it will be in

12     the time-limit if you respond at the beginning of next week.

13             MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I believe the

14     dead-line has not even started running because the translations have not

15     been received.  The Trial Chamber has asked us to do it as soon as

16     possible, and I have provided you with a clear indication of time.  And

17     now, I am informing the Trial Chamber when it will be physically possible

18     for us to do that.

19             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  We are very grateful for that, Mr. Gajic.  Thank

20     you very much.

21             Good morning, Ms. Tabeau.  Welcome back to the courtroom.  It's a

22     long time ago that you started your testimony in this trial.  I have to

23     remind you that the affirmation to tell the truth you made at the

24     beginning of your testimony still applies.

25             Mr. Tolimir is continuing his cross-examination.

Page 17491

 1             Mr. Tolimir, you have the floor.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.  May

 3     God's peace reign in this courtroom and may His will be done in these

 4     proceedings and not necessarily mine.

 5                           WITNESS: EWA TABEAU [Resumed]

 6                           Cross-examination by Mr. Tolimir: [Continued]

 7        Q.   [Interpretation] I would like to greet Ms. Ewa Tabeau.  I wish

 8     her a pleasant stay in this courtroom.  I still have a few questions left

 9     which is neither here nor there.  What matters is that we have managed to

10     provide time for your testimony.

11             Ms. Tabeau, can we please look at 1D949 in the e-court.  Thank

12     you.  I apologise, I have not seen Mr. Vanderpuye a long time and I

13     forgot to greet him, as well as all the others in the courtroom.

14             We see this document which is not very legible, but this was a

15     document which was issued by the Ministry of Labour, Social Policy,

16     and Refugees --

17             THE WITNESS:  Excuse me, could this be enlarged a little bit.

18             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Please wait a moment.  Perhaps it's only

19     necessary to have one of the documents on the screen.

20             Mr. Tolimir, please continue.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

22             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   I will repeat.  You probably now see it better.  The document was

24     issued by the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, from the Federation of

25     Bosnia and Herzegovina, from its Tuzla canton.  It was compiled on the

Page 17492

 1     28th of July, 1995.  The title of the document is: "Breakdown of Refugees

 2     from Srebrenica Accommodated in Municipalities in the Tuzla/Podrinje

 3     canton on the 28th of July, 1995."

 4             In this document it is listed that on the 20th of July, 1995, a

 5     total of 27.130 individuals were accommodated in various municipalities.

 6     And the remark reads:

 7             "In the above figures, persons accommodated at Dubrava airport

 8     are not included."

 9             And this implies those that were accommodated within the

10     perimeter of the airport.  My question to you, Ms. Tabeau, is this:  Did

11     you have an occasion to see this document and similar documents that

12     speak about the time when the refugees from Srebrenica were accounted

13     for?  And can you tell me whether such documents have been included into

14     your analysis?  Did you include them and did you try to check those

15     documents against any others that were compiled in the course of 1995?

16     Thank you.

17             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  For the benefit of the witness, I think we should

18     have only the English translation on the screen and be enlarged.  Thank

19     you very much.  I take it, Mr. Tolimir, that you have the B/C/S version

20     in front of you in hard copy.

21             Ms. Tabeau.

22             THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

23             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Ms. Tabeau.

24             THE WITNESS:  I didn't see this particular document, but sources

25     related to the so-called refugees from Srebrenica were used in our work.

Page 17493

 1     We discussed these issues in the report.  There is an annex -- there is

 2     annex discussing the cross-referencing of the so-called refugees from

 3     Srebrenica with our lists of missing persons from Srebrenica.  The major

 4     source we used for cross-referencing is called the DDPR.  The source is

 5     discussed in annex 3.5, and there is another annex discussing the

 6     methodology of cross-referencing.  And there is annex 3.7 in the report

 7     in which we discuss the 1997 record of Srebrenica refugees.

 8             These records are actually coming largely from the same source.

 9     It is the registration of internal displacement during the war in Bosnia

10     and Herzegovina.  The registration was done by local authorities.  At

11     some point UNHCR got involved in the registration processes, and the

12     outcomes of these processes were databases.  One of the them, central

13     database on displaced persons within Bosnia and Herzegovina and refugees

14     in this country, is called DDPR.  We used it as one of the main sources

15     on surviving population from Bosnia and cross-referenced this source and

16     the so-called 97 refugees from Srebrenica with our list of survivors.

17             We have not said "survivors" but "missing persons," of course.

18     Sorry.  It was my mistake.

19        Q.   Thank you, Ms. Tabeau.

20        A.   Excuse me, I am Tabeau, not taboo, please.

21        Q.   Thank you, Ms. Tabeau.  I apologise for not pronouncing your name

22     properly.  And I apologise once again.

23             This document clearly shows that very precise numbers are given

24     rather than just estimates.  Does this point to the fact that people who

25     had been evacuated from Srebrenica were registered as well as those that

Page 17494

 1     had reached the territory under the control of the BiH Army in the

 2     convoy?

 3        A.   Well, the refugees -- or displaced persons, more correctly, have

 4     always been registered in conflict affected countries.  It is an

 5     important group of people who need protection and aid and records of

 6     displacement is an important one, so I never questioned the fact that

 7     this kind of registration was done and was done systematically.  So I

 8     never questioned it in my report or any testimonies.

 9        Q.   Thank you, Ms. Tabeau.  Do you agree with me if I say that the

10     basic data on the number of refugees and displaced persons from

11     Srebrenica should be the base for all the other analyses and estimates,

12     and I am talking about the expert reports provided by demographers and

13     similar experts?  Do you also agree that your analysis should give those

14     numbers in a separate tables, that they should not be included with all

15     the other data?  Thank you.

16        A.   Well, I not only agree with you that separate analysis should be

17     made with regard to displacement and refugees of a conflict, but I, with

18     my people, have done several such reports which were submitted in several

19     cases in ICTY.  But here in this case, we are speaking about a different

20     kind of report.  The report we submitted is about victims, and in

21     addition it is a particular group of victims.  It is the missing persons;

22     a very special group.  We know very little in the beginning of our

23     process about the fate of these persons.  So I don't see in what way

24     other than what we did in our work we could use data on displacement and

25     refugees to draw conclusions about missing persons.  What we did, we

Page 17495

 1     cross-referenced records of survivors, it would be displaced persons,

 2     refugees, non-displaced population, with records of missing persons, in

 3     order to eliminate potential survivors in the records of missing persons.

 4     That is all we did, and this is all that should and can be done when

 5     preparing a report on victims.  Other than that, displacement

 6     information, refugees information, cannot be used directly to draw

 7     conclusions about victims.

 8        Q.   Thank you, Ms. Tabeau.  Please, I would like you to look at

 9     1D949.  Thank you.  I apologise.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I wanted to tender that document,

11     and I would like to call up 1D947.  The numbers are similar which made me

12     make that mistake.

13             Once again, I would like to tender 1D949 into evidence, please.

14             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Indeed, that is the correct number, and we have

15     error on page 3, line 11, there is a different number which is incorrect.

16     The document will be received.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter number 1D949 shall be

18     assigned Exhibit D313.  Thank you.

19             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Now we would like to have 1D947 on the screen.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

21             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   We can see the document on the screen.  It is again not very

23     legible.  Can it be -- yes, thank you.  This is a document issued by

24     UNPROFOR.  It's Sector North-east whose headquarters were in the Tuzla

25     air base.  The document was issued on the 4th of August, 1995.  The

Page 17496

 1     document reads:  "Subject:  Srebrenica, displaced persons situation

 2     update."

 3             The following points are made as an update to the current

 4     humanitarian situation in SNE concerning the Srebrenica displaced

 5     persons.

 6             "Total number:  35.632 (approximately).

 7             "Housed in private accomodation:  17.383.

 8             "Housed in collective centres:  9.749.

 9             "Tuzla air base camp:  6.500."

10             This is a supplement to the first table which indicated 27.000

11     people with the 6.500 who were at the base.  During your work, did you

12     have available to you the update that UNPROFOR had concerning people who

13     fled from Srebrenica to the territory under the control of the BiH and to

14     the Tuzla air base camp?  Thank you.

15        A.   I did not have this particular document, but the number as such

16     doesn't come to me as a surprise, the 35.600 something.  If you, sir,

17     refer to annex 3.7, then you will find some statistics that are quite

18     comparable to this number.  In my estimation, it would be about 30.000

19     displaced persons from Srebrenica in more or less the same period.  As

20     you see from our report, we cross-referenced these records with the

21     records of missing persons.  We identified about 100 individuals

22     potentially overlapping between missing persons and displaced persons.

23     We clarified these cases with the authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina,

24     and compared with additional sources we have in our office, that would be

25     ICMP identifications of victims, and found many matches among the

Page 17497

 1     identified for our potential 100 survivors.  And the conclusion is that

 2     is not correct to believe that these 100 potential candidates are the

 3     persons reported as missing on our list.  So the exercise ended with the

 4     conclusion that no record of a missing person should be removed from the

 5     list as a reported survivor, displaced person.

 6        Q.   Thank you, Ms. Tabeau.  Under C in the document it says that:

 7             "Plan for movement of displaced persons population from Tuzla air

 8     base to collective centres is co-ordinated with BiH civil defence staff

 9     through and by UNHCR head of office.  Displaced persons will be

10     transported with BiH transport and moved to accommodations which have

11     been repaired or renovated by either SEA, IRC," and so on and so forth.

12             Please, did you establish the final list once those people from

13     the air base were transported to accomodation centres that had been

14     repaired or renovated by representatives of various international

15     organisations?  Thank you.

16        A.   There was no need to work with these kinds of lists because the

17     sources on survivors that we used for our work actually comprised these

18     kind of developments.  This particular document is dated, as far as I

19     remember, August 1995, if we go to the -- yes.  We worked with 1997

20     records, compiled by the authorities in Tuzla and later in Sarajevo in

21     the Ministry For Displaced Persons and Refugees, and we also used the

22     2000 version of the DDPR, that is the central system registering

23     displaced persons and refugees, and we as well used other sources on

24     survivors; that is, the sources that would be reporting on both displaced

25     persons and non-displaced persons.  That would be the three large voter's

Page 17498

 1     registers that we used to search for survivors.

 2             I think that this is quite some work meant to find any possible

 3     survivors, and it must be remembered that these searches were run in the

 4     context of this one particular group:  Missing persons, the persons of

 5     whom no record existed as to their fate after the fall of Srebrenica.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  Please, Mrs. Tabeau, could you tell me, since you

 7     studied all this, whose data is more precise:  Those that were based on

 8     the lists of displaced persons and refugees in accomodation centres or

 9     the data from 1997?  Did you cross-reference those two sets of data in

10     order to establish any discrepancies?

11        A.   You mean the 1997 data with the 1995 data, if I may clarify;

12     right?  Yes.

13             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Microphone.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, I apologise.

15             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Yes, the 1995 data and the 1997 data.  Did you cross-reference

17     those two sets of data as you have already indicated in your previous

18     answer?  Thank you.

19        A.   I, as a matter of fact, didn't have to cross-reference anything

20     in this particular case because the records of 1997 refugees discussed in

21     annex 3.7 largely come from the local authorities in Tuzla, who actually

22     registered the displacement from Srebrenica in the period to which this

23     document is referring.  So actually I have the data to work with and that

24     would be the 1997 records of Srebrenica refugees.

25             As you will see in this annex, there were four CDs [Realtime

Page 17499

 1     transcript read in error "cities"] that were submitted to the Office of

 2     the Prosecutor.  The CDs one to three were coming directly from Tuzla

 3     authorities, and only one CD was coming from the Ministry for Displaced

 4     Persons and Refugees in Sarajevo.  So these three CDs jointly comprised

 5     about 20.000 records of displaced persons, so I simply had this data.

 6             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  The record should be record.  We are not talking

 7     about "cities" but "CDs."

 8             Mr. Tolimir.

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

10             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Thank you, Ms. Tabeau.  Please, since you said in the first and

12     second parts of your answer that you relied on documents from 1997, my

13     question is:  Are the documents from 1997 more valid, more relevant, than

14     the documents that were developed in 1995 after people left collection

15     centres?

16        A.   I think the 1997 records shouldn't be seen as made in 1997.

17     These are records that were collected over a longer period of time

18     starting already during the war, in this case 1995, and later, and the

19     record is dated as of 1997; that means, it is the status of this data of

20     this registration system that goes back to all the information that was

21     obtained in the course of time.  So it is not about what is more

22     reliable, 1995 or 1997, it is just the data coming from a dynamic system

23     that is systematically updated as the new data is coming.

24        Q.   Thank you, Ms. Tabeau.  Was it finally documented definitively,

25     everyone that came out with the military column and the civilians, was it

Page 17500

 1     supposed to be identical, this new data from 1997?  Was it identical to

 2     the records of collection centres from 1995?

 3        A.   Well, you are referring to a column.  I refer -- I will refer to

 4     records of displaced persons often also called, incorrectly, refugees in

 5     this context, so it is just the population who ended in the Tuzla region

 6     as displaced people; that is, people who no more were living in their

 7     homes.  Was it identical with this 1995 information?  This is all we

 8     have, and knowing how the data was collected I can say this is the same

 9     information as was subsequently obtained or produced by the authorities

10     from Tuzla.

11        Q.   Thank you, Ms. Tabeau.

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 1D947 is a document I would like to

13     tender.

14             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  It will be received.

15             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter document 1D947 shall be

16     assigned Exhibit D314.  Thank you.

17             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Tolimir.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

19             Please, could we now display 1D958.  That is a report from the

20     World Health Organization on persons displaced from Srebrenica to the

21     Tuzla/Podrinje canton.  The document also identifies the number of

22     displaced persons on 29 July, 1995.

23             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   And it says -- can you see it now so we can all follow?

25        A.   Not yet.

Page 17501

 1             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  It's not on the screen.  Did you provide us with

 2     a correct number?  The document with that number is not listed in your

 3     list of documents.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] My mistake.  It should be 948.  I

 5     should have followed the same order as before.  1D948 follows 1D947.  I

 6     apologise to the electronic courtroom and Ms. Tabeau.

 7             We need, in fact, 1D948.  It's a report on recently displaced

 8     people from Srebrenica to Tuzla-Podrinje canton.

 9             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  It's on the screen.

10             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   They say the total is 34.341.  In private accomodation, 17.137.

12     In collective centres, 9.804 persons.  And at the air base, 7.400.  My

13     question is:  Did you have occasion to see this document before while you

14     were making your analysis and your expert report?

15        A.   No, I didn't.  As this document is not really a source for me in

16     my analysis of missing persons and exhumed persons and identified

17     persons.  So I, myself, have estimated and presented in several reports.

18     The displacement from Srebrenica was very, very considerable, especially

19     with regard to the Muslim population living in Srebrenica area and

20     neighbouring municipalities.  Many of them ended in the Tuzla canton, so

21     this is yet another confirmation that the statement about the large-scale

22     displacement from Srebrenica is correct, but it is not helpful to use

23     this kind of statement in the analysis of missing persons, of mass graves

24     and identified people.

25        Q.   Thank you, Ms. Tabeau.  And is it useful to have a document like

Page 17502

 1     this when considering the number of displaced persons from Srebrenica to

 2     the Tuzla-Podrinje canton?

 3        A.   Well, it is better to work with records of displaced persons and

 4     refugees, and these records exist and are much more correct than these

 5     kind of rough statistics.  So it is just one of contextual documents that

 6     confirm the scale of displacement, no more than that.  But statistically

 7     speaking, I would always prefer to work with individual records of

 8     victims, displaced persons, refugees, killed persons, missing persons,

 9     whatever.

10        Q.   Thank you, Ms. Tabeau.  My question is:  For demographers, are

11     numbers on the population and movement more interesting?  Is this the

12     kind of data that indicates where these people are accommodated and in

13     what numbers?

14        A.   Well, it indicates the places where people were accommodated and

15     some numbers, indeed.

16        Q.   Thank you.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I should like this document, 1D948,

18     to be admitted into evidence.

19             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  It will be received.

20             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter document 1D948 shall be

21     assigned Exhibit D315.  Thank you.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I thank the Registrar.  Could

23     e-court please display P1777.  Thank you.

24             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   That is a list from the OTP on missing persons from Srebrenica.

Page 17503

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And we need page 91 in e-court.

 2             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   While we are looking for that page, would you kindly tell us --

 4             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  It should not be broadcast.

 5             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Ms. Tabeau, would you tell us, please, were you involved in the

 7     drafting of this OTP list?

 8        A.   Yes, I was.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Could we then look at the name -- I don't know how to

10     deal with this, because maybe all of the names are protected.

11             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  It's very easy.  We can go into private session

12     for that part of your examination.

13             Mr. Gajic.

14             MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the Defence has tried

15     to facilitate the proceedings by preparing hard copies of the document so

16     we don't have to call it up in e-court every time.  If the usher could

17     just distribute the list to everyone in the courtroom, to all the

18     parties.

19             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Yes, please, that's helpful.  Especially for the

20     witness.

21             Mr. Tolimir, are you going to mention specific names on the list?

22     In that case, we should go into private session, would you agree?

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.  We have

24     now distributed the document, so I don't have to mention any names.

25             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

Page 17504

 1        Q.   I would like to ask Ms. Tabeau to look at entry number 7.  Thank

 2     you.

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  Now, if you could answer this question:  Does it

 5     follow from this that the person under number 7 was born on the 2nd of

 6     May and went missing on the 14th of July, 1995, in a place called

 7     Buljim-Bratunac (redacted)

 8     (redacted) Thank you?

 9        A.   Yes, that's correct.

10             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  I'm sorry, I can't follow.  On the first page, I

11     am now dealing with page number 91, which is on the screen.  Then --

12             THE WITNESS:  Record number seven.

13             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Yes, then that is the next page.  Yes, thank you.

14     It's clarified.

15             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   I emphasize that the date of birth is 2nd May 1952 and the date

17     when the person went missing is 1995, 14 July.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we now see 1D950 [Realtime

19     transcript read in error "1D590"].

20             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Gajic.

21             MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] I apologise.  There is an error in

22     the record.  It's 1D950.

23             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  That is the number which was interpreted.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  What we see here is a

25     decision by the lower court in Lukavica determining that the death of the

Page 17505

 1     person under number 7 occurred on the 7th of July, 1995.

 2             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  It should not be broadcast.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

 4             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   And the statement of reasons indicates the cause of death.  Since

 6     there is no translation I have to read it to you.  I will leave out only

 7     the name and surname, and I will be referring to the person as entry 7.

 8     The proponent, I will leave out the name, submitted an application to

 9     this court to prove the death of her spouse, leaving out the name,

10     stating that as a member of the 28th Mounted Battalion he was killed on

11     7 July 1995 on an elevation called Ljubisavici.

12             The claims from the application of the proponent have been

13     confirmed by witnesses Muhudin Hasanovic [phoen] and Mevlida Osmanovic as

14     well as the temporary holder of custody, Osman Omerovic.  The aforenamed

15     persons stated that, leaving out the name, was during the war a member of

16     the 28th Mountain Battalion, and his unit mounted an attack on the enemy

17     elevation called Ljubisavici on 7 July 1995.  The name of the elevation

18     is Ljubisavici, on which occasion entry number 7 was killed.

19             [As read] "The next day on the 8th of July 1995 he was buried at

20     the town cemetery called Kazani.  These facts follow from the death

21     certificate 07/02-216-22/50, issued by the command of the 28th Division

22     on 19 March 1997 which states that entry number 7 was killed on 7 July

23     1995 at the Ljubisavici elevation."

24             I will not read the passage which follows which states that it

25     was published in the Official Gazette, et cetera.

Page 17506

 1             Now, based on this, Ms. Tabeau, I would like to ask:  In this

 2     case, the case of the person under number 7, is it an obvious discrepancy

 3     between the list of the OTP which states that the person went missing on

 4     the 14th of July whereas this court decision indicates that he was killed

 5     on 7th July 1995?

 6        A.   Well, let me tell you, nothing is obvious.  First of all, it is

 7     very good to ask what kind of document is this.  It is a court

 8     declaration of a person death.  The declaration is issued in response to

 9     a request from a family member of this person.  The family member -- the

10     family reported this person as missing.  They don't have information

11     about what happened to him.  If they did know what happened to this

12     person, there wouldn't be necessary to have a court to decide -- to

13     declare this person dead.

14             So these kind of declarations were issued for the missing

15     persons, conditionally on the fulfillment of a number of requirements.

16     The same type of declarations were used for the list of 58 names that

17     General Tolimir addressed at some point earlier and which I studied in

18     order to make an assessment of the possibility whether these cases were

19     of people who died in different circumstances and different places at

20     different moments of time than what is claimed in the OTP lists of

21     missing persons.

22             These court declarations, as a matter of fact, usually don't --

23     are not based on precise information about the death, because the death

24     is actually something that needs to be declared as the person is missing.

25     So the circumstances, the date, the place, the cause of death, are

Page 17507

 1     unknown.  This particular case, based on witness statements, based on

 2     what they were tell the court, seems to be more complete in the sense

 3     that the witnesses told the court about what happened.  And based on what

 4     they said, the court issued a decision.  At the same time, in the OTP

 5     list, this person is reported as a missing, with the date of

 6     disappearance 14th of July (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11             Of course, it's a very difficult question.  As a matter of fact,

12     what I would do in such case, I would go back and check both sources

13     because they contradict each other in some sense.  (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17             So what I would do is I would go and check all the details and

18     come back with a conclusion.  In both cases much more information should

19     be available.  The ICMP will most certainly have complete reports from

20     the family members of the person.  It is easy to figure out who reported

21     the person to the ICMP.  Is this the same -- exactly same person reported

22     in both the court declaration and in the ICMP record, et cetera, et

23     cetera.

24             So these kind of cases, at first impression contradictory, and

25     with a serious question which source should be trusted, can be sorted out

Page 17508

 1     rather easily.  This is what I have done for the 58 names addressed

 2     earlier by General Tolimir, and the same can be done with this particular

 3     case.

 4        Q.   Thank you, Ms. Tabeau.  Now, please, several facts are stated

 5     here that we need to bear in mind:  One, that the 28th Division issued a

 6     certificate on 19 March, 1997, that the person was killed in combat on

 7     the 7th of July, that's one; and second, two witnesses - I won't mention

 8     their names again - say that he was buried at the local cemetery called

 9     Kazani, and the wife claims the same.  And the court determined it based

10     on witness statements.

11     (redacted)

12     (redacted)

13     (redacted)  And could the same family

14     claim him as gone missing from the column, as saying that he was killed

15     earlier while being a member of the column, as determined by the court?

16     What should be more reliable to General Tolimir, a court determination or

17     an assessment made based on an analysis?

18        A.   Well, I cannot tell General Tolimir what he should decide because

19     it is his decision, but what I would do, as I said, I would study this

20     particular document in a broader context of all available information

21     related to this case.  And this is what I did, and if you give me a

22     second I will check my records because I possibly have more information

23     right now in the court, or I will do it in the break, but things are

24     sometimes not as straightforward as they look.  For instance, the same

25     names can be associated with a totally different person, and there might

Page 17509

 1     be a very small difference in the date of birth, small but significant in

 2     the sense that this would be two different persons.  These kind of things

 3     happen quite often, and this is why we, in our method, don't work with

 4     single source and single document, we work with a number of sources,

 5     related sources, that overlap in the sense that one given case can be

 6     compared across the sources.  And what we would do, we would go back

 7     first to the 1991 census record and check how many people with these same

 8     names or very similar names were reported there in the census, and we

 9     would track their fates in other sources of information.  (redacted)

10     (redacted)

11     (redacted)  We would go to other databases.  If this person

12     is a known death, as it seems according to this court declaration, the

13     case should be reported in official death notifications, compiled by

14     statistical authorities in both entities in the federation and

15     Republika Srpska, and we have these records in our office.  We would

16     search for the person, compare the records, we would check all kinds of

17     sources.  And only then would we draw a conclusion.  So I can do this.  I

18     am not sure then how Tolimir can do this, but I can help, I can assist

19     this Court to clarify these kind of cases, and this is actually what we

20     have been doing since the very beginning of our work on Srebrenica.

21             Srebrenica is a mass atrocity case.  It is very -- it would be

22     very difficult to analyse all the cases, one by one, approximately 8.000

23     victims.  To clarify what happened to them by questioning witnesses is

24     actually an impossible thing to do.  So what instead can be done, there

25     exists lists of victims issued by reliable organs, and we use these

Page 17510

 1     lists, cross-reference them, and come up with our findings.  This is, I

 2     think, the best approach to answer these discrepancies.

 3             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Ms. Tabeau, I would like to put an additional

 4     question to you in relation to that.  Thank you for this explanation.

 5     Earlier in one of your answers you said:

 6             "It could be sorted out quite easily.  This is what I have done

 7     for the 58 names addressed earlier by General Tolimir."

 8             Are you referring to the beginning of your cross-examination in

 9     this trial where we dealt with similar cases, and did you do this

10     research in the time between when after the last day in court in this

11     trial?  What was the result of this check for the 58 names?

12             THE WITNESS:  It is, indeed, so that the 58 names I mentioned

13     came up earlier this year.  I think, already, for the first time during

14     the testimony of Helge Brunborg, as far as I'm not wrong.  And the claim

15     of the Defence is that there are 58 persons listed on the OTP lists of

16     missing persons that, as a matter of fact, died at different places, at

17     different dates than the fall of Srebrenica, and in addition they died of

18     natural causes of death and shouldn't be kept on the OTP list.

19             So I studied these particular 58 names recently and made a little

20     report about my findings.  All these 58 names were taken from a book by

21     Milivoje Ivanisevic.  So that's the actual source for this the names.

22     All of these names were listed by him based on these kind of court

23     declarations as the one we are having on our screen.  These declarations

24     were issued by local courts in Bosnia and Herzegovina.  Most of them

25     rather in distant past from now, so in the year, say, 1997, 1998,

Page 17511

 1     something like that, and all these declarations were addressed to the

 2     courts by the families because the families actually didn't know what

 3     happened to their relatives.

 4             As a matter of fact, these declarations I studied were issued in

 5     the context of missing persons.  As -- the conclusion -- I did two

 6     things:  First of all, I collected the actual declarations and studied

 7     them myself to confirm whether, indeed, these declarations related to

 8     unrelated cases, not Srebrenica victims, and the second part of the work

 9     was in line with what I just mentioned, it was cross-referencing of these

10     names with the sources the OTP has -- I have in my unit, including the

11     1991 population census, the missing persons list, the ICMP identification

12     of these persons.

13             To keep it brief, in both cases, I didn't find any reasons to

14     consider any of these persons unrelated to the fall of Srebrenica.  As a

15     matter of fact, there is a lot of evidence to the contrary.  Many of

16     these individuals were identified by ICMP.  Only, I think, as far as I

17     remember, one wasn't, and three actually were siblings' identifications,

18     but the rest were identifications that link these names to certain mass

19     graves and records of DNA identification.  So all in all -- actually, two

20     records, as far as I remember, were reported in the court declarations as

21     deaths from 1992, but I checked that these two names were actually

22     different persons than the persons included in the OTP lists.  Those that

23     were on the OTP lists were with very similar or even identical names,

24     slight differences in dates of births but were different persons and died

25     in the fall of Srebrenica.  The 1992 records on the Ivanisevic list were,

Page 17512

 1     as a matter of fact, different people who died in 1992.

 2             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Just one brief additional question.

 3             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

 4             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  If I understood you correctly, you didn't have

 5     any reason to change your findings in your previous report; is that

 6     correct.

 7             THE WITNESS:  Yes, that is correct.

 8             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Did you -- as you said, you compiled these

 9     findings, the research in relation to these 58 persons in a little

10     report --

11             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

12             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  -- given to the OTP?

13             THE WITNESS:  I think the report should have been disclosed to

14     everybody.

15             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  That was -- that would be my question to

16     Mr. Vanderpuye, if that report was disclosed to the Defence.

17             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Indeed it was, Mr. President, and it's uploaded

18     as 65 ter 7518, which I intended to introduce it and to use it in a

19     redirect which, obviously, will be much briefer now.  But the Defence

20     does have the report.  I do note, though, that I don't believe the report

21     has been translated as yet.  A request was submitted but it's not

22     completed.

23             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you very much for this update.

24             Mr. Tolimir, you may continue.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.  My legal

Page 17513

 1     assistant wants to say something about the documents that Ms. Tabeau has

 2     just mentioned.

 3             MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, yesterday we reviewed

 4     documents.  Before we had not had an occasion to see over a hundred pages

 5     of documents similar to the one on the screen.  We could not read them on

 6     the electronic disclosure system.  Of course, we managed to review a lot

 7     of those pages, but not all.  We hope that we will continue dealing with

 8     these documents.  Unfortunately, there is still no translation of the

 9     document into English.

10             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you.

11             Mr. Tolimir, carry on, please.

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.  Could

13     D950 be admitted into evidence, 1D950.  This is the document dealing with

14     the person who was buried in the local graveyard before the conflict in

15     Srebrenica and subsequently in -- his body was excavated from a mass

16     grave.  Thank you.

17             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  The document will be marked for identification,

18     pending translation.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter document 1D950 shall be

20     assigned Exhibit D316, marked for identification, pending translation.

21     Thank you.

22             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Tolimir.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Could we now look at

24     P1777.  Thank you.

25             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

Page 17514

 1        Q.   This is a Prosecutor's list of people missing from Srebrenica.

 2     It was compiled in 2009.  I don't think it should be disclosed.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We are interested in page 13.

 4             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  It should not be broadcast.

 5             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Since we can't say the names, we are interested in entry number

 7     five from the top of the list.

 8             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  We can see the names.  The names are on the

 9     screen.  We can see them.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, we can.  But I am not going to

11     read them.  Everybody can see the names.  I am interested in number 5.

12             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Ms. Tabeau, does it arise from this that the person under number

14     5 was born on the 21st of January 1995 and that the last time he was seen

15     in Potocari on the 13th of July, 1995, in Potocari.  And that his death

16     was confirmed?  Thank you.

17             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  The date of birth in this list is 21st of January

18     1965, not 1995.

19             THE WITNESS:  Yes, with this correction, it is correct.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, I agree with

21     Mr. President.  I misspoke.  21st of January, 1996 -- or, rather, 1965.

22     Thank you.

23             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Ms. Tabeau, was it confirmed that the last time he was seen was

25     in Potocari and then that he was confirmed dead?

Page 17515

 1        A.   Yes, this is what we see on this list.

 2        Q.   Thank you.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And now I would like to show the

 4     witness 1D951.  Thank you.  Thank you.

 5             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Now we can see a decision where it says that the person under

 7     number 5 was born on the 20th of January in Srebrenica and that his

 8     family had filed a request for the date of death to be confirmed as the

 9     15th March in Zepa municipality of Rogatica.  15th of March, 1995.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And now can we go to page 3 in

11     e-court?  Thank you.

12             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Please, we can see another document issued by the municipal court

14     in Kladanj.  This is a decision to correct the previous decision of the

15     same court in Kladanj, and in this decision it says that the date of

16     birth would be deleted and that it would be replaced by another date of

17     birth which would be the 21st of January, 1965.  Everything else remains

18     the same as before.  The decision that we see contains a correction of

19     the date of birth of the person who died and whose name is listed under

20     number 5.  Thank you.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now go back to 1D951,

22     page 1.

23             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Now we can see it.  This is a decision pursuant to which number 5

25     was declared dead, and at 15th of March 1995 is hereby determined as the

Page 17516

 1     date of death.  And I am going to read from the statement of reasons

 2     where it says:

 3             "Based on the testimonies of the applicant and witnesses, the

 4     court has established that" - person under number 5, whose name I am not

 5     going to read - "went missing on the 15th of March, 1995," as it stays

 6     says here, but this is an error -- no, it's not an error, "he went

 7     missing on the 15th of March, 1995, as a member of the Army of BiH, and

 8     he went missing in Zepa.  From then on there have been no news of his

 9     life or death."

10             My question is this:  Does this decision clearly point to the

11     fact that the court had to establish the date of birth twice?  You also

12     mentioned such instances that were aimed at avoiding manipulations.  Does

13     it also clearly show that person under number 5 who died in circumstances

14     unrelated to the events surrounding the month of July 1995?  Thank you.

15        A.   Well, if you're asking whether the date of birth has been

16     established twice, obviously it was, and probably because a reliable

17     document in which the date of birth would be reported was unavailable or

18     became available at a later moment of time.  Inconsistencies in dates of

19     birth are seen very often across various documents reporting on the same

20     persons, especially if information is coming based on witness statements

21     or just statements.  People are very bad in remembering dates.

22             So the second part of your question was -- I think there wasn't

23     second part, so it was the question.

24        Q.   Thank you.  Can we see here that the date of death was the 15th

25     of March, which was a few months before the date indicated in the

Page 17517

 1     report -- in the Prosecutor's report, and that the place of death was

 2     Zepa and not Srebrenica?  Thank you?

 3        A.   Well, let's not forget that this court declaration is about a

 4     missing person, a person whose fate is unknown.  So we can't speak about

 5     the actual date of death, the actual place of death, the actual cause of

 6     death.  Why?  Because there is no proof other than statements of some

 7     people who are saying things they are saying.  The date 15th of March is

 8     the date of last seen.  This is when the person was last seen by those

 9     who appeared before the court to give their statement, and they are

10     saying they saw the person in Zepa.  That's it.  This is all the document

11     is telling us.  In order to be sure that this was the case with this

12     person, a lot of additional work is required.

13             In our records, ICRC records, coming also from informants, close

14     relatives, there is a different date of last seen.  The date is the 13th

15     of July, and the place is different.  Whom to trust more and better, this

16     is a very good question.  What we believe is the right thing to do, it is

17     important to cross-reference these kind of statements with the DNA record

18     of identification of such people.

19             For many of these kind of cases, such identifications are

20     available.  For some, not yet.  But because these persons are often

21     included in siblings' identifications, this is a sign for us this

22     information is coming.  For some other cases there won't be information

23     other than the report about the missing, the disappearance of this

24     person.  If I am asked which source I trust more when it comes to

25     reporting of disappearances, missing persons, I do trust the ICRC.  Why?

Page 17518

 1     Because it is an organisation that has been collecting information about

 2     missing persons for a very long time.  They have developed procedures,

 3     approaches, how to do it right.  They, for instance, use questionnaires,

 4     structured questionnaires in which information is collected about not

 5     only just names and date of disappearance.  There is much more in there,

 6     in these questionnaires.  There is also some information about the

 7     informants, and we know that ICRC does not accept information from

 8     anybody.  They require that the informant is a close relative.  They

 9     check the ID of the informant.  So they have an interview.  They speak

10     about what happened.  And it is all available from the questionnaires.

11             The other informant, I don't know.  I have no idea who are those

12     people.  Perhaps they are relatives of the wife who went to court and

13     requested that a declaration would be issued.  Why did she need a

14     declaration?  Perhaps because of property.  I don't know why.  Perhaps

15     because of some other things.  So in order to have a clear idea about the

16     quality of these statements, I would have to go back and contact these

17     people and talk to them and check whether what this statement is telling

18     us is actually the truth.  So it is not a quick decision to decide

19     what -- who is right, this court declaration or ICRC or ICMP.  It is a

20     process, it is an investigation, and in many cases this investigation can

21     be done here using statistical databases.  But in some other cases even

22     this is not enough.  In some cases it is necessary to go back and find

23     these witnesses and to talk to them, as OTP often does, and this is the

24     way to make sure that the information provided to this Court is correct.

25        Q.   Thank you, Ms. Tabeau.  Now, please tell us, the applicant in

Page 17519

 1     this case, isn't she the closest relative to the missing person?  She was

 2     his wife.  And did the court use her testimony and the testimony of

 3     witnesses in order to establish that he went missing on the 15th of

 4     March, 1995, as an army member in Zepa?  And in this courtroom, should we

 5     have the records of all the courts, all the decisions of all the courts

 6     showing what they based their decisions on?  Should I, as an accused,

 7     trust the decisions of such courts or should we go through the exercise

 8     of reestablishing the data?

 9             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Tolimir, I think the witness answered this

10     question already in detail and explained the whole procedure she and her

11     colleagues were following to establish if such a declaration gives reason

12     to change the previous findings.  She explained in detail and at length

13     how, in her opinion, it would be the best way to check the information.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.  In that

15     case, if we apply the same parameter to all court decisions, I have no

16     other questions for this witness.  This brings my cross-examination to an

17     end.

18             I just wanted to present different cases that were treated

19     differently.  I did not want to apply the same criteria to every missing

20     person.  And finally, I would like to tender this document into evidence,

21     1D951.  Thank you.

22             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  This document will be marked for identification,

23     pending translation.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter document 1D951 shall be

25     assigned Exhibit D317, marked for identification, pending translation.

Page 17520

 1     Thank you.

 2             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Tolimir, and to clarify the situation, my

 3     comment was in relation to your last question.  Nothing else.  Because

 4     you asked for the best way to establish the truth and that was just the

 5     last answer of the witness, in principle.

 6             Nevertheless, I take it that this concludes your

 7     cross-examination.

 8             We must have our first break now and we will resume at 11.00.

 9                           --- Recess taken at 10.31 a.m.

10                           [The witness stands down]

11                           [The witness takes the stand]

12                           --- On resuming at 11.02 a.m.

13             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Vanderpuye, you have the floor for your

14     re-examination.

15             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Thank you, Mr. President.  And good morning to

16     you, Your Honours.  I haven't had a chance to greet everyone, so good

17     morning.

18                           Re-examination by Mr. Vanderpuye:

19        Q.   And good morning to you, Dr. Tabeau.

20        A.   Good morning.

21        Q.   I have a relatively few number of questions to ask you, so let me

22     get started.  You were asked some questions based on a few documents that

23     General Tolimir put to you.  I have them as 1D949, and this related to a

24     document that presented certain figures, it's D313, presented certain

25     figures concerning refugees or displaced persons related to Srebrenica.

Page 17521

 1             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  This is now D313.

 2             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 3        Q.   And you were also presented with another document, 1D947, which

 4     is D314; and 948, which is D315.  All of these documents presented

 5     figures of people that were displaced or referred to as refugees

 6     concerning the Srebrenica events.

 7             You indicated during the course of your cross-examination that

 8     this was distinct from the -- you wrote your report concerning missing

 9     persons.  So what I would like to ask is if you could perhaps clarify for

10     us and for Chamber what the distinction is between those types of records

11     and the report that you produced concerning missing persons, are they

12     related to one another, are they distinct from one another?  If you could

13     explain that.

14        A.   I already mentioned this earlier during my cross-examination that

15     records of missing persons and records of displaced persons are two

16     different types of records.  Displaced persons are, obviously, survivors

17     who are registered because of the fact they lost their homes and don't

18     have a place to live in.

19             Missing persons is a separate category.  These are people who are

20     believed they didn't survive the conflict, and this belief is not just a

21     belief based on nothing.  It is based on evidence from exhumation and

22     identification projects of victims from mass graves.  There is an

23     extremely significant overlap between identified persons and exhumation

24     records and records of missing persons.  That's the foundation of this

25     belief.

Page 17522

 1             So when it comes to analysis, records of displaced persons, of

 2     course, obviously are unrelated to those of missing persons.

 3        Q.   Thank you for that clarification.

 4             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Judge Nyambe has a question.

 5             JUDGE NYAMBE:  Just a follow-up on your immediate answer.  You

 6     say, "displaced persons are unrelated to those of missing persons."  Are

 7     there any circumstances, tell me if you can, where a displaced person can

 8     also be a missing person?  To me, it's -- to me, a layperson, it's one

 9     and the same thing.  A displaced person can present themselves as missing

10     as well.  Is that possible in your area of expertise?  Thank you.

11             THE WITNESS:  Your Honours, I believe that it is not, in fact,

12     possible for a displaced person to be a missing person at the same time,

13     because a missing person is somebody whose whereabouts are unknown and

14     for a long, long time.  So that's the reason that the person is

15     registered as a missing person.  When it comes to displacement, we have

16     records, incomplete, deficient, but we do have records.  So these people

17     that physically exist can be contacted, can be spoken to, so that's a

18     totally different group.  I hope it clarifies.

19             MR. VANDERPUYE:

20        Q.   If I may just ask you a follow-up question to Her Honour's

21     question --

22             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  One moment, please, Judge Nyambe has a follow-up

23     question.

24             JUDGE NYAMBE:  Yes.  If we can put it the other way around, can a

25     missing person turn up as a displaced person at some point?

Page 17523

 1             THE WITNESS:  Only if there is a misreporting of some kind.  It

 2     happens that families include missing persons among the displaced of

 3     their families, but these are incidental instances that are absolutely

 4     marginal and insignificant.  But, yeah, that the missing person after a

 5     while would appear as a displaced person, yeah, in theory it might be so,

 6     but I am thinking of people who left the country, move overseas, and

 7     don't show any sign of life.  But -- even the family doesn't know and

 8     believe -- the family believes it is a missing person, but again I

 9     wouldn't think this is a massive process.  These are, yeah, infrequent

10     incidents, I would say.

11             JUDGE NYAMBE:  Thank you.

12             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Vanderpuye.

13             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Thank you.

14        Q.   I just have two follow-up questions to that.  The first is: In

15     the figures that we have seen that General Tolimir presented to you in

16     D313, I think, or 315, is it your understanding that the numbers that we

17     see there, roughly 34.000 or 35.000 people displaced or refugees in

18     respect of the Srebrenica event, that those numbers include or do not

19     include people that are missing as is reported in your -- in your

20     analysis?

21        A.   These figures on displaced persons do not include missing

22     persons.  That is what we checked by cross-referencing relevant sources

23     of information, and at several occasions we did so, and the persons that

24     were marked as potential survivors out of this exercise were just 12

25     people, and they are listed in our report.

Page 17524

 1        Q.   And, formally speaking, as a demographer, in your analysis of --

 2     in your experience, rather, in analysing a multitude of records regarding

 3     displaced persons and missing persons, is it formally generally

 4     documented or an expectation that displaced persons are people that whose

 5     whereabouts are known that can be accounted for as distinguished from

 6     missing persons or is the line somewhat blurred, professionally speaking?

 7        A.   I don't think the line is blurred.  These two groups are clearly

 8     distinguished in the way how they are recorded and presented in all kinds

 9     of circumstances.

10        Q.   All right.  I'd just like to move to another area, and that is

11     your report.

12             MR. VANDERPUYE:  If I could have 65 ter 7518 in e-court, please.

13     Just so the record is clear, this relates to the report on 58 Srebrenica

14     cases that was raised by the Defence during the course of the

15     cross-examination.

16             Mr. President, I would have to move to add this to the 65 ter

17     exhibit list because it wasn't originally on it.

18             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Tolimir, do you have any objection to add

19     this document to the 65 ter exhibit list?

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.  We have

21     no objection, except that the Prosecutor could have tendered the document

22     we have had admitted during our cross-examination in this segment.

23             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  I am not sure if I understand your comment.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  My comment was that the

25     document should be identical to the document we used in the first part of

Page 17525

 1     our cross-examination.  That's all, thank you.

 2             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  I take it that this is the report we discussed

 3     earlier during the cross-examination when I asked Ms. Tabeau if there is

 4     a report about these 58 cases.  This is the report.  And you said you

 5     have no objection to add it to the 65 ter exhibit list.  Leave is granted

 6     to do that, Mr. Vanderpuye.

 7             Now Judge Nyambe has a question.

 8             JUDGE NYAMBE:  Yes, just a follow-up question to understand the

 9     difference between "missing person" and "displaced person."

10             My understanding of a displaced person during war times is one

11     who has been displaced by the war and moves from his usual place of abode

12     to another place, and then is registered.  At that point they become a

13     displaced person; is that correct?

14             THE WITNESS:  Yes, it is correct.

15             JUDGE NYAMBE:  Okay.  Now what happened to this individual before

16     they are registered as displaced persons?  To their families, they are

17     missing persons, no?

18             THE WITNESS:  It is what happens between the registration and the

19     moment a person goes missing or disappears.  There is a period of

20     uncertainty because there is a hope at the family that the person would

21     join them, and sometimes occasionally they even report, as I said, such

22     people as displaced persons.  I can't say more about it, because that is

23     all what can happen in this period.  But in this particular case, we are

24     discussing, in this courtroom, it is not that the records of missing

25     persons we have used for our work were taken in this uncertain period

Page 17526

 1     when many things were happening, displacement and killings and combat

 2     activities, we are -- we have used for our work very many additions of

 3     the ICRC list of missing persons, starting with the 1997 edition, then

 4     1998, 2000, 2004, 2005, the latest is 2008.

 5             So it is not that we have taken a sample dated at a given moment,

 6     an early moment in time when the war was still going on.  We have

 7     confirmed these records again and again and again in order to make sure

 8     that we work with the right information.  So that is the whole point of

 9     updating this work, that we wouldn't be working with records of missing

10     persons who eventually were found alive.  ICRC has identified a few cases

11     of such people.  They are explicitly flagged in ICRC records as found

12     alive, and we separated them, excluded them from our analysis.

13             JUDGE NYAMBE:  So then this process is ongoing?  Potentially

14     somebody listed as missing could turn up somewhere still alive?

15             THE WITNESS:  Well, theoretically, yes, but we are speaking of

16     very small numbers.  I don't remember exactly the number, but say 30

17     people, 50 people at most, found alive out of 22- 23.000.  These are

18     insignificant numbers.

19             JUDGE NYAMBE:  Thank you very much.

20             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Vanderpuye.

21             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Thank you,

22     Your Honour.

23        Q.   Let me show you what we have in e-court here.  You recognise this

24     as your report, Dr. Tabeau?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 17527

 1        Q.   And it's entitled:  "Report on 58 allegedly unjustified

 2     Srebrenica cases."

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   And dated 28 July, 2011?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   In the introduction here you explain the reason and the purposes

 7     that you carried out this particular analysis.

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   All right.  And then you indicate a number of sources that you

10     consulted in putting the report together.

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Could you just briefly tell the Trial Chamber what those sources

13     were?  You don't have to -- you don't have to tell us what you did with

14     them just yet, but just what they are?

15        A.   On first group of sources, included the actual court declarations

16     based on which this list was compiled.  Second group of sources included

17     the OTP sources, that would be the 1991 population census, the 2009 OTP

18     list of missing person, and including the information about the

19     identification, and finally we also used the latest ICMP update on

20     Srebrenica victims of December 2010.

21        Q.   All right.  And were the methods that you used in order to

22     compare the data that was provided concerning these 58 names to the

23     material that you've identified the same or similar to the methods that

24     you've used previously in connection with, for example, the April 2009, I

25     believe it is, report on Srebrenica missing and dead?

Page 17528

 1        A.   The methods are the same.

 2        Q.   All right.  And what I would like to do is to briefly to go into

 3     what your findings were with respect to the 58 names that you examined.

 4             MR. VANDERPUYE:  We will have to go to page 2 of the report for

 5     this, in e-court.

 6        Q.   And you summarised them here.  But I wonder if you could explain

 7     those findings a little bit more so that the Trial Chamber has a good

 8     understanding of what you did in order to reach these results.  Here you

 9     say initially that some 44 cases out of 58 that were reported in these

10     decisions.  Can you tell us what that shows or what that means?

11        A.   This first paragraph relates to the outcomes of cross-referencing

12     the list of 58 names with the actual court declarations.  In total, we

13     received approximately -- not approximately, 58 documents plus 1

14     irrelevant that was excluded completely.  The question was whether these

15     58 documents cover the actual individuals from the list.  So it was a

16     matter of checking what kind of documentation of the cases was received.

17     And the conclusion is for 44 cases, we see from these documents that

18     these persons were presented in the court declarations as missing

19     persons; moreover, as related to the fall of Srebrenica.

20             Further, two persons were reported in the court declarations as

21     disappeared in 1992 and were declared as dead with dates of death in

22     1992, and for these two persons we later checked, these were different

23     individuals than those that we have on our OTP lists.  In addition, there

24     were three persons in the court declarations that were different from

25     those names on the 58 list.  For nine cases there was no documentation,

Page 17529

 1     but generally the conclusion is that there was enough documentation to --

 2     to see that the cases documented were not presented the way as they were

 3     communicated by the Defence to this Court as based on the book

 4     Milivoje Ivanisevic.

 5        Q.   I just want to make sure that we are clear on the record, when

 6     you refer to documentation in this context, are you referring to the

 7     B and H court decisions that were provided pursuant to a request made by

 8     the OTP?

 9        A.   Yes, this is the documentation.  This is what I understand under

10     it.

11        Q.   You indicate in the second paragraph under this heading that

12     there was cross-referencing with OTP lists, and based upon that 52 cases

13     were confirmed to be on the Srebrenica missing and identified persons

14     list.

15        A.   Yes, that is in this paragraph that I discuss the results of

16     cross-referencing the list of 58 names with the OTP sources.  They

17     matched very well, except for the fact that two persons listed with very

18     similar, almost identical, names and similar but different dates of

19     birth.  These two indicated as deaths in 1992 in the documents are

20     different persons on the OTP list.  Generally, 52 out of 58 were

21     confirmed as missing, OTP missing persons, and at the same time as

22     identified persons according to the ICMP DNA identification records; 52

23     records, both missing and identified.  Four persons were confirmed as

24     just missing persons.  For three out of four, identification is available

25     in the form of siblings' identification.  So it seems it's coming but not

Page 17530

 1     yet available for complete names.  Only as sibling identification.

 2             And, yeah, that would be 58, so that is the conclusion from this

 3     exercise.  Yeah.

 4        Q.   You testified on cross-examination that - and I think it might

 5     have been pursuant to a question that was put to you by

 6     Her Honour Judge Nyambe - that if there was -- if you were to compare the

 7     records, or if there was an inconsistency between the records that were

 8     provided and the OTP records, (redacted)

 9     (redacted) that that would be your preferred method of

10     establishing what the fate of that person was.  Do you recall saying

11     something to that effect?

12        A.   Yes.  We discussed this.  I think it goes -- and this is what I

13     said, that the approach we have taken for this work is based on the ICMP

14     confirmations.  This is an important part to us.  If a given missing

15     person is or not confirmed in the DNA identification records, and it is

16     about the reliability of both ICRC and ICMP as the record makers in each

17     case.  It goes into the mandates but also the methods they operate, the

18     standard procedures they use, general approach how things are done.

19        Q.   All right.  I think I may need to correct myself, and it may have

20     been the result of a question that was put to you by General Tolimir

21     about that, but in particular I want to draw your attention to one

22     document that General Tolimir showed you which concerned a person that

23     we've referred to in the record as entry number 7.

24             MR. VANDERPUYE:  And that was in P1777.  It would have been, I

25     think it's page 91 of that document, but we had hard copies distributed.

Page 17531

 1        Q.   This was a person who -- for whom a certificate -- or, rather, a

 2     court record was received indicating a data of death of 7 July, 1995, as

 3     you may recall?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   That individual was, according to that record, ostensibly buried

 6     on the 8th, I believe, of July, in a local grave.  (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16        A.   Well, as we discussed earlier today I compare related sources of

17     information, major sources being the ICRC records of missing persons and

18     ICMP records of DNA identification.  And these records jointly with the

19     court record doesn't seem to be obvious contradiction to what was

20     observed by some witnesses earlier this year, by March 1995.  So it is

21     perfectly possible, in my eyes, that the person disappeared in July 1995

22     at -- this was reported on the ICRC by some close relatives of the

23     person, (redacted)

24     (redacted)

25     (redacted)

Page 17532

 1        Q.   Okay.  Now, you had mentioned that there were included in this

 2     material, that is the records that you received, some deaths that were

 3     indicated in 1992.  Do you recall that?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   And what was the disposition of those records; in other words,

 6     did you analyse them and what was your conclusion?

 7        A.   Yes, I analysed these records.  And in order to present the

 8     Chamber with the approach applied, we perhaps could move to page 8 of

 9     this report, table 7.

10             MR. VANDERPUYE:  All right.  We will have to go back to 65 ter

11     7518.  And we'll need to go to page 8.  And just for the benefit of

12     General Tolimir it does read at section 2.4, it refers to the two

13     deaths -- two 1992 deaths which are referred to in the report as case 13

14     and 50, and indicates how that material or those cases were analysed.

15        Q.   And Dr. Tabeau, you can tell us a little bit about how you did

16     that.

17        A.   In table 7, there are results from my searches in the 1991

18     population census --

19             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  This page should not be broadcast.

20             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

21             THE WITNESS:  Yes.  The search was done using the names.  First

22     name, father's name, and the surname of both individuals.  First

23     individual, I won't say the name of the person, is presented by showing

24     four different records from the census.  All these four individuals have

25     identical last name, first name, father's name; the differences are seen

Page 17533

 1     in the date of birth.  The date of birth reported in the census for each

 2     of these individual is one from 1958, one from 1962, then 1964, 1956.

 3     Obviously four different persons living in Bosnia with the same names in

 4     different municipalities.  Two individuals are bolded in this table, the

 5     individual number one and the fourth individual.  One -- the first one is

 6     born in 1958, the second one is born in 1956.  One is from Bratunac, one

 7     is from Srebrenica.  So in the actual court declaration provided to us,

 8     the individual born in 1958 is covered and in the OTP lists of missing

 9     persons and identified, the individual born in 1956 is covered.  So

10     obviously two different persons.

11             The second case is of the same nature.  The more confusing part

12     is the date of birth.  One of the individuals is found in the census and

13     presented in the second panel of this table.  One is born in 1941 and one

14     in 1940.  Again, different municipalities, and the same names.  And

15     similarly, one -- the one born in 1941 is covered in the actual court

16     declaration and the one born in 1940 in the OTP records.  So the census

17     information actually was extremely useful, allowed me to establish how

18     many people with the same names lived in Bosnia in the outbreak of the

19     war and, obviously, they experienced different fates.  This happens

20     sometimes and we can see it in our lists.

21        Q.   Just in conclusion:  Of the 58 names that have been identified by

22     the Defence and by Milivoje Ivanisevic in his book, how many of these

23     names actually -- that is, you know, conflict with the list of names that

24     are indicated in the OTP list of missing and dead related to Srebrenica?

25        A.   Of the list of 58 persons was presented by General Tolimir as

Page 17534

 1     conflicting in its entirety, so all the 58 names were suggested either to

 2     be taken off from the OTP records, but the conclusion from this study is

 3     there is no need to take off even one record from our lists.

 4        Q.   Thank you, Dr. Tabeau.  I don't have any further questions.

 5             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Mr. President, I would like to tender the

 6     report.  I do note, actually, that there are parts of this report that

 7     probably should be under seal, so I will have to identify that.

 8     Alternatively, I could offer in the whole report under seal which might

 9     be more efficient.

10             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  I think so.  It's much easier to work with it.

11     It should be marked for identification, pending translation, and put

12     under seal.

13             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Thank you, Mr. President.  I just want to note

14     also --

15             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Just a moment, please.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter document 7518 should be

17     assigned Exhibit P2586, admitted under seal, marked for identification

18     pending translation.  Thank you.

19             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Vanderpuye.

20             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Thank you, Mr. President.  I just wanted to note

21     that the third annex which concerns the results of documents that have

22     been reviewed and cross-referenced concerning these 58 names is a -- it's

23     a spreadsheet and so we'll provide that on a CD.

24             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you very much.

25             Ms. Tabeau --

Page 17535

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  Just one correction for the record, Your Honours.

 2     65 ter document 7518 was assigned Exhibit P2586 under seal, marked for

 3     identification pending translation.  Thank you.

 4             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you for this clarification.

 5             Ms. Tabeau, you will be pleased to hear that this now concludes

 6     your examination in this trial.  Thank you very much that you were able

 7     to provide us with your expertise and your reports.  Now you are free to

 8     return to your normal activities.  Thank you very much again.

 9             THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

10             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Vanderpuye, is the next witness ready?

11             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Yes, Mr. President.  The next witness is ready.

12     And my colleague, Mr. Elderkin, will be handling him, so in light of that

13     may I be excused?

14             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you very much.  You are.

15             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Thank you.

16             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  And the next witness should be brought in,

17     please.

18                           [The witness withdrew]

19             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  We -- before the next witness appears in court I

20     would like to raise two matters.  This morning we heard that there are

21     some translations available now.  I was informed by the Registrar that

22     three of them should be now marked -- no longer marked for identification

23     but be exhibited now.  These are P1677, P2265, and P2447.  The other two

24     mentioned by the Prosecutor, namely, P2164, and P2444, P2444, and not

25     "P244", not P244, are already in evidence.  There is no need to mark them

Page 17536

 1     as exhibits now.

 2                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

 3                           [The witness entered court]

 4             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Just another correction.  The number P2164 is

 5     wrong.  It should be P2162.  The previous translation may be replaced by

 6     the new complete translation.

 7             Good afternoon, sir.  Welcome to the courtroom.  Please read

 8     aloud the affirmation on the card which is shown to you now.

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

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

11             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you very much.  Please sit down and make

12     yourself comfortable.

13                           WITNESS:  DRAGAN TODOROVIC

14                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

15             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Sir, you will be first examined by the

16     Prosecutor, Mr. Elderkin, and later in cross-examination by Mr. Tolimir.

17             Mr. Elderkin, you have the floor.

18             MR. ELDERKIN:  Mr. President, Your Honours, everyone else in the

19     courtroom, good morning to you.

20                           Examination by Mr. Elderkin:

21        Q.   And witness, good morning to you.  As you know my name is

22     Rupert Elderkin.  I want to remind you before we get started to try to

23     keep your voice up and speak into the microphones and speak a bit slowly

24     so that the interpreters have time to translate what we are saying.  And

25     if there is anything that I or anyone else asks you that is unclear, then

Page 17537

 1     please let me know and I will do my best to rephrase the question.

 2             We start, please, by stating your full name.

 3        A.   Dragan Todorovic.

 4        Q.   Are you a Bosnian Serb?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Do you recall testifying in this court during the Popovic trial

 7     in 2007?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   Yesterday, did you listen to the audio recording of your

10     testimony in that trial?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Having listened to your testimony, does it fairly and accurately

13     reflect what you would say were you to be examined here today and if you

14     were asked the same questions?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Sir, yesterday did you also read in your own language the

17     transcript of an interview that you gave to investigators from this

18     Tribunal in December of 2004?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   And did you also read in your own language the notes of an

21     interview that you gave to American investigators in June of 2005?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Are the facts stated in those two documents accurate and correct?

24        A.   Yes.

25             MR. ELDERKIN:  Your Honours, I would move to have the witness's

Page 17538

 1     Popovic testimony admitted.  There are two 65 ter numbers, 7512 is the

 2     confidential version under seal, and 65 ter 7513, which is the public

 3     transcript.

 4             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Both documents will be received, the first under

 5     seal.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter document 7512 shall be

 7     assigned Exhibit P2587, admitted under seal.  And 65 ter document

 8     P2588 -- pardon me, 65 ter document 07513 shall be assigned

 9     Exhibit P2588.  Thank you.

10             MR. ELDERKIN:  Your Honours, I would also request the admission

11     of the associated exhibits which are indicated in the exhibit list for

12     this witness, and those are 65 ter numbers 2072, 2073.  Your Honours, for

13     your information, Exhibit -- 65 ter number 2074 has already been admitted

14     as Exhibit P233.

15             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you, the first two documents will be

16     received as exhibits.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter document 2072 shall be

18     assigned Exhibit P2589.  And 65 ter document 2073 shall be assigned

19     Exhibit P2590.  Thank you.

20             MR. ELDERKIN:  And I would now like to read a short summary of

21     the witness's evidence.

22        Q.   Dragan Todorovic was a member of the VRS during the war.  He

23     served with various units, including a period when he served in the

24     RS MUP Special Police Brigade's 2nd Sekovici Detachment.  In late 1994,

25     he joined the Vlasenica platoon of the VRS's 10th Sabotage Detachment

Page 17539

 1     based in Dragasevac, a village around 4 to 5 kilometres from Vlasenica.

 2     He worked in logistics supporting both the Vlasenica and Bijeljina

 3     platoons of the 10th Sabotage Detachment.

 4             On different occasions during the war, Todorovic encountered

 5     senior VRS officers, including the Main Staff chief of intelligence,

 6     Colonel Petar Salapura, who communicated the most with the

 7     10th Sabotage Detachment; the Main Staff chief of security,

 8     Colonel Ljubisa Beara; and their superior, General Tolimir.  Todorovic

 9     testified that he saw General Tolimir for the first time in Zepa.

10             On the 10th of July, 1995, Todorovic's unit received a written

11     order to prepare to deploy into the field.  The order was sent in the

12     name of Milorad Pelemis, the commander of the 10th Sabotage Detachment,

13     but signed by Franc Kos, a fellow member.  The unit packed their gear and

14     waited for the Bijeljina platoon, then drove to Zeleni Jadar, where they

15     spent the night.

16             The next day, 11th of July, Commander Pelemis arrived.  He

17     ordered the unit to divide into two groups and to enter Srebrenica town.

18     They entered the town in the afternoon without meeting any resistance and

19     secured the police station.  Todorovic saw senior officers, including

20     General Mladic and Drina Corps commander General Milenko Zivanovic.

21     Mladic ordered the unit to continue the blockade at the police station to

22     secure any important documents that might be there, and then issued an

23     order for other soldiers to move towards Potocari.  General Mladic

24     relieved the unit of its duty in Srebrenica on the evening of 11th of

25     July.  He told them to retreat and that they had 48 hours to search and

Page 17540

 1     take whatever they wanted.

 2             Todorovic's unit spent the night of 11th of July near Srebrenica

 3     town.  On 12th of July he went with a driver to Dragasevac to prepare for

 4     the return of soldiers to the base.  Later that day, as the

 5     10th Sabotage Detachment units returned from their deployment to

 6     Srebrenica, there was a vehicle accident in which a soldier was killed.

 7     Todorovic and others were assigned to make the necessary arrangements for

 8     the soldier's body to be returned to his family in Trebinje.  They

 9     travelled there on the 13th July and the soldier's funeral was on the

10     14th of July.

11             The soldiers who had travelled to Trebinje arrived back at

12     Dragasevac by around 11.00 a.m. on the 15th of July.  Commander Pelemis

13     was absent, and the troops did not have any activities to perform.  Then,

14     VRS Main Staff officer Dragomir Pecanac and Drina Corps security chief,

15     Lieutenant Colonel Vujadin Popovic arrived.  Pecanac came into the camp

16     and asked 10th Sabotage Detachment member Zoran Obrenovic for some

17     soldiers.

18             Pecanac said that he had a meeting in Zvornik with Colonel Beara.

19     Pecanac rounded up a group of soldiers and took them from the camp down

20     the road towards Sekovici.  Todorovic provided equipment and supplies to

21     these soldiers, including zolja rocket-launchers, a machine-gun, and

22     ammunition for automatic rifles.  Todorovic saw the soldiers leaving.

23     The group included Franc Kos, who was in charge; Boris Popov;

24     Marko Boskic; and Drazen Erdemovic.  Todorovic testified that he did not

25     know what task the group was used for.

Page 17541

 1             Regarding Popovic's presence at the Dragasevac compound,

 2     Todorovic testified that the gate-keeper told him that Popovic was

 3     outside.  Todorovic saw Popovic's car and could see a person inside it,

 4     however he claimed that he did not see Popovic.

 5             Todorovic was read notes of his FBI interview where he stated:

 6             "When he got back to Dragasevac, a senior officer named Popovic

 7     was also present, although he waited for Pecanac by his Volkswagen Golf

 8     outside the driveway's gate."

 9             In addition, he was read part path of his OTP interview statement

10     in which he states that:

11             "Between 10.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon, Major Pecanac arrived at

12     Dragasevac with a security officer, Lieutenant Colonel, or

13     Colonel Vujadin Popovic.  They arrived in two separate seeks.  Pecanac

14     came into the compound whilst Popovic remained on the outside ... all the

15     while, Popovic remained outside the compound area."

16             Todorovic then admitted that he did, in fact, see Popovic that

17     day.

18             MR. ELDERKIN:  Your Honours, that concludes my summary.  I have

19     just a few questions, if I may, that I would like to ask the witness.

20             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Yes, go ahead, please.

21             MR. ELDERKIN:

22        Q.   Sir, you previously testified that you saw General Tolimir for

23     the first time in Zepa, and I want to ask you about that topic.  When did

24     you go to Zepa?

25        A.   We arrived in Zepa on the 20th or the 21st of

Page 17542

 1     June [as interpreted].

 2        Q.   Could you confirm the month and the year that you are talking

 3     about?  In the transcript I see the 20th or 21st of June.

 4        A.   It was in July.  It was July, the month of July, not the month of

 5     June.

 6        Q.   And just for the transcript records, sir, the year as well,

 7     please?

 8        A.   1995.  But the month is July, not June.

 9        Q.   Thank you, sir.  I believe the month is now correctly recorded in

10     the transcript.  Sir, with whom did you go to Zepa?

11        A.   With my detachment, the 10th Sabotage Detachment.

12        Q.   Since there are two platoons of the 10th Sabotage Detachment,

13     which platoon or platoons were deployed there?

14        A.   I was with the Vlasenica platoon.

15        Q.   Did members of the Bijeljina platoon go to Zepa or not?

16        A.   Yes, they did.

17        Q.   Did your commander, Pelemis, deploy to Zepa?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   And what was the task you were deployed to in Zepa?

20        A.   We were supposed to be engaged in an action to take, to conquer

21     Zepa.

22        Q.   And, sir, where did you travel to when you went towards Zepa?

23     Where did you arrive?

24        A.   We travelled across Han Pijesak.

25        Q.   And where did you make your camp?  Where did you spend the night

Page 17543

 1     on the day you arrived in the Zepa area?

 2        A.   We camped above Zepa on an elevation, and I don't know its name.

 3        Q.   Do you know the name of any of the villages closest to where you

 4     were deployed?

 5        A.   No.

 6        Q.   And can you describe the immediate location, were there any

 7     buildings where you were, were you by a road, were you in the forest?

 8     Please give a description as best you can.

 9        A.   There by the road there was a house.  There was a slope, a

10     hillside, there was a United Nations transporter.

11        Q.   And how long were you deployed to that location?

12        A.   We spent the night there and the entire following day.

13        Q.   Apart from other members of the 10th Sabotage Detachment, who did

14     you see during your deployment to that area?

15        A.   The Army of Republika Srpska, units of the Drina Corps.

16        Q.   And was it during this deployment that you saw General Tolimir,

17     as you mentioned in your previous testimony?

18        A.   No, not that day.

19        Q.   Can you tell us about when you did see General Tolimir, please?

20        A.   When we went down to Zepa, up to a bridge, where there are four

21     or five wooden huts.

22        Q.   How much time did you spend at that location you've just

23     mentioned, the bridge where there are four or five wooden huts?

24        A.   Three days, I think.

25        Q.   What was your task or your unit's task during those three days?

Page 17544

 1        A.   To guard the bridge.  Nothing else.

 2        Q.   Describe the occasion or occasions when you saw General Tolimir?

 3        A.   Well, it was not really a personal encounter.  I did not meet him

 4     as a person.  He was passing by with his entourage in two vehicles of the

 5     VRS, two jeeps.

 6        Q.   Who else was in his entourage?

 7        A.   General Ratko Mladic was in one of the vehicles.

 8        Q.   And did you see any other officers from the VRS Main Staff?

 9        A.   Not from the Main Staff, but there were officers of the

10     Drina Corps who were there with their troops.

11        Q.   During your time in the Zepa deployment, did you ever see the man

12     Pecanac who you described in your previous testimony?

13        A.   I did not see him in Zepa.

14        Q.   Sir, right at the beginning of your testimony today, you recalled

15     that yesterday you reviewed the interview statement from investigators

16     from this office, and you confirmed that the contents of that statement

17     were correct.  And in that statement, sir, you describe in a little bit

18     of detail the time in Zepa, and you also mention Mr. Pecanac.  Would it

19     help you to recall whether you saw Mr. Pecanac if you were to review what

20     you said in that statement back in December of 2004?

21        A.   I don't think Pecanac came to Zepa.  I should look to see where.

22        Q.   Sir, if it would help you to look --

23             MR. ELDERKIN:  -- then can I ask for the document to be put on

24     screen.  It's actually on the Defence list, so I understand that it is

25     loaded up, and it's 65 ter 1D946.  And the relevant page in both

Page 17545

 1     languages is page 4 in e-court.  It's the bottom half of that page, if it

 2     can be zoomed in.

 3        Q.   Sir, if you just take a moment when the document is up on the

 4     screen to look at the paragraph you'll see numbered 11, and that's the

 5     paragraph in the statement where you describe the deployment to Zepa.  It

 6     should come up on the left hand side of the screen in the Serbian

 7     language.  Let us know if the text is big enough for you to read.

 8        A.   Pecanac was there for negotiations.  When the negotiations

 9     started, when contact was made with Avdo Palic, also known as Professor,

10     it's then that Pecanac and others from the security detail came.  Our

11     soldiers also went on the security detail.  But that day when we came to

12     the bridge and when we were there, he did not come to see us.  He was

13     passing by in the security detail of Mladic, but he did not really come

14     to address us at the check-point while we were there.

15        Q.   So you say he was in the security detail of Mladic, does -- are

16     you referring to the time when you say Tolimir and Mladic came by in two

17     vehicles or are you referring to another time?

18        A.   That's a different occasion when contact was made with Avdo Palic

19     to negotiate the surrender of Zepa.  That's when Pecanac came, and our

20     soldiers from the sabotage detachment went with him on his security

21     detail to the location where the negotiations were held.  But the first

22     two days we were alone with our commander at the bridge.  Nobody came to

23     visit us.

24        Q.   Now, how often during the whole of your Zepa deployment did you

25     see General Tolimir or his vehicle?

Page 17546

 1        A.   I didn't see him personally.  I just saw his vehicle pass by, the

 2     vehicles just passed by.  We had no right to stop anybody.  They were

 3     passing back and forth.

 4        Q.   Was that on a single occasion or on more than one occasion?

 5        A.   More than one.

 6        Q.   Did any of your colleagues from the 10th Sabotage Detachment

 7     perform any protection duties for General Tolimir during the deployment

 8     in the Zepa area?

 9        A.   I don't know, because General Mladic was also there.  Perhaps

10     they were protecting him, perhaps Tolimir.  I don't know what they did,

11     who they protected.  I just saw them going to Zepa.  They must have been

12     on somebody's security detail, perhaps in another location.  I don't

13     know.

14        Q.   Did you see General Tolimir at the same time you saw

15     Major Pecanac, or did you see them only on separate occasions?

16        A.   Separate.

17        Q.   Did you hear anything about what General Tolimir was doing in the

18     Zepa area?

19        A.   I did.

20        Q.   And what was that?

21        A.   That he was to negotiate with Avdo Palic, commander of the

22     Zepa Brigade, about the surrender of Zepa.

23        Q.   Were you in the Zepa area when the Muslim population left the

24     enclave?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 17547

 1        Q.   What did you see?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   What did you see?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   I am not sure if the translation is working.  Can you describe

 6     whether you saw the population leaving?  Did you see buses?  Did you see

 7     people gathered in groups?  Can you describe, if you can remember, how

 8     you -- or what you saw?

 9        A.   Transport was provided for the population of Zepa, including

10     buses.  Without weapons, women and children were to come out first, then

11     the wounded, then soldiers.

12        Q.   Were any soldiers from the Serb side escorting the Muslim

13     population?

14        A.   There was the military police of the VRS.

15        Q.   And when did you last see General Tolimir or General Tolimir's

16     vehicle during your deployment to the Zepa area?

17        A.   That day when they were supposed to agree on the evacuation of

18     the population of Zepa, when he finished those negotiations with Palic.

19        Q.   Sir, thank you very much.  I don't have any further questions for

20     you at this time.

21             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you.

22             Sir, now it's the turn of Mr. Tolimir to put questions to you

23     during his cross-examination.

24             Mr. Tolimir, you have the floor.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.  I hope

Page 17548

 1     this trial day ends in keeping with God's will, not mine.  I would like

 2     to greet Mr. Elderkin whom I haven't seen in the courtroom in a long

 3     time.  I would like to greet everyone else in the courtroom, including

 4     the witness and wish him welcome.

 5                           Cross-examination by Mr. Tolimir:

 6             THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

 7        Q.   Dragan, since we can we have speak the same language and this is

 8     to be interpreted, both my questions and your answers, let's try to make

 9     a brief pause between questions and answers so that they can follow,

10     otherwise they don't be able to catch up and our questions and answers

11     will overlap.

12        A.   All right.

13        Q.   Thank you.  In your previous testimony in the Popovic case, you

14     said you left Kladanj when the conflict in Bosnia started and from

15     Kladanj you went to the territory of Republika Srpska.  Could you please

16     say whether that's correct?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   And describe the circumstances how and why you left Kladanj.

19        A.   I left Kladanj in 1992, I believe it was in the month of May.  I

20     lived there before, I worked there, I had a house and family.  And then

21     the day came when I saw the units of the BH Army had come in, the

22     Patriotic League, my family and I became suspicious.  As soon as we saw

23     those rifles, I thought I should take my family to a safer place, so I

24     believe we left Kladanj in May 1992.

25        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Todorovic.  Could you tell us whether you left

Page 17549

 1     your family house and everything and whether you returned after the war,

 2     and whether you left all the immovable and moveable property there that

 3     you couldn't take with you?

 4        A.   I had only one tracksuit and a pair of sneakers.  The same goes

 5     for my wife and child.  I left my house behind, all my property, and

 6     everything was burned down later.

 7        Q.   Did the VRS do that or did the BH Army units do that waging war

 8     against the Serbian population?

 9        A.   Well, the BH Army came later.  First of all, there was the

10     Patriotic League and all the men who were creating problems before the

11     war joined the Patriotic League.

12        Q.   Maybe I wasn't clear.  Did the VRS, after it was established,

13     fight in Kladanj where your house was?

14        A.   No.

15        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Todorovic.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we now look at 1D946.  That's

17     your statement.  It's already on the screen, in fact.  We want to look at

18     page 1, paragraph 4.  More precisely, paragraph 2 in number 4.

19             MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   It says that group in Bijeljina had the task to act behind enemy

21     lines.  And before that you said the sabotage detachment was linked to

22     the security administration.  So tell us, the sabotage units, including

23     your detachment that were inserted into enemy territory, were they linked

24     to the security administration or to the intelligence administration?

25        A.   Well, my unit was subordinated to the Main Staff.  Now, whether

Page 17550

 1     to intelligence or security, I don't know.  The contract was with the

 2     Main Staff of the VRS.

 3        Q.   Thank you for that answer.  If you don't know under which

 4     administration at the Main Staff you were, it doesn't matter.  In any

 5     case, you were a member of the VRS and a member of the

 6     sabotage detachment?

 7        A.   Yes, yes.

 8        Q.   In the course of the reading of this summary by Mr. Elderkin, he

 9     said at page 50, among other things -- in fact, he asked you when you

10     entered the town and where your unit spent that first night.  And you

11     said you entered the town on the 11th and you spent the night near

12     Srebrenica.  That's what you said in your statement.

13             I would like to know, did you arrive to Srebrenica from

14     Zeleni Jadar without fighting?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Then, before that, on the 11th, when you travelled, when did you

17     journey from Zeleni Jadar to Srebrenica?

18        A.   On the night of the 10th we spent the night near Srebrenica, or

19     perhaps it was closer to Zeleni Jadar.  I am not really sure about the

20     geography.  In any case, we came from the direction of Dragasevac,

21     Vlasenica.

22        Q.   Thank you.  Now, on the 10th, the night of the 10th, where you

23     spent the night there, did you hear or see members of the 28th Division

24     or had they already pulled out from the territory of Srebrenica?

25        A.   When we arrive at Srebrenica, there was still sporadic gun-fire,

Page 17551

 1     but there was no indication that there was any fighting.  We were put up

 2     there, we spent the night, there was no combat, we didn't shoot, nobody

 3     shot at us.  Occasionally, a round would be fired just to make it clear

 4     that there were troops around to mark the territory.

 5        Q.   Can you remember that night of the 10th and the 11th when you

 6     entered the area of Srebrenica after spending the night and entering the

 7     town, can you remember whether you saw any members of the BH Army?

 8        A.   While entering Srebrenica, that morning when we got orders to go

 9     in, when we divided -- when we split into two groups, when we got order

10     from our commander Pelemis who lined us up and gave us orders on how we

11     are to act, how to be careful, that we shouldn't hurt anyone who

12     voluntarily surrenders, that we should search houses in groups of three,

13     we entered Srebrenica, perhaps it's a disgrace to say, but without firing

14     a round.

15        Q.   Since you entered without firing a round, can we conclude based

16     on your answers that you did not encounter any resistance when you

17     entered the town of Srebrenica from Zeleni Jadar?

18        A.   On the axis that our unit was, there was no combat.

19        Q.   On page of an earlier transcript, that's the Popovic case, you

20     said that you were guarding the police station?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Thank you.  At the police station did you find anyone of the

23     residents, Muslims, Serbs, or perhaps prisoners?

24        A.   No.

25        Q.   During the examination-in-chief, you were asked a few questions

Page 17552

 1     about your time in Zepa during the combat for the liberation of Zepa.

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   You indicated clearly on page 54 that you came, you passed by a

 4     house, and there was a UN APC next to that house, and you spent the whole

 5     day there?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   Did you engage in any combat in the area of Zepa at all?

 8        A.   No.

 9        Q.   In the questions and answers that followed concerning whom you

10     had seen, et cetera, you said you were guarding a bridge?

11        A.   It was a very small river, the entrance into Zepa.  There were

12     some mills there and a few houses, four or five houses.

13        Q.   And you said then that you had seen officers pass by across that

14     bridge towards Zepa, and you said you saw Tolimir and Mladic and also

15     Pecanac.  There was some question about Pecanac.  My question is:  Did

16     you personally ever talk to Mladic, Tolimir, or Pecanac in Zepa?

17        A.   No.

18        Q.   Thank you.  The Prosecutor asked you in this examination-in-chief

19     whether you had seen residents of Zepa leaving Zepa for Kladanj.  My

20     question is:  Did the residents of Zepa start leaving after the agreement

21     was signed between the VRS and the BH Army on the evacuation of the

22     population of Zepa?

23        A.   Yes.  And we were very happy to see it end that way without

24     casualties on either side.

25        Q.   Thank you.  I want to ask:  Based on your entire engagement in

Page 17553

 1     Srebrenica and Zepa, did you and the soldiers who were with you fight at

 2     all in Zepa or Srebrenica from the time when you came from Zeleni Jadar

 3     to the time when you came to Srebrenica, and later on the 20th of July to

 4     Zepa?  Did anyone engage in any fighting?

 5        A.   No.

 6        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Todorovic, for all the answers you provided here

 7     during my examination.  That was based on your statement and your earlier

 8     testimony.  I have no further questions.  Thank you for coming to this

 9     Court, for giving testimony.  I wish you a pleasant journey and a safe

10     return home.  May God be with you and bless you.  I hope you return

11     safely to your family.

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the Defence has

13     completed its cross-examination of this witness.  We have no further

14     questions.  Thank you.

15             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you very much.

16             Judge Mindua has a question.

17             JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, Witness Todorovic.  Following

18     up on the questions of General Tolimir, I would like one clarification.

19     You entered Srebrenica on the 10th?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The 11th.

21             JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much for this

22     clarification.  Was your unit the first unit of the VRS to enter the

23     enclave?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was one of the first, certainly.

25             JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Very well.  Thank you very much.

Page 17554

 1     Do you know if other VRS units had engaged in fighting against the

 2     28th Division of the BH Army to take Srebrenica?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, but not in the numbers that

 4     they tried to portray.  In much smaller numbers.

 5             JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Sorry, I didn't understand that

 6     really.  What do you mean in much smaller numbers?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I meant to say that there were

 8     troops of the VRS and the police there, but not in the numbers reported

 9     by reporters from Srebrenica.  There were much fewer troops than they

10     portrayed in the media, on TV, et cetera.  Fewer troops were involved in

11     the entry into Zepa than the Muslims said.  They said 30.000 Serb

12     soldiers attacked Srebrenica, and there was not even half that number.

13             JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Very well.  So according to you

14     there were not 30.000 soldiers on the Serb side attacking Srebrenica, but

15     I would like to understand this:  This enclave of Srebrenica fell after a

16     battle or battles with the 28th Division of the BH Army, or the town

17     fell, as you've said, without a single bullet fired by the VRS without

18     any resistance.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My unit did not fire a single

20     bullet.  I am not saying there was no fighting anywhere on other sites.

21             JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you.  I understand now.

22             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you.

23             Mr. Tolimir, you have used 1D946.  That was the OTP statement of

24     the witness.  Are you tendering that document?

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.  It may

Page 17555

 1     be admitted.  This is a Prosecution document that has been of use to us

 2     and may be of use to the Trial Chamber as well.

 3             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  It may be admitted is not a clear answer.  Are

 4     you tendering it or not?  It's in your hands.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President.  I said that I

 6     am tendering it because it can be used by all the sides in these

 7     proceedings.

 8             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you very much.  It will be received as an

 9     exhibit.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter document 1D946 shall be

11     assigned Exhibit D317.  Thank you.

12             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  I think it should be 318 because we have already

13     a document with that number.  D317 MFI'd is the document 1D951.

14             THE REGISTRAR:  Correct, Your Honours.  Apologies.  1D946 shall

15     be D318.  Thank you.

16             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you very much.

17             Mr. Elderkin, do you have re-examination?

18             MR. ELDERKIN:  Your Honours will be glad to hear that I don't.

19             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Thank you very much.

20             Sir, you will be pleased to hear that this concludes already your

21     examination in this trial.  The Chamber would like to thank you that you

22     were able to come to The Hague and to help us, and now you are free to

23     return to your normal activities.  Thank you very much, again.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Mr. Elderkin, is there another witness available

Page 17556

 1     for today?

 2             MR. ELDERKIN:  I'm afraid not, Your Honours.  I believe the next

 3     group of witnesses are arriving over the weekend, so we have gone a

 4     little faster than we had expected.

 5             JUDGE FLUEGGE:  Indeed.  We are in the same position.

 6             We have to adjourn for the week, and we will resume on Monday,

 7     2.15 in this courtroom.  We adjourn.

 8             I am very sorry.  Everybody was already rising.  I have to

 9     address the parties with one matter, very briefly.

10             On the 8th of September we will have the videolink of one

11     witness, and that probably start at 10.30 I was told by the registry, but

12     we -- the relevant courtroom won't be available for us the whole day

13     because there might be some technical problems.  Please be aware that

14     10.30 we will start with that videolink conference.  Sorry for this late

15     notice.  We adjourn now.

16                           [The witness withdrew]

17                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.33 p.m.,

18                           to be reconvened on Monday, the 5th day of

19                           September, 2011, at 2.15 p.m.