Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 2233

 1                           Thursday, 29 October 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.10 a.m.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning

 6     everyone in and around the courtroom.  This is case IT-08-91-T, the

 7     Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Good morning.  May we begin in the usual manner by

 9     having the appearances, please.

10             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you, Your Honours.  For the Prosecution I'm

11     Thomas Hannis joined by Matthew Olmsted and our case manager Crispian

12     Smith.

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Appearing for Stanisic

14     Defence Slobodan Zecevic, Slobodan Cvijetic, and Mr. Eugene O'Sullivan.

15     Thank you very much.

16             MR. KRGOVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Dragan Krgovic for

17     Stojan Zupljanin.

18                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

19             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, Mr. Hannis.

20             MR. HANNIS:  Yes, Your Honours.  There was one procedural matter

21     I wanted to raise first thing this morning.  It concerns Witness ST-110

22     Mr. Trbojevic.  He's here pursuant to a subpoena issued by the Trial

23     Chamber, but in light of the pace at which we have been proceeding we had

24     anticipated he would start to testify today or tomorrow, but now it looks

25     like he wouldn't begin before next week.  He is a practising lawyer, he

Page 2234

 1     has some cases which he is counsel for and scheduled to appear in state

 2     court in Bosnia next week.  We would propose if the Court is willing to

 3     allow him to return home today or tomorrow as scheduled by victim witness

 4     and return at a later date.  We are suggesting perhaps the week of

 5     November 23rd.  But because he's here under subpoena issued by you, we

 6     felt it necessary to bring him here to court.  If you're willing to go

 7     along with our suggestion then we would ask to have him brought in and be

 8     advised by the Court that he remains under the subpoena and that he will

 9     have to return the week of November 23rd.

10             I think -- I've had some discussion with Mr. Zecevic, and I

11     believe the Defence does not oppose this request.

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  We have no objection.  We understand the situation.

13     Thank you, Your Honours.

14             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Hannis, for how long time was Mr. ST-110

15     supposed to testify?

16             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, I'm not sure what we put in our

17     notification last week, but he is a 92 ter.  I'd estimated perhaps three

18     hours with direct, and the Defence, I think Mr. Zecevic had said five --

19     oh, I see he's giving me the signal of eight hours now on

20     cross-examination.

21             JUDGE HARHOFF:  And Mr. Krgovic?

22             MR. KRGOVIC:  One hour, Your Honour.

23             JUDGE HARHOFF:  One hour.  So this seems to me that ST-110 would

24     have to stay here for several days.

25             MR. HANNIS:  That's correct, Your Honour.

Page 2235

 1             JUDGE HARHOFF:  And the reason we can't hear him, I understand,

 2     is that we have another subpoenaed witness.

 3             MR. HANNIS:  Mr. Djeric.

 4             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Right.  ST-111.  Now, for how long was he

 5     scheduled to testify.  Do you recall?

 6             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, I'm not -- my case manager's checking

 7     for me.  Three hours, and I believe the original estimate I'd seen from

 8     the Defence I think was six hours for Mr. Zecevic and one hour for the

 9     Zupljanin Defence.

10             JUDGE HARHOFF:  So again we have subpoenaed a witness who is

11     required to testify over several days.

12             Now, if I am not mistaken, you asked the Court to issue subpoena

13     orders on two consecutive days.

14             MR. HANNIS:  I believe there were -- they were scheduled two days

15     apart.  One was scheduled to appear on Tuesday and one on Thursday.  I'm

16     not sure, but that's my recollection.

17             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Very well.

18             MR. HANNIS:  And part of that is done, Your Honour in case the

19     first witness is not served and doesn't respond to the subpoena.  We

20     didn't want to have too big a gap in between.

21             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Right.  Thank you.  Do you suggest you bring him

22     into the courtroom, or what was your plan?

23             MR. HANNIS:  I believe victim witness had him brought over today.

24     I'm not sure which waiting-room he's in.

25             JUDGE HARHOFF:  But, Mr. Hannis, can I just inquire whether you

Page 2236

 1     wanted to bring him to the courtroom and have the Court admonish him that

 2     now he goes home but he has to promise us that he will return upon a new

 3     call?

 4             MR. HANNIS:  Yes, Your Honour.  I did that just based on practice

 5     in my domestic jurisdiction.  I didn't feel I had the authority to tell

 6     him that the Court says you can go home but you have to come back on this

 7     date.  Our practice where I came from was to have the witness brought in

 8     and be admonished by the Court that you are still under the subpoena, you

 9     are going to be allowed to go home now but you have to return on such and

10     such a date.  If you don't, the penalties that you were warned about

11     remain in effect and could be imposed against you in the event that you

12     do not return.

13             JUDGE HALL:  That, too, is my practice, my experience,

14     Mr. Hannis.

15             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Okay.  So let's bring him in.

16             Mr. Hannis, if we can't find him, I suggest we just start with

17     the other witness and then take Mr. ST-110 at the beginning of the

18     next --

19             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, the victim witness was advised

20     yesterday, the witness was advised yesterday to be here this morning.  I

21     assumed that the usual transport was arranged, and I assume he's in one

22     of the victim waiting rooms, but I don't know which one.

23                           [The witness entered court]

24             JUDGE HALL:  No, he doesn't have to make the declaration.

25             Good morning, sir.  Please have a seat.

Page 2237

 1             MR. TRBOJEVIC: [Interpretation] Good morning.

 2             JUDGE HALL:  What is your name, please?

 3             MR. TRBOJEVIC:  [Interpretation] Milan Trbojevic.

 4             JUDGE HALL:  You would have been brought here today, or you --

 5     the reason why you're here today is because the Tribunal would have

 6     issued a subpoena requiring your attendance.  For reasons that --

 7             MR. TRBOJEVIC:  [Interpretation] That's correct.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  For reasons that you may or may not be aware of --

 9     as you would be, I'm sure, be familiar with the process of trials whereby

10     it isn't always possible to predict the progress of a particular trial

11     and therefore from time to time delays, unfortunately, occur to the

12     inconvenience of, in this case, witnesses and those who are -- would

13     prefer to be elsewhere.

14             The -- we're advised by the Prosecution, at whose instance you

15     were subpoenaed, that the schedule is such that they are unable to lead

16     your evidence today.  You, nevertheless, are still under the requirement

17     to attend before the Tribunal according to the subpoena, and it is

18     proposed -- well, we intend to release you today, and it is proposed that

19     you return here on the 23rd of November when the Prosecution would be

20     ready for you.

21             Do you understand what I've said so far?

22             MR. TRBOJEVIC:  [Interpretation] Yes, I do.  Yes.

23             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  So we regret the inconvenience caused and the

24     disruption to your personal schedule, but you're now free to return and

25     continue -- to return to your home and continue your ordinary domestic

Page 2238

 1     and personal dealings, but you are directed to return to this Chamber on

 2     the 23rd of November.  Arrangements -- the usual arrangements will be

 3     made to facilitate your attendance on that date.

 4             Thank you, sir.

 5             MR. TRBOJEVIC:  [Interpretation] I understand.

 6                           [The witness withdrew]

 7             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, just one correction.  I made a

 8     misstatement.  We announced five hours for cross of Mr. Trbojevic.  I

 9     said eight, and I saw that His Honour Judge Delvoie was looking at me

10     with -- with a look of unbelief.

11             Thank you very much.

12             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Hannis.

13             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you, Your Honours.  I appreciate that.

14     Mr. Olmsted will be calling the next witness.

15             MR. OLMSTED:  Yes, Your Honours.  The Prosecution is ready to

16     call the next witness.  The next witness has been granted protective

17     measures, both a pseudonym as well as image distortion.

18             Perhaps while --

19                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

20             MR. OLMSTED:  Perhaps while we're waiting for the witness to come

21     in I could give a brief summary of his prior testimony just to put his

22     testimony here today into context.

23             In his Rule 92 ter statement, ST-79 describes events surrounding

24     the armed attack on Visegrad by the JNA Uzice Corps in April 1992.  He

25     tells how Muslim houses were targeted for looting and destruction by Serb

Page 2239

 1     paramilitary groups, and that the JNA and local Serbs established

 2     check-points around the municipality at which Muslims were stopped to

 3     determine whether they were on lists.

 4             The witness further describes how Serb forces took Muslims from

 5     their homes and places of employment and describes his own arrest on 7

 6     June 1992 by Milan Lukic who was wearing a police uniform that day, and

 7     three other armed Serbs.  They took the witness and six other Muslim men

 8     to the Drina River near Visegrad, made them line up along the bank and

 9     opened fire on them, killing five of the Muslim men.

10                           [The witness entered court]

11             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Olmsted, it appears that the witness has

12     protective measures.  I rely on the list the Prosecution sent to us with

13     the daily witnesses and so on, and there it is mentioned that there are

14     no protective measures.  So I would be glad if that list would be --

15     could be accurate in the future.

16             MR. OLMSTED:  Yes, Your Honour.  We'll make sure that it is

17     accurate in the future.

18             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

19                           WITNESS:  WITNESS ST-79

20                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

21             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Good morning, to you, sir.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  Good morning, Your Honours.

23             JUDGE HARHOFF:  And thank you for coming to the Tribunal.  You

24     are called here as a witness in the case against Mico Stanisic and Stojan

25     Zupljanin, and the first thing we would like you to do is to read the

Page 2240

 1     solemn declaration to us.

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

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

 4             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you, sir, you may sit down.

 5             Sir, as I told you, you have been called by the Prosecution to

 6     testify in this case, and the first thing that is going to happen is that

 7     the Prosecution will put some questions to you, and you will then be

 8     asked questions by the Defence, but first of all, let us start by going

 9     into private session.

10                           [Private session]

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 2241

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17                           [Open session]

18             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honours.

19             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you.  As I just said, you have been

20     accorded protective measures, a pseudonym and face distortion, which

21     means that people from outside this courtroom cannot see your face and

22     cannot hear your name because the name that we will use for you will be

23     ST-79.  So from this moment on, we will address you, Mr. Witness, ST-79.

24             As I said, you have been called to testify under an expediated

25     procedure meaning that the Prosecution will put a few questions to you

Page 2242

 1     lasting no more than 30 minutes, I understand.

 2             MR. OLMSTED:  I'll do my best, Your Honour.

 3             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you very much.

 4             And the Defence for Mr. Stanisic will then put questions to you

 5     lasting altogether approximately -- how long time was it, Mr. Zecevic?

 6             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I was advised that Mr. O'Sullivan

 7     will conduct the cross-examination, that it would last around half an

 8     hour.

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.  And for Mr. Krgovic?

10             MR. KRGOVIC:  We don't have question for this witness, Your

11     Honour.

12             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Very well.  So this is the schedule for today.

13     The Prosecution will take you through your testimony in about half an

14     hour, and we will then give the floor to Mr. O'Sullivan who is

15     representing Mico Stanisic, and he, too, will use about 30 minutes, and

16     that will be the end of your testimony.

17             So thank you very much, Mr. Witness.  I give the floor to the

18     Prosecution.

19             MR. OLMSTED:  Thank you, Your Honour.

20                           Examination by Mr. Olmsted:

21        Q.   And good morning, ST-79.

22        A.   Good morning.

23        Q.   ST-79, did you provide --

24             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Olmsted, I'm sorry, I forgot to have the

25     witness sign his name sheet, so could you please arrange that.

Page 2243

 1             MR. OLMSTED:  Yes, Your Honour.  May the usher provide him the

 2     pseudonym sheet.

 3             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. ST-79, can you confirm that this is the name

 4     that appears on the sheet before you?

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  Yes.

 6             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Would you then please just sign it and give it

 7     back to the usher.  Thank you very much, sir.

 8             MR. OLMSTED:

 9        Q.   Mr. ST-79, did you provide your testimony in the Lukic case on 10

10     and 11 July, 2008?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   And since arriving here in The Hague to testify here, have you

13     had the opportunity to listen to that testimony from the Lukic case?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   Were the tapes that you listened to an accurate reflection of

16     your testimony in that case?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   And if you were asked the same questions here today, would you

19     give the same answers?

20        A.   Yes.

21             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, may this witness's Rule 92 ter

22     statement, which is 65 ter exhibit numbers 10046.1 and 10046.2 and

23     associated exhibits 65 ter numbers 3449, 3450 and 3451 be admitted into

24     evidence under seal.

25             JUDGE HALL:  [Microphone not activated]

Page 2244

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, the pseudonym sheet of the witness

 2     will become Exhibit P174 under seal, and the documents which form the

 3     part of the 92 ter package will become Exhibit P175.1 through P175.5.

 4             MR. OLMSTED:

 5        Q.   Now, Mr. ST-79, I would like to ask you some questions that

 6     clarify and expand upon the issues that you addressed during your prior

 7     testimony, and first of all, during your prior testimony you describe how

 8     upon returning to Visegrad at the end of April 1992, after the Uzice

 9     Corps had taken control of the town, you encountered a number of

10     check-points around Visegrad.  You also state that the check-points were

11     manned by a mix of JNA soldiers and local Serbs and that some of these

12     local Serbs were wearing police uniforms.  Could you describe for us the

13     police uniforms that you saw these local Serbs wearing at these

14     check-points?

15        A.   Well, you see, these were standard issue police uniforms.  I

16     can't at this moment tell you exactly -- see any colours that are

17     similar, but they were -- the shirt was light blue and the pants were

18     darker but also blue.

19        Q.   And would they wear any insignias or patches on their uniforms?

20        A.   Yes.  On the sleeve there had to be insignia, the police and what

21     town it belonged to or what municipality.  The same way that insignia is

22     worn nowadays on uniforms.

23        Q.   Now, you mentioned during your prior testimony that the persons

24     manning these check-points had lists of names that they checked against

25     the people they stopped.  From what you could observe, what were the

Page 2245

 1     ethnicities of the persons on these lists?

 2        A.   They were Muslim by nationality.

 3        Q.   Did you ever see any Serbs arrested or harassed at these

 4     check-points?

 5        A.   No.

 6        Q.   In addition to these check-points, what other movement

 7     restrictions were imposed upon the Bosniaks in Visegrad?

 8        A.   Well, you see, it was hard to move around because of the White

 9     Eagles operation at the time.  It was difficult to move around and to

10     even stay there, because they took people of Muslim nationality out of

11     companies, or they took them away from their homes, and that's how it

12     was.

13        Q.   Were some Muslims required to report at certain locations on a

14     regular basis?

15        A.   Yes, there were such instances.  I know of a case.  This was very

16     soon after my return from Gorazde.  Some neighbours of mine who had

17     probably been arrested earlier when the Uzice Corps entered the town, I

18     don't know exactly who actually arrested people at the time, but in any

19     case, this was after my return from Gorazde.  There was this circle of

20     people that I played cards with, and they said that they had to report to

21     the SUP at the time every hour or every other hour, but who this was who

22     issued that order and to whom they had to report, I really don't know.

23        Q.   When these neighbours of yours would return from the police

24     station, would there be any change in their physical appearance?

25        A.   Well, you see, I didn't notice that they had been beaten or

Page 2246

 1     anything of that sort, but they just had to report there to make sure

 2     that they were still in that town lest they move out, maybe join a

 3     paramilitary formation or just escape to a wood.  But in any case, I know

 4     they hadn't been beaten then, but I know that one or two of them, as far

 5     as I know, had been liquidated, had been killed.  They had gone to SUP to

 6     report, and they never returned, and to this day they are missing.

 7        Q.   You also state during your prior testimony, and I think you've

 8     just mentioned a little while ago that Muslims were taken from their

 9     places of work during this April to May 1992 time period, and I think you

10     also mentioned that it was the White Eagles who were doing this.  Were

11     the police aware that the White Eagles were going around and arresting

12     people at their places of employment?

13        A.   Well, you see, Visegrad is a small town, so they would have had

14     to be aware of it.  They knew what was going on in the town.

15             And if Your Honours allow me, I could give a few examples of how

16     the police operated.

17        Q.   Well, perhaps the Trial Chamber will have some questions

18     regarding that, or maybe it will come out as I ask further questions.

19             The families of the Muslims who were taken away by the White

20     Eagles, did they complain to the police or someone else regarding these

21     arrests?

22        A.   Yes.  The wives and the mothers went to the then SUP to complain

23     that their men had been taken away, or their brothers or husbands, and to

24     this they received the reply that the police did not have any control

25     over those men.

Page 2247

 1        Q.   Besides these arrests of Muslims from their places of employment,

 2     what other activities were the White Eagles engaging in throughout

 3     Visegrad during this time period?

 4        A.   Well, you see, to me, I can't find the right word.  There was

 5     general chaos.  They would steal cars from people.  They would take

 6     people away.  They would sometimes play the screams of people who had

 7     been tortured, riding around town in these cars.  So they would tour the

 8     town and play these horrible screams through the loudspeakers.  I think

 9     probably to terrorise people.  I don't know.  To instill fear.

10        Q.   From what you could see, what were the police doing to prevent

11     the White Eagles from engaging in these kind of activities?

12        A.   Well, as far as I know, they did not interfere in any way.  They

13     never tried to punish anyone or to prevent any of this.

14        Q.   What level of trust did you have and your family have and other

15     Bosniaks in the community in which you live have in the police in

16     ensuring the security of your families and homes?

17        A.   Well, you see, there was no trust whatsoever either in the police

18     or the army.  To me it all seemed that these White Eagles who were doing

19     this throughout the town, and even while the Uzice Corps was there, it

20     appeared to me that they were under their protection, actually.

21        Q.   I would like to show you a couple of photographs.  The first one

22     is 65 ter Exhibit number 10140.

23             Now, sir, do you recognise either man in this photograph?

24        A.   Yes.  The man on the right, as I see it, is Milan Lukic.  He's in

25     a camouflage uniform.  And we can also see this Passat vehicle.  That's

Page 2248

 1     the vehicle that I was driven away in.

 2        Q.   Is this how Milan Lukic looked back in 1992?

 3        A.   No.  He did have a uniform but not this one.  This is a green

 4     camouflage uniform, whereas he had a blue camouflage uniform.

 5        Q.   With -- take a look at the other man in the photograph, the man

 6     on the left.  And perhaps we can zoom in a little bit further on him.

 7             I'm just curious.  You can see on his left arm he has a patch or

 8     an insignia.  Have you ever seen that insignia before?

 9        A.   Yes.  I think that insignia was on the uniform that Lukic wore at

10     the time.  Now, I can't see here whether it says "Police" on the patch or

11     something else, but this is what it looked like approximately.

12        Q.   And just to clarify, back during this time period, other than

13     police would the insignia also say something to the effect of "Milicija"?

14        A.   Yes.  When Lukic came to take me out of my house, I think he had

15     a patch on his left shoulder.  I can't really recall precisely, but I

16     think it says "Police."

17        Q.   Do you -- you say you recognise the vehicle as the vehicle that

18     you were taken away from your home on 7 June 1992.  Who was the original

19     owner of that vehicle that you see in this picture?

20        A.   The owner of this vehicle was Behija Zukic.

21        Q.   And what was her ethnicity?

22        A.   She was a Muslim.

23        Q.   And if you know, what happened to this woman?

24        A.   Lukic killed her in her own apartment and stole her car.

25        Q.   Do you recognise the place where this photograph was taken?

Page 2249

 1        A.   I couldn't really -- I'm not certain.  I think it's a part of the

 2     town, but I'm not sure which part.

 3        Q.   That's fine.

 4             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, this photograph is not on our 65 ter

 5     exhibit list yet.  I'm not sure if the Defence opposes its admission at

 6     this stage.

 7             Does the Defence oppose us seeking to admit this photograph?

 8             MR. O'SULLIVAN:  No objection.

 9             MR. OLMSTED:  Can we admit it then, Your Honours?

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P176, Your Honours.

11             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Olmsted, just to be clear, we're talking

12     here -- the witness is talking about police and about White Eagles, and

13     then he's telling us about Lukic in a blue police uniform.  Does he mean

14     White Eagle or police?

15             MR. OLMSTED:  If I understand your question, you're wondering

16     whether Milan Lukic was with the White Eagles or the police?

17             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Yes.

18             MR. OLMSTED:  You can put the question to the witness if you

19     like.  Okay.

20        Q.   ST-79, do you know whether Milan Lukic was with the White Eagles

21     or with the police?  Were you aware of his employment?

22        A.   Well, you see, when he came to take me away, he had a blue

23     camouflage uniform on, and on the patch it said on his sleeve, it said

24     "Police."  Now, as far as I knew, he was in the White Eagles.

25        Q.   Let's take a look at another photograph.  It's Rule 65 ter

Page 2250

 1     Exhibit number 10139.

 2             MR. OLMSTED:  And if we can look at the photograph on the bottom,

 3     in fact.

 4        Q.   And, sir, do you recognise anyone in this photograph?

 5        A.   Yes.  The upper row on the left is Milan Lukic.

 6        Q.   Now, if you can take a look at the man squatting down in the

 7     front row to the right with the sunglasses.  He also has a patch or an

 8     insignia on his left arm.  Perhaps we can zoom in on that a little bit.

 9     I'm just wondering if you'd ever see that kind of patch or insignia

10     around Visegrad during this time period?

11        A.   Well, I think that's the patch that we discussed a little

12     earlier.  They were both not very visible, so I can't really state with

13     certainty, and I can't claim that they are the same, but ...

14        Q.   Yes, but would you say that that -- I know you can't see it

15     perfectly clear, but does that at least resemble the patch of a police

16     officer?

17        A.   Yes.

18             MR. OLMSTED:  Again this document isn't on our 65 ter exhibit

19     list, but because it's a photograph perhaps the Defence doesn't oppose us

20     admitting it into evidence.

21             MR. O'SULLIVAN:  No objection.

22             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

23             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P177, Your Honours.

24             MR. OLMSTED:

25        Q.   Sir, during your prior testimony you state that you were -- while

Page 2251

 1     you were on your way to the Vilina Vlas Hotel in a car driven by Milan

 2     Lukic, you were stopped at a check-point.  Could you tell us who was

 3     manning that check-point at which you were stopped in?

 4        A.   Yes.  This was a check-point in Sase, close to Vilina Vlas.

 5     There was an intersection there, a fork in the road, and the -- he

 6     stopped the car there.  There was a check-point there.  A police man was

 7     standing there, and Lukic said to him and I quote, "I've caught myself

 8     some Balijas."

 9        Q.   How did the police officer manning the check-point react to this

10     statement by Mr. Lukic?

11        A.   Well, you see, as far as I could hear, there was no mention of

12     why he had done that, but as far as I could observe, this policeman was

13     also proud of this act.

14        Q.   Sir, I would like to show you a map and have you mark certain

15     locations on it.

16             MR. OLMSTED:  May we look at 65 ter Exhibit 10141.

17        Q.   All right.  I think Mr. Usher is going to show you how to use the

18     digital pen.

19             First -- first, can you identify where this police check-point we

20     were just describing at Sase was on your way to the Vilina Vlas Hotel.

21     If you can mark it with a number 1.

22        A.   [Marks]

23        Q.   You marked it.  Could you put a big number 1 next to it just so

24     we can reference it.

25        A.   [Marks]

Page 2252

 1        Q.   Very good.  And next could you mark with a number 2 the rough

 2     location of the Vilina Vlas Hotel.

 3        A.   [Marks]

 4        Q.   Very good.  Now, if you could mark with a number 3 the place

 5     along the River Drina that you and the other Bosniak men were taken by

 6     Milan Lukic and his men.

 7        A.   [Marks]

 8        Q.   Approximately how far is this location from that check-point in

 9     Sase?

10        A.   Well, I think I stated that in my statement.  About 200 to 500

11     metres.

12        Q.   And on this day where this crime incident which you describe in

13     your statement occurred, in your line along the River Drina, obviously

14     there might have been noises coming from the group that you were with,

15     but beyond that did you hear any other sounds in the area surrounding you

16     that day?

17        A.   Yes, because there were the -- the weapons were being fired

18     intermittently in bursts, and then individual shots were fired.

19        Q.   And that was within the group that you were with along the River

20     Drina; is that correct?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   My question to you is:  Beyond the group that you were with,

23     maybe in the distance or near the houses nearby or anywhere around you,

24     did you hear any other sounds while you were standing there on the bank

25     of the River Drina?

Page 2253

 1        A.   Well, yes.  You could hear gunfire, and you could see -- you

 2     could hear cars passing and the like.

 3        Q.   Now, I think we have to --

 4             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, I apologise, but it looks like there

 5     was a technical problem and he has to go back and mark the two prior

 6     locations on this map.

 7        Q.   Sir, could you, once again, mark with a number 1 the location of

 8     the Sase check-point and with a number 2 the location of the Vilina Vlas

 9     Hotel.

10        A.   [Marks]

11        Q.   Thank you.  Now, finally, in your statement you mentioned that

12     after you escaped the execution at the Drina, you crossed the river and

13     then later you observed the corpses from a hill.  Can you mark with a

14     number 4 where that location on the hill was that you observed the

15     corpses from.

16        A.   [Marks]

17        Q.   And when you observed these corpses from the hill, was that on

18     the same day of the crime incident or was it subsequent to it?

19        A.   Well, you see, this was on the next day, the day after.  I spent

20     that night in a house in that village, and then I took my neighbours and

21     these people to -- to the place where I was supposed to be shot, and then

22     I saw these bodies, these corpses that were in the water, and they were

23     there for the next couple of days.

24        Q.   And from this hill across the River Drina that you observed these

25     corpses from, how clearly could you see the corpses from that position?

Page 2254

 1        A.   Well, you see, you couldn't tell who they were.  You couldn't

 2     recognise their faces, but it was clearly visible that these were bodies

 3     of people.

 4        Q.   And if you can take a look at the map.  Along the right side --

 5     sorry, the left side of the River Drina, just below the hill that you

 6     observed the corpses from there is a road that appears.  Could you see

 7     the corpses from that road as well?

 8        A.   Yes.  This was the road leading to Barimo.

 9             THE INTERPRETER:  And the interpreter did hear the next place.

10             MR. OLMSTED:

11        Q.   I'm sorry, could you tell us -- the interpreter didn't hear your

12     full statement.  Could you tell us where that road led to?

13        A.   This road led to Barimo, Milosevici, Brstanica, and so on, these

14     various hamlets that were down the Drina River.

15        Q.   Now, you mentioned that the bodies were -- remained along the

16     River Drina bank for a couple of days.  Can you tell us how you know

17     that?

18        A.   Well, I crossed the river -- well, actually, I went from this

19     hill every single day to observe this, because everyone was interested to

20     see where it was that I had been taken and how many people had been shot,

21     killed.

22        Q.   Do you know what happened eventually to those corpses?

23        A.   Well, probably when the river withdrew -- the level of the river

24     could change because they had control over this because there was a dam

25     in Bajina Basta, so once there were a lot of bodies there they would

Page 2255

 1     close the lake, the accumulation lake, and then the water would come and

 2     take these bodies down the river.

 3             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours may this map be admitted into evidence

 4     as marked by this witness.

 5             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P178, Your Honours.

 7             MR. OLMSTED:

 8        Q.   Finally, my final topic with you, ST-79.  Could you tell us who

 9     Sredoje Lukic was?

10        A.   Sredoje Lukic was a police officer in Visegrad.  That's how I

11     know him.

12             MR. OLMSTED:  No further questions, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE HALL:  Cross-examination.

14             MR. O'SULLIVAN:  We definitely need Courtroom I, Your Honour.

15                           Cross-examination by Mr. O'Sullivan:

16        Q.   Good morning, sir.

17        A.   Good morning.

18        Q.   I'd like to ask you about, first of all, the uniforms that the

19     White Eagles wore.  I believe you have described them as camouflage

20     uniforms on which there were double-headed Eagles on the front pocket.

21     Is that correct?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   And when you saw Milan Lukic for the first time in June 1992, he

24     was wearing a uniform that had the double-headed eagle on the uniform,

25     didn't he?

Page 2256

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   And you also noticed on that uniform that there was a police

 3     insignia, but you don't know which police insignia; correct?

 4        A.   Yes.  It was written "Policija," but I don't know what sort of

 5     marking was there.  Was it the one of the former Yugoslavia or these

 6     other ones, I don't know.  All I know is that the marking was "Policija,"

 7     "Police."

 8        Q.   And you knew that Mr. Lukic was originally from Visegrad, and you

 9     believed that he worked in the police in Obrenovac, Serbia; correct?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   And the police in Serbia wear blue uniforms, don't they?

12        A.   Probably.

13        Q.   Well, sir, you -- you travelled in Serbia, didn't you, prior to

14     the war?  The police wore blue uniforms, didn't they?

15        A.   No, I didn't.  I didn't travel in Serbia, and I don't know.  They

16     probably did wear them.  I didn't have the opportunity to see how a

17     policeman in Serbia was dressed.

18        Q.   Didn't you know that the police in all of the former Yugoslavia

19     wore blue uniforms?

20        A.   Yes.  They wore blue uniforms.  I don't know whether it was at

21     the federal level.  I guess if it was one state, then it probably had a

22     uniform -- regulation uniform for the police.

23        Q.   And is it correct that the White Eagles were made up of Serbs

24     from Serbia and local Serbs from Visegrad?  Is that right?

25        A.   I think that's what I said in the statement, that there were

Page 2257

 1     both.

 2        Q.   And that's correct, is it -- isn't it?  I'm asking you to confirm

 3     your statement.

 4        A.   Yes.  It's correct for the locals.  I don't know for the other

 5     ones that I didn't know, but, yeah, it's correct.  Yes.

 6        Q.   And the White Eagles were made up mostly of younger men, and the

 7     local -- the locals were mostly older men; is that right?

 8        A.   That's not what I said in the statement.  It says that the White

 9     Eagles comprised mainly younger men.

10        Q.   Well, I may have misspoken.  That's what I intended to say.  The

11     White Eagles were mostly younger men, and the locals were mostly older

12     men.  Correct?

13        A.   No.  White Eagles would indicate younger men.  The local men who

14     were in the White Eagles were also younger men.  For example, one of them

15     who might recognise in front of the new hotel in Visegrad in the centre

16     of town, I think that I refer to him as Oliver Krsmanovic.  He was the

17     only one whom I recognised there.  At the time he was perhaps some 25 to

18     30 years old.  I don't know exactly.

19        Q.   And I think you've described the White Eagles as a very dangerous

20     group that was out of control.  Would that be a fair description of them?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   And they were rather undisciplined; is that right?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   And would it also be correct to say that they would abuse

25     alcohol?

Page 2258

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   So they were basically doing what they wanted, and they were not

 3     under anyone's control.  Would that be a fair way to put it?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   Is it correct that at the time - I'm thinking about April, May,

 6     June 1992 - that there was a shortage of uniforms to go around for the

 7     people who were engaged in the conflict?  Would that be correct?

 8        A.   I don't know if there were enough uniforms.  Most of the people

 9     were uniformed.  I don't know whether there were enough uniforms or not,

10     but there should have been enough, because everybody was wearing a

11     uniform, even from the reserve forces.  Even I had one from the reserve

12     forces from before the war.  So it probably was the case that they did

13     have enough uniforms.

14        Q.   But not everyone would necessarily be wearing his uniform.  Isn't

15     it a fact that your former JNA uniform was taken away from you and

16     probably given to someone else to wear?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   And we see from your evidence that Milan Lukic wore at least two

19     types of uniforms, according to your testimony, two different uniforms.

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   And didn't you also notice during that period that there were

22     people who would have partial uniforms because they didn't have full

23     uniforms?

24        A.   I don't recall saying that anywhere, that they had partial

25     uniforms.

Page 2259

 1        Q.   No.  I'm asking you if you ever saw that.  I'm not asking you

 2     whether you said it before, but didn't you see that in the early days

 3     during the war?

 4        A.   Perhaps there were such cases.  I really didn't pay attention to

 5     that.

 6        Q.   Earlier today you were asked about people who were taken away

 7     from work.  You remember you had the question from the Prosecutor a few

 8     minutes ago about that?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   Isn't it correct that you don't know who the people were that

11     were taking people away from work?  You don't know who was doing that, do

12     you?

13        A.   I don't know them by name, but I know by the stories of the

14     people from the companies who were eyewitnesses of such things and that

15     these things were done by the White Eagles.

16        Q.   Well, let me remind you of what you said when you were a witness

17     in the Lukic case.

18             MR. O'SULLIVAN:  And that's the -- for the record that's Lukic

19     transcript pages 380, 381, which I believe is P175.2.

20        Q.   I'll read to you, sir, what you said in the Lukic case.  You were

21     asked this question:

22             "Who was taking them away from your work?"

23             And your answer:

24             "I don't know.  Probably those White Eagles or the paramilitary

25     units that were there, that were there in Visegrad at the time."

Page 2260

 1             Next question is this:

 2             "Would it be fair to say instead of saying 'probably,' that you

 3     just don't know?"

 4             And you answered:  -- and you answered yes, you didn't know.

 5             Now it's the true, isn't it, that you didn't know.  You adopted

 6     this Lukic statement when you began your testimony here today.

 7        A.   Yes, that was it, but I'm testifying here on the basis of my best

 8     recollection.  You have these statements in front of you, and I am

 9     sitting here and telling you what I remember.  I'm remembering things

10     that happened 17 years ago, so perhaps there are some little things that

11     are not quite the same.

12        Q.   Right.  And what you said in the Lukic trial in 2001 -- or,

13     sorry, 2008, was your best recollection.  You told the truth when you

14     said you didn't know.

15        A.   I probably did say that.

16        Q.   You went to the police station in Visegrad once in 1992, in the

17     month of May; correct?

18        A.   I don't recall the month, but I did go to the police station

19     because my brother was arrested and beaten up at the police station, and

20     I went to see if they would release him and when.  However, he told me to

21     just get away from there and that's what I did.

22        Q.   And you know that he was arrested and beaten up by the military

23     police; correct?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   And when you went to the police station that day, you only saw

Page 2261

 1     military personnel at the police station; correct?

 2        A.   I didn't even enter the police station.  I was in front of the

 3     police station and my brother was at the window, and he indicated to me

 4     from the window to get away, that it wasn't safe, and I think that I said

 5     that perhaps there was a soldier there or something like that, but I

 6     don't think that I saw any police.

 7        Q.   Correct.  You only saw military personnel; correct?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9             MR. O'SULLIVAN:  No further questions, Your Honour.

10             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, I just have very limited

11     re-examination.

12                           Re-examination by Mr. Olmsted:

13        Q.   Sir, during your cross-examination you were asked questions about

14     this double-headed eagle.  Had you ever seen this double-headed eagle

15     symbol before?

16        A.   Well, I don't know how I can explain that to you.  It's probably

17     a symbol of Serbdom, the two-headed eagle.  This is what I can conclude.

18     I had the opportunity to see that.  In World War II, similar insignia was

19     worn, so it wasn't the first time that I was seeing it.

20        Q.   So was this a symbol only of the White Eagles or did it represent

21     something beyond that, and would you see it in other places around other

22     people's uniforms?

23        A.   I really couldn't tell you whether it was just the White Eagles

24     that used it as the insignia.  The Chetniks also wore that in World

25     War II on their caps.  It's probably some sort of insignia of a

Page 2262

 1     particular unit or indicating heroes.  I don't know.  I mean, I wasn't

 2     really interested, whether that was some kind of important symbol or not.

 3        Q.   Now, when you're talking about the men who had been arrested and

 4     taken away from their places of employment, during your examination you

 5     were talking about how family members would go to the police station and

 6     inquire with the police what happened to their family members who were

 7     taken away.

 8             Do you recall what the police -- whether the police told the

 9     family members who was taking these people away, who was making these

10     arrests?

11             MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I object to that question.  How would he know?

12     How would he recall what the police said?  He wasn't there.

13             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Rephrase.

14             MR. OLMSTED:  Let me rephrase.

15        Q.   You had testified earlier that family members went to the police

16     station to inquire on Muslims who had been taken away from their

17     employment.  Did you ever learn from what they had found out at the

18     police station as to who -- whether the police identified who was taking

19     away these people from their places of employment?

20        A.   I just said that based on what I knew, that mothers and wives

21     were leaving -- going to the MUP and saying that the White Eagles had

22     taken their men away, and the police, according to what I know, would say

23     that they had no control over those people, and I think this is the same

24     thing that I said in my previous testimony.

25             MR. OLMSTED:  Thank you, Your Honour.  No more questions.

Page 2263

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, sir, for attending.  You are now

 2     released.  You may return to your home.  We wish you a safe journey.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  Thank you very much for the

 4     confidence you have shown in me.

 5                           [The witness withdrew]

 6             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, perhaps this would be an appropriate

 7     time for the break.  Ms. Korner will be leading the next witness.

 8             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Yes.  I agree, but could we just raise one little

 9     matter before we go to the break, and that relates to the mode of

10     admission into evidence of the whole batch of documents, I think it was

11     108 documents, relating to the next witness.

12             As I recall, the Chamber ruled that in order for the Prosecution

13     to have these documents admitted into evidence without having to go

14     through each and every one of them with the witness, our proposal was to

15     suggest that the Prosecution could perhaps divide the documents into

16     groups and then present the witness with one or maybe two documents from

17     each group so as to have the witness's comments to these documents as his

18     oral evidence, but then if the Chamber was assured that the rest of the

19     documents belonging to that group would -- had the same character as the

20     document that was put to the witness, then we could admit that whole

21     group and then move on to the next group.

22             Now, I see that the Prosecution has offered such a grouping, a

23     regrouping, of the documents, but the regrouping that you have done is a

24     grouping according to the source, and I'm not sure if that is really

25     useful, and I would ask if the Prosecution could perhaps regroup and do

Page 2264

 1     the same thing as Mr. Zecevic did when he was grouping his documents

 2     yesterday, namely to group them either according to municipality or to

 3     crimes, because that would enable us to -- to assess the -- the coherence

 4     between the documents in each of the groups.

 5             MR. HANNIS:  I'll certainly convey that to Mrs. Korner.  I know

 6     that she had done some grouping of the documents, and I do recall at

 7     least some of them were grouped by source.  For example, I think one

 8     category was government sessions, meetings of the government, and the

 9     witness Mr. Djeric was the prime minister.  That seemed to be a logical

10     way for us to do it, because that dealt with the authenticity and such

11     matters relating to that group all come from the same source, and so that

12     seemed to make sense.  And those meetings of the government sessions

13     discuss a whole panoply of topics that cover several municipalities and

14     different kinds of events.  So it's hard for me standing here right now,

15     Your Honour, to think of how we could break those down according to

16     separate crimes or parts of the indictment.  But I'll convey what you've

17     just said to her, and we'll take a look at it.

18             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Yes, please do, because you realise that the

19     difficulty that the Chamber will have in the end when we assess the

20     evidence, is it will be difficult for us to -- to ascertain what the

21     evidentiary value of the documents that we admit into evidence without

22     having seen them really is.  This is why it would be helpful if you would

23     introduce one group of documents, say, relating to crimes committed in a

24     particular municipality, or that you could perhaps group the documents

25     according to one of the crimes or the crimes that are listed in your

Page 2265

 1     indictment, because that would enable us then to immediately assess the

 2     evidence for the purpose of -- of the deliberations after the end of the

 3     trial.

 4             MR. HANNIS:  Okay.  I understand that.  Some groups of documents

 5     are being offered for purposes other than the crimes, to show the

 6     interrelationship between the parties, the hierarchies and structures,

 7     and other matters as well that are important, and certainly when we are

 8     filing our final brief we would be pointing you to specific documents and

 9     things where we want to make arguments based on those documents.

10             Thank you.

11             JUDGE HALL:  Twenty minutes.

12                           --- Recess taken at 10.25 a.m.

13                           --- On resuming at 10.52 a.m.

14                           [Trial Chamber confers]

15             MR. ZECEVIC:  Just one matter, Your Honours.  I was notified that

16     the document I used yesterday, which was exhibited as 1D52, MFI'd because

17     pending translations, we just received the translation this morning, and

18     it has been uploaded, and therefore I kindly move the Trial Chamber to

19     admit it as -- as a proper exhibit.  Thank you very much.  The

20     translation has been uploaded in the e-court, and the court officer has

21     been notified of the number.  Thank you.

22             JUDGE HALL:  It's now admitted, yes.

23             MS. KORNER:  Good morning, Your Honours.  I was watching the

24     proceedings, so I heard the remarks of Judge Harhoff at the end of the

25     first session.

Page 2266

 1             Your Honours, can I explain that this witness, Mr. Djeric, was a

 2     member of the government of the Republika Srpska, or the Serbian republic

 3     in Bosnia as it began, from March of 1992 as prime minister, until the

 4     end of November when he resigned.

 5             The documents which he can speak to of us own knowledge are not

 6     divisible into the sort of categories that one can do with a witness who

 7     is giving evidence about actual crimes that were committed as to a

 8     certain extent was Mr. Krulj yesterday and the day before.

 9             The government, either in the Assembly or in its own meetings did

10     not tend to discuss the specifics of crimes that were committed.  The

11     reason for calling this witness is twofold.  We say that the documents

12     which relate to the running of the Republika Srpska in 1992 are relevant

13     largely to the joint criminal enterprise which the Prosecution allege,

14     much to Mr. Pantelic's fury, took place in the course of 1992.  All of

15     those documents add, in little bits and pieces when put together to what

16     we say is evidence of that joint criminal enterprise and which the

17     Defence say, to the contrary, does not say any such thing and that's the

18     issue between the two parties on this.

19             Additionally, this witness will give evidence directly in respect

20     of his dealings with Mico Stanisic, who was the minister of the interior.

21     Accordingly the most sensible division that we could come up with in

22     respect of these documents to comply with the way that Your Honours wish

23     the documents to be dealt with was to divide them into categories of the

24     Assembly minutes, the Presidency minutes, and I will ask Mr. Djeric to

25     explain so that Your Honours fully understand the difference between the

Page 2267

 1     functions of the government, the NSC, the National Security Council and

 2     Presidency minutes there is one minute we're putting in through the

 3     National Security Council on its own.  Then there was the Council of

 4     Ministers and the government minutes.  Then there are documents which

 5     don't specifically fall into any of these categories but which he himself

 6     directly issued or received, a few miscellaneous - if I can put it that

 7     way - documents about which he can speak but wasn't personally concerned,

 8     and finally intercepts of which there are in fact five altogether.  Only

 9     four when he listened to them were legible in which he was able to make

10     identification of voices.  The fifth we're trying to get enhanced at the

11     moment and, if necessary, play it to him in court tomorrow when it's been

12     enhanced.

13             And so that is the division that we have done with those

14     documents and on which -- the basis on which I have worked.

15             It is my proposal to deal with something like 20-odd -- I

16     actually added them up -- in a little detail, and then in accordance with

17     Your Honours' ruling to submit the rest of the documents within these

18     categories to be marked for identification subject to cross-examination

19     by Mr. Zecevic then once that cross-examination is completed hopefully to

20     have them all admitted into evidence.  That, as I understood, was Your

21     Honours' rulings.

22             So unless I am told that this is not the way I am to do it, that

23     is the way I propose to do it.

24             JUDGE HARHOFF:  That's fine.  The documents are yours still, so

25     we are not in a position to tell you just how to organise them, but the

Page 2268

 1     suggestion we made was made in order to try and see if it was possible to

 2     somehow regroup the documents according to their substance, to their

 3     contents, because as Mr. Zecevic correctly pointed out the other day when

 4     we discussed this, the documents, if and when admitted into evidence,

 5     will ultimately be used for their contents, and that is why we thought

 6     that if it was possible to somehow group the documents together in

 7     batches according to their contents and the substance that they raise,

 8     then that would be preferable because that would enable us to deal with

 9     the contents rather than the source.  But if you tell us now that this is

10     not possible because the Assembly, of course, discussed all sorts of

11     things and so did the government, then we will -- we will have to accept

12     that.  And I understand what you're saying, that this is the best way in

13     which you can think about how to organise the documents.

14             However, if we do that, we -- we immediately recognise that the

15     Defence is facing a serious problem in that they would have to go through

16     each and every one of the documents in order to have the witness's

17     comments on the substance, the contents of the documents, and for that

18     they would then need a lot more time.  And I think if we can't do it any

19     other way, then the Chamber's preference is then to allow the Defence

20     more time.  That's the least painful way in which we can get through

21     this.

22             If any of the parties can suggest any better way, then let us

23     hear, but --

24             MS. KORNER:  Can I say this, that Mr. Zecevic and I, it's not

25     that we failed to have discussions, it's just at the moment we haven't

Page 2269

 1     really had the opportunity to reach an agreement, but our view is that

 2     the simplest way of dealing with these types of documents is to simply

 3     agree that they go in.  There's no challenge, as I understand it, leaving

 4     aside intercepts, but to the records of the -- no challenge to the

 5     authenticity of the records of the Assembly minutes, the government

 6     minutes, and the like, and we could, therefore, simply agree between us

 7     and present the Trial Chamber with a package of all of these documents,

 8     and then each of us in turn would address, when the time came, Your

 9     Honours on what we said were the relevant matters in favour of either

10     side's submissions on these matters, and that is a way of dealing with

11     it.

12             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Isn't that exactly what we are suggesting?

13             MS. KORNER:  No, because we don't mean just these.  We mean all

14     of them.  There are -- this is only a selection, I'm sorry to have to

15     tell you, of some of the Assembly minutes that are on our list.  Others

16     are allocated to be dealt with by Mr. Trbojevic and other witnesses.  But

17     we can simply avoid all that, put them all in a package.  But as I say,

18     Mr. Zecevic and I haven't worked this out fully yet.

19             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mrs. Korner, it seems to me that what you're

20     suggesting is to have them admitted merely by their authenticity --

21             MS. KORNER:  Yes.

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  -- by their reliability.  But admission into

23     evidence for the Chamber involves two tests, namely not only reliability

24     but also relevance.

25             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  May I say straight away, I mean, that says it

Page 2270

 1     itself.  They are relevant.  Even -- Your Honours --

 2             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Yes, but --

 3             MS. KORNER:  Can I just finish this.  I have the feeling you

 4     think the Prosecution is just trying to throw in documents, if I can put

 5     in the vernacular, for the hell of it.  We're not.  We're as anxious as

 6     the Trial Chamber to limit it.

 7             JUDGE HARHOFF:  No.  Mrs. Korner, let me be sure that we

 8     understand each other correctly.  We're not afraid of evidence.  That's

 9     the way you make it sound.  But what we are keen to try and do throughout

10     this trial is to ensure that whenever we admit a piece of evidence that,

11     we have had the chance to understand the evidentiary value it has in

12     relation to your indictment, and rather than just admitting a huge load

13     of documents into evidence and then only after the trial having to start

14     reading these documents during our deliberations, rather than doing that,

15     we really would prefer if in the process of admitting the evidence, that

16     we can be shown by the party who brings the evidence, and this is not

17     only the Prosecution, it also goes for the Defence, what the evidentiary

18     value is of this particular piece of evidence so as to be able to assess

19     right there and then, and particularly when we have witnesses who can

20     testify and who can provide comments to the evidence, to have this

21     possibility as we admit the evidence.  So this is why we are trying to

22     find or device a way in which we can have these huge loads of documents

23     admitted into evidence without necessarily having to go into each one of

24     them but still having an understanding of what these documents really

25     tend to show in relation to the crimes and to the charges raised against

Page 2271

 1     the two accused.

 2             MS. KORNER:  May I say, Your Honour, we do understand that.  The

 3     difficulty is this:  Your Honours -- or you as the Pre-Trial Judge, took

 4     the view that a short trial was what was required.  If you want a short

 5     trial, then -- and I don't mean you, I mean you the Trial Chamber, then

 6     what has to be dispensed with sometimes is the minute examination, if you

 7     like, or even indeed a certain level of examination of each individual

 8     piece of evidence, because that takes time.  There is no -- there's no

 9     other way of dealing with it than other -- as has happened in previous

10     trials where, for example, witnesses -- this particular witness who was

11     called by the Court in Krajisnik testified over a period roughly of four

12     days, although it doesn't appear to have been full days.  One of the

13     witnesses coming testified for nine days in chief and cross-examination

14     because he was taken through every document so that the Trial Chamber

15     could see why it was relevant.

16             Now, because of the time constraints, one of the ways I think

17     that Your Honours would have to sacrifice is knowing exactly the

18     relevance of every piece -- every document you admit and leaving it to

19     counsel when they address Your Honours at the relevant time to pull

20     together, and that is our duty, to pull together the parts of the

21     documents that we say are relevant to a particular issue that you're

22     going to have to rule on.

23             JUDGE HARHOFF:  In our understanding, that is exactly what we are

24     now suggesting, that you go ahead as we have ruled.  Namely, that you

25     introduce these eight different batches of documents, and you show the

Page 2272

 1     witness and you show the Chamber a couple of samples from each batch.

 2     And then we leave it to the Defence to, during their cross-examination,

 3     raise the points that they take issue with.  But since, of course, the

 4     Defence has to be concerned more about the substance and the contents of

 5     the documents, we shall have to allow them extra time for that.  And as I

 6     said, I think this is the least painful way of getting through it.  It

 7     will inevitably incur some delay in the sense of some extra time is

 8     required for this, but I think that is the price that we will then have

 9     to pay at this moment.  So this may cause in the end a slight extension

10     of the trial time, but hoping that there are not too many witnesses of

11     this kind, I think we can -- we can live with it, and this is the least

12     troublesome option.

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, just a brief comment.  I hope this --

14     this doesn't suggest that -- that the burden is reversed, burden of

15     proof, because it is my understanding that it is for our colleagues from

16     the other side to show that the documents are relevant and in fact show

17     and support their thesis in -- or their theory of the case.

18             Thank you.

19             JUDGE HARHOFF:  There is no reversal of the burden of proof.  The

20     burden of proof clearly lies with the Prosecution, and -- and no question

21     can be raised about that.

22             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you.  I just wanted to clarify this.

23             JUDGE HARHOFF:  In fact, we discussed this very point as we were

24     coming in, and our understanding is that the Prosecution will highlight

25     the relevant parts of the documents, and it is then for the Defence to

Page 2273

 1     select those documents that you take issue with and have them -- and

 2     challenge their contents while the witness is here.  But as I said, we

 3     will give you extra time for this.

 4             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much.

 5             JUDGE HARHOFF:  So let's go ahead.

 6                           [The witness entered court]

 7                           WITNESS:  BRANKO DJERIC

 8                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  Please make your solemn declaration.

10             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please.

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

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

13             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, sir.  You may be seated.

14             Good morning to you again.  First of all, thank you very much for

15     coming to attend, assist the Tribunal as a witness, and on behalf the

16     Chamber and counsel on both sides, I assure you that we will not detain

17     you for one minute longer than is necessary.

18             Could you give us your name, please.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  I am Branko Djeric.

20             JUDGE HALL:  And your date of birth, sir?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  The 20th of November, 1948.

22             JUDGE HALL:  Your profession is what?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  I am a university professor.

24             JUDGE HALL:  Have you testified previously before this Tribunal?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  Yes.

Page 2274

 1             JUDGE HALL:  So you are familiar with the procedure whereby the

 2     side calling you would, first of all, have questions for you, in which

 3     case it's the Prosecution, followed by the cross-examination, and then

 4     the Chamber may have some questions.

 5             What is your ethnicity, sir?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  A Serb in the sense of ethnicity,

 7     but I am from Bosnia and Herzegovina.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

 9             If we may have a moment, please, Ms. Korner.

10             Yes, Ms. Korner.  Please proceed.

11                           Examination by Ms. Korner:

12        Q.   Mr. Djeric, first of all, can I deal with your previous testimony

13     at this court.  I think in 2006, over a period of some four days

14     altogether, you testified in the trial against Momcilo Krajisnik.  I'm

15     sorry, you've got to say yes.

16             And just so that we have the record correct, I think it was the

17     Judges who ordered you to appear, and they were the first persons to ask

18     you questions; is that right?

19        A.   That's right.  I was a court witness then.

20             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please approach the

21     microphones.

22             MS. KORNER:

23        Q.   If you would pull your chair up.  Thank you very much,

24     Mr. Djeric.

25             And during the course of your testimony you were shown and asked

Page 2275

 1     to comment upon a number of documents; is that right?

 2        A.   That's right.

 3        Q.   All right.

 4             MS. KORNER:  In that case, Your Honour, may I ask that his

 5     previous testimony and the associated exhibits be admitted.  They've

 6     already been, I understand, pre-marked.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  Tendered, admitted and marked.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P179.1 through P179.24, Your Honours.

 9             MS. KORNER:  Thank you.

10        Q.   Now, Mr. Djeric, just to give a lit bit more background, I think

11     you started out as an economist working for a company called Energoinvest

12     in Sarajevo?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Then did you become an assistant professor at the university of

15     Sarajevo?

16        A.   First an assistant professor and then a professor.

17        Q.   Did you enter politics, in fact, in 1991?

18        A.   Well, you see, while I was still a student, I was already

19     involved in some kind of youth policies or politics, young student

20     politics.  So my first contact with politics was while I was still a

21     student, but then for a while I was not involved in politics up until

22     1991.

23        Q.   And in 1991 did you become a member of the government of the

24     Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

25        A.   Yes.  With the initial democratic changes in this government in

Page 2276

 1     1991, I was appointed minister without a portfolio.

 2        Q.   Right.  And did you eventually become minister for development?

 3        A.   This was actually -- I was -- I had this function as a minister

 4     without a portfolio.  There was no Ministry of Development, but I as a

 5     person, my -- the ambit of my work was development, the preparation of

 6     development documents.

 7        Q.   Were you at any stage a member of the SDS?

 8        A.   No.

 9        Q.   After the government, the Bosnian Serb government, was formed,

10     did you join that government in mid-March of 1992?

11        A.   When the government was being put together, in one of the

12     Assembly sessions of Bosnian Serbs, as you said, I was appointed as prime

13     minister designate.  This was in March, and now I realise that it was on

14     the 24th of March, 1992, in fact.

15        Q.   Right.  And did you take up that position as prime minister

16     from -- at the end of March of 1992?

17        A.   Well, you see, I was appointed prime minister designate.  Your

18     question is rather complex, so I will have to explain it a bit.

19        Q.   All right.  I'll tell you what, Mr. Djeric, we have limited time,

20     so don't worry.  I appreciate there were a number of steps, but you

21     became the prime minister proper in the end, did you?

22        A.   Well, first I was prime minister designate, and then I was the

23     president of government, or the prime minister, but there are many formal

24     and practical aspects that we would have to really explain.

25        Q.   Yes.  Well, I'm going to ask you to explain in a moment or two

Page 2277

 1     about the various aspects of the government in its largest form, but can

 2     I just move to the end now.

 3             Did you in fact tender your resignation at the end of October

 4     1992?

 5        A.   Yes.  This was at the Prijedor session, if I am not mistaken.

 6     This session was, as I learnt later, on the 29th of October.

 7        Q.   Right.  However --

 8        A.   But this is something that you would have to check, because I'm

 9     not really good with dates, and I really could not check that myself.

10        Q.   All right.  And -- well, we're going to -- one of the documents

11     I'm going to show you is the session that was at the end of November of

12     1992.  Was it then that your -- you actually resigned, or your

13     resignation was accepted?

14        A.   No.  I submitted my resignation at the end of October, on the

15     29th of September, but please don't take this date literally.  This

16     happened at the session of the Assembly of the Serbian people in

17     Prijedor.  At the end of October I signed it and submitted it.  I don't

18     know the reasons why this was not discussed at that session of the

19     Assembly and why my resignation was not accepted then.  It was actually

20     postponed for another -- to be discussed at another session in November,

21     as you said, and that's when it was accepted.  But I officially and in

22     writing submitted my resignation on the 29th of October.

23        Q.   All right.  Actually, I don't know whether it was a mistake in

24     the translation but it says 29th of September at page 45, line 7, but it

25     was October.  All right.

Page 2278

 1        A.   May I?

 2        Q.   All right, Mr. Djeric.  If you feel you must, go ahead.

 3        A.   Well, I'm not sure about the dates.  I was just telling you.  It

 4     was at the Prijedor session of the Assembly where I submitted my written

 5     resignation, but it was actually accepted at the session in Zvornik, but

 6     I'm not sure of the dates.  All of this happened in 1992.

 7        Q.   All right.  Thank you very much.  Well, that's -- that's the

 8     preliminaries.  Now, I want you to have a look, please, at a chart that's

 9     been prepared of the -- the Republic of Serbia government in Bosnia and

10     just confirm for us, would you.  It's 10138.3.

11        A.   Excuse me.  This was the Government of Republika Srpska of Bosnia

12     and Herzegovina.

13        Q.   Right.

14        A.   Because you said of Serbia.

15        Q.   Thank you very much.  Yes.  It's going to come up on the screen

16     in front of you.

17             Right.  And I want you to, as we go through it, can you explain

18     perhaps briefly, Mr. Djeric, the set-up, as it were, of the government.

19             We see at the top there was the Republika Srpska Presidency,

20     Dr. Koljevic, Dr. Karadzic, and Dr. Plavsic.

21             How -- what was the function of the Presidency?

22        A.   Well, you see, it is unclear about the Presidency.  Maybe that's

23     how it was described in some laws in peacetime there, but while we were

24     there, this was really a sort of coordinating body of a number of

25     officials of the Serbian people.  That's how it was.

Page 2279

 1        Q.   All right.

 2        A.   And these are the most prominent officials of the Serbian people,

 3     and I would refer to it really as a coordinating body, because in the

 4     event of war, and it was stated clearly in the law, it would say that

 5     there would be a Presidency in wartime.  However, a state of war was

 6     never declared, so that the legal status of this body is really unclear

 7     and I can't shed any right on that.  I'm not a professional lawyer, so I

 8     don't really know.  I can only confirm that these were the most prominent

 9     officials of the Serbian people at the time.

10        Q.   Right.  And was Dr. Karadzic the president of the Presidency, as

11     it were?

12        A.   Excuse me?  Well, that was his role.  He was a party man, and he

13     was at the head of this.

14        Q.   All right.

15        A.   But in fact, in keeping with the law that the head of this there

16     should have been Mr. Koljevic and Ms. Plavsic, because they were elected

17     by popular vote in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

18        Q.   And how was Dr. Karadzic elected then?

19        A.   Dr.  Karadzic was the president of the party and the president of

20     the council for national security.

21        Q.   Right.  Now, we'll come on to that in a moment when we start to

22     look on the -- then we see what is called the expanded Presidency, which

23     includes the president of the Bosnian Serb Assembly, Momcilo Krajisnik,

24     and then yourself as president of the government.  How did the expanded

25     Presidency work?

Page 2280

 1        A.   Well, we came -- I came when invited, so at first this body

 2     functioned as a National Security Council.  So there was some actually

 3     unclear -- unclear distinctions between what the bodies were.  Often they

 4     didn't meet.  You would get called, and then the conversations would take

 5     a different course.  You would just stay there waiting for --

 6        Q.   Sorry, Mr. -- I don't want to stop you, Dr. Djeric, but all I'm

 7     concerned about at the moment is if the Presidency was expanded to

 8     include you and Mr. Krajisnik, did that mean that you would attend

 9     meetings?

10        A.   That meant that I was obliged to attend whenever issues that

11     would be something that was within my competence were discussed.

12        Q.   All right.  Now that's the next question I was going to ask you.

13     What was within your competence as prime minister or president of the

14     government?

15        A.   For the most part we dealt with economic issues, social issues,

16     information, cultural problems, social and so on.  Other than these

17     matters -- so all those matters that did not deal and had nothing to do

18     with the war sector.  That was not something that was within my

19     competence, the command functions and everything that had to do with

20     that.

21        Q.   And how did the government interact with the Assembly?  In other

22     words, would the government carry out the wishes of the Assembly, or --

23     however it voted, or would the government bring forward matters to the

24     Assembly or both?

25        A.   Well, you see, we prepared materials and documents, laws,

Page 2281

 1     regulations, and so on, for the Assembly.  In other words, we prepared

 2     for the Assembly sessions, and at times we would also handle -- if there

 3     were any objections to the documents or proposals, we would have to work

 4     on that.  So basically it was the legislative aspect that was something

 5     that I had to deal with and my ministers.

 6        Q.   Right.

 7             MS. KORNER:  Could we move the chart up a little, please.

 8        Q.   We see then the first deputy president or deputy prime minister

 9     of the government was a gentleman named Momcilo Pejic.  Is that right?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   Who was then replaced in around June of 1992 by Milan Trbojevic.

12        A.   No.

13        Q.   No?  When do you say -- all right.  Did Mr. Trbojevic become the

14     deputy president?

15        A.   Well, you see, Trbojevic was the deputy president.  So in other

16     words, they were both vice-presidents, but they were -- they had

17     different competencies.  Pejic was in charge of the economics and

18     finances, where Trbojevic -- whereas Trbojevic was in charge of the

19     internal policies.  So he coordinated the work of the Ministry of Justice

20     and the Ministry of the Interior and similar ministries.  So that was

21     Trbojevic's job.

22        Q.   All right.  And then we see that the minister of internal affairs

23     was Mico Stanisic.  The minister of the defence was Colonel Subotic, and

24     the minister of foreign affairs was Buha.

25             Now, around these gentlemen, and we'll have a look in a moment at

Page 2282

 1     the National Security Council minute, but they are shown as part of the

 2     National Security Council.  Was that right?

 3        A.   To be honest, I can't really figure this out.  There are a lot of

 4     different charts here.  I mean, the government was separate, and here we

 5     have it all in one, so I'm not really clear.  But I can tell you that

 6     within the framework of the government Buha was minister of foreign

 7     affairs, Subotic was the minister of defence, Mico Stanisic -- Stanisic

 8     is the minister of internal affairs, and these were the two deputy

 9     presidents.

10             As for the Security Council and that aspect, I'm really not in a

11     position to explain that very well, simply because this is not something

12     that was within my competence, so I really don't know.  It was a bit

13     farther removed from me.  So I don't know what they did at the Security

14     Council, because this is something that Karadzic was really at the head

15     of, so I can't really discuss this.  And I don't know what division of

16     functions was within the security council.

17        Q.   All right.  Can we just move down to the rest of the chart.  And

18     we see there listed the other ministers in the government during this

19     period.  The only one at the moment I want to mention is Momcilo Mandic

20     as minister of justice.  Is that right?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Now --

23        A.   I apologise, but this is an exhaustive list of ministers, but

24     they actually came at different times.  I don't know exactly when Momcilo

25     Mandic was appointed.  Maybe that was in June.

Page 2283

 1        Q.   Yes.  We'll see the appointment of Momcilo Mandic at some other

 2     stage.

 3             All right, I just want to -- finally on this, before I deal with

 4     the various, as it were, committees or governments, to whom should Mico

 5     Stanisic as minister of internal affairs, to whom should he have

 6     reported?

 7        A.   He had a twofold role, in fact.  For the military issues he

 8     was -- he reported to the supreme commander, or in other words, to

 9     Karadzic who was at the head of this.  As for the other tasks that fell

10     in the scope of the Ministry of the Interior, then this he would have

11     reported to the president of the government for this.

12             I don't know if I was clear enough.

13        Q.   So -- yes.  If the police were going to be used for military

14     matters, he would report to Karadzic.  Is that what you're saying?

15        A.   And everything that had to do with that.

16        Q.   Right.

17        A.   Because I did not have the authority to order the employment of

18     the police or the milicija, in any sense.

19        Q.   And for other matters, that is to do with straight, as it were,

20     policing matters, he would report to you, is that right, or should have

21     reported to you?

22        A.   Well, he should have for all those questions that have to do with

23     the legislative aspects, financing, the budget, and so forth.  These

24     issues, he was supposed to coordinate the work in these aspects with the

25     president of the government.

Page 2284

 1        Q.   All right.  Well, let's start, then, looking at some of these

 2     documents.

 3             MS. KORNER:  Unless Your Honours have any questions at this stage

 4     on the functioning of the government and ...

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry, Your Honours.  I believe part of the

 6     answer by witness has not been recorded in the transcript.  I wouldn't

 7     like to --

 8             JUDGE HARHOFF:  No, of course not.

 9             MS. KORNER:  I don't know, I'm sorry, I was looking at something

10     else.  Part of which answer?

11             MR. ZECEVIC:  Part of the answer on -- the last answer, page 51,

12     12 to 15.

13             MS. KORNER:

14        Q.   Okay.  Mr. Djeric, we'll go back over this for a moment.  I asked

15     you whether for straight policing matters he reported to you, or should

16     have reported to you, and the answer as recorded was:

17             "Well, he should have for all those questions that have to do

18     with the legislative aspects, financing, the budget, and so forth.  These

19     issues he was supposed to coordinate the work in these aspects with the

20     president of the government."

21             Did you add anything else?

22        A.   Well, I said first of all he would coordinate them with the

23     deputy president of government for internal affairs, and that was

24     Trbojevic because he was in charge of this ministry, and then the next

25     step would be with me.

Page 2285

 1        Q.   Right.  All right.  Can we look, then, please, at the Assembly

 2     meeting which dealt with your appointments and that of Mr. Stanisic.

 3     It's 65 ter 921, please.

 4             MS. KORNER:  If we could have the first page up in each case just

 5     so that we can -- in the English and B/C/S.

 6        Q.   Does that show that this was the Bosnian Serb Assembly meeting on

 7     the -- I'm -- just a -- oh, yes.

 8             MS. KORNER:  You need to -- sorry, the B/C/S needs to go -- the

 9     page needs to go further up, please.  I want to go down the page on the

10     B/C/S.  Thank you.

11        Q.   Shows it was a meeting that was held on the 24th of March in

12     Pale.  Is that right?

13             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone was not activated.

14             MS. KORNER:

15        Q.   Your microphone's not on, Mr. Djeric.  Yes, it's on now.  I'm

16     afraid you'll have to repeat your answer.  You've had the opportunity of

17     looking through this, haven't you, Mr. Djeric?

18             Have you -- Mr. Djeric, can you see on the screen you've got some

19     documents -- a document, I hope.  Can you just confirm you've had the

20     opportunity to --

21        A.   Yes, yes, I have it in front of me.

22             MS. KORNER:  If we go to the third page in B/C/S and in

23     English -- actually, second page first of all.  I'm so sorry.  The second

24     page.  Third page in B/C/S, second page in English.  Sorry.  Yes.

25        Q.   Dr. Milan Milanovic says that the Council of Ministers of the

Page 2286

 1     Assembly -- or, rather, the decision to relieve from duty --

 2             "The Council of Ministers of the Assembly of the Serbian people

 3     which was established on the 21st of December, 1991, is hereby relieved

 4     from duty."

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours --

 6             MS. KORNER:  Yes, mine won't turn off.

 7             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry, Your Honours.  I just noted that -- that

 8     the witness has not been asked by Ms. Korner whether he would give the

 9     same answers if he was asked.  So now I would -- I need to raise that as

10     an objection now, because the situation is developing in that -- in that

11     aspect.  I mean, because the -- because the documents have been tendered

12     and his statement before, and he wasn't asked if he would give the same

13     answers to the questions as before.

14             Thank you.

15             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  Mr. Zecevic is quite right.  I did -- I did

16     omit to ask that.

17        Q.   Dr. Djeric, I'm sorry to -- Mr. Djeric, I'm sorry to stop you

18     dealing with this document for the moment.

19             Was your testimony that you gave in the Krajisnik case read back

20     to you a few days ago now?

21        A.   I actually leafed through it.  Yes, I did have occasion to review

22     it.

23        Q.   Right.  In the event that you were to be asked those questions

24     again, was what was in those -- what was in the record of that an

25     accurate record of what you said at the time?

Page 2287

 1        A.   I'm not sure I understood you.

 2        Q.   Such was your previous testimony as you reviewed, were you able

 3     to, I suppose, remember that that was an accurate record of what you told

 4     the Trial Chamber and the various people who asked you questions at that

 5     time?

 6        A.   I think so.  I told the truth then, and I am still telling the

 7     truth.  Maybe there's something that needs to be clarified.

 8        Q.   No.  As you heard, Mr. Zecevic wanted that question asked.

 9             MR. ZECEVIC:  That is exactly why I wanted to stand up.  I think

10     the proper -- the proper question to the witness is whether he will give

11     the very same answers to the questions posed to him at that time today.

12     That is the question that the witness has to confirm.

13             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, if we have to discuss it, which I think

14     we may have, then I think the witness needs to leave court.

15             MR. ZECEVIC:  I think, Your Honours, this is a procedure

16     concerning 92 ter and the jurisprudence.

17                           [Trial Chamber confers]

18             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mrs. Korner, it would seem to us that the

19     suggestions made by Mr. Zecevic would be just straightforward according

20     to Rule 92 ter.

21             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  Your Honours, in that event, I think I do need

22     to discuss.  There's a good reason why I haven't asked the question in

23     that form.

24             JUDGE HARHOFF:  In that case, we would kindly ask you,

25     Dr. Djeric, to leave us for a short period of time.  The usher will take

Page 2288

 1     you out, and we'll bring you back shortly.

 2                           [The witness stands down]

 3             JUDGE HARHOFF:  And I think we should go into private session.

 4  [Private session] Confidentiality lifted by oral order of the Chamber

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in private session, Your Honours.

 6             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you.

 7             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, I know what the rule says.  The

 8     difficulty with this witness is the following, and Your Honours may have

 9     seen it when you read through it:  He gives completely contradictory

10     answers from questions in some respects that he's asked on the same

11     topic, firstly, when the Judges asked him questions, and secondly, when

12     Mr. Tieger for the Prosecution was cross-examining him, and it is

13     directly the contrary.  For example, at one stage he's shown the

14     signature on the document, says it's a forgery, and then another stage

15     when he's shown the document again he says, no, it isn't a forgery, I

16     agree it's my signature.  So to ask him the question as it's phrased

17     under the rules, would you give the same answers is to ask him, would you

18     give directly contradictory answers in some cases, and that seems to me

19     it doesn't make much sense.

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, Your Honours, if that is the case which

21     Ms. Korner is explaining right now, then it's not admissible.  They --

22     the Prosecution choose to lead this witness as a 92 ter witness with the

23     92 ter package.  The rules are very explicit.  The witness has to answer

24     whether today he will give the same answers to the same questions.  That

25     has to be done.  Otherwise, all this package which was admitted as an

Page 2289

 1     exhibit will not -- is not admissible according to the rule.  They could

 2     have called him as a viva voce witness.  That was the option.  Or don't

 3     call him at all.

 4             Thank you very much.

 5             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, of course I can ask him the question

 6     in those terms.  That's what the rules mean, but it -- it's going to look

 7     pretty silly is all I can say.  I can certainly ask him that question.

 8     It seems to me that the real gravamen of all of this was that the answers

 9     he gave then are those as are recorded in the transcript.

10             JUDGE HARHOFF:  We did not become aware of some of the

11     inconsistencies until we started reading a couple of days ago, but that

12     was when you had introduced him as a 92 ter witness, and I must say that

13     now that the full story is being disclosed, it is -- I think maybe he

14     should have been called as a viva voce witness, because the -- the

15     conditions under which you can bring 92 ter witnesses are those that

16     follow from the rule.  But let us just consult.

17             MS. KORNER:  Certainly.

18                           [Trial Chamber confers]

19             JUDGE HALL:  The Chamber, having heard the explanation of counsel

20     for the Prosecution and being alive to the concerns raised by

21     Mr. Zecevic, considers that where we're at now with this witness, we

22     just -- we will continue, and the -- it will be for the -- when the turn

23     of the Defence comes, no doubt that they would do what they think best to

24     do in terms of what of the material -- the whole body of material they

25     have available before them, both the exhibit of the -- being the

Page 2290

 1     witness's prior testimony, and what he says here today.  We see no other

 2     practical way out of the problem.

 3             JUDGE HARHOFF:  And could I just add, Mrs. Korner, that since he

 4     was introduced as a 92 ter witness and we have admitted the testimony,

 5     then, you know, that's the track that you have set us on, and this means

 6     that you have to put the questions to him that are required under 92 ter.

 7     There's no way around it.

 8             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, it was a matter of practical reality,

 9     of course, but can I say that I completely forgot to ask the question,

10     but I was going to ask it in the way I suggested, but I will ask him the

11     question as required by the rule.

12             JUDGE HARHOFF:  But can I just -- either you bring him as a viva

13     voce or you bring him as a 92 ter, but there's no way in between that.

14             MR. ZECEVIC:  That is exactly what I -- I mean, the Rule

15     92 ter(A)(3)is very clear, I think, and what we're -- in this situation,

16     what has been done by the Prosecution is noncompliance with the Rule

17     92 ter.

18             JUDGE HALL:  So could we have the witness back in, please.  And

19     we're back if public session, open session.

20                           [Open session]

21             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honours.

22                           [The witness takes the stand]

23             MS. KORNER:

24        Q.   Mr. Djeric, I just want to ask you one further question in

25     respect of your previous testimony.  I've already asked you whether it

Page 2291

 1     accurately reflects what you said.  Secondly, if you were asked the same

 2     questions again today, would you give the same answers?

 3        A.   I am speaking the truth, and in that sense I would give the same

 4     answer.  I don't know if I would use exactly the same words, but I would

 5     give the same answer.  I have come here to speak the truth, but there is

 6     a problem here if I can indicate it, about the end of duty of the

 7     ministerial council, because these people who were dismissed from duty

 8     were no longer working in that particular way, but I was told that if I

 9     wish to pick any of them for ministerial posts, I could do that.

10        Q.   Yes.  Don't worry about that.  I just want to ask you -- the

11     reason I've shown you that is what was the Council of Ministers of the

12     Assembly of the Serbian People, which was, as it were, abolished in this

13     Assembly session?  What was its role?

14        A.   This was an executive organ of the Assembly or of the parliament

15     of the Serbian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

16        Q.   And did it operate as its -- if I can put it that way, its

17     unofficial government before the declaration of the Serbian Republic of

18     Bosnia and Herzegovina?

19        A.   No.  The Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina was declared

20     at the Assembly in January 1992.  It was proclaimed then.  The Serbian

21     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, that was the name.  And it exists in

22     the documents.  It already adopted its constitution as of January, and it

23     had its executive body just like states today have a council of

24     ministers.  That would be the equivalent.

25        Q.   So what was the reason for its abolition in March?

Page 2292

 1        A.   Well, this would require a longer answer, but I will try to be as

 2     brief as possible.

 3             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please, Your Honour.

 4             JUDGE HALL:  Ms. Korner, since the witness is about to go into

 5     what may not be a brief explanation, we notice it's 12.05 so this may be

 6     a convenient point.

 7             MS. KORNER:  I thought it was 12.20.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  I can give a short answer as well.

 9             MS. KORNER:

10        Q.   A short answer?

11        A.   Yes, I can provide a short answer.  Simply, there were some

12     political changes that occurred.  You know that at the time negotiations

13     were under way and that the international community had offered the

14     Cutileiro Plan based on the offer by the diplomat Cutileiro.  So then the

15     leadership of the Serbian people or the leadership of the Serbian

16     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina decided in order to complete the

17     process of democratisation and to monitor the plan, they decided to

18     reinforce their organs and to transform the Council of Ministers into a

19     government.  So for those political goals, the Assembly of the Serbian

20     people of Bosnia and Herzegovina required a government and not a council

21     of ministers.  So this was done for the reason of democratisation, for

22     reasons of decentralisation of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and in order to

23     coordinate with the international community regarding the implementation

24     of the Cutileiro Plan.

25        Q.   Yes.  All right.  Thank you very much.

Page 2293

 1        A.   I apologise.  So the government was formed exclusively with

 2     peacetime intentions.  This is something that needs to be kept in mind,

 3     for peacetime purposes.

 4        Q.   Yes.  Thank you, Mr. Djeric.

 5                           [The witness stood down]

 6                           --- Recess taken at 12.08 p.m.

 7                           --- On resuming at 12.31 p.m.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Ms. Korner, while the witness is on his way back in,

 9     could you at a convenient point, let's say about two minutes before the

10     time of adjournment, break your examination there?  We'll alert you as to

11     the dies non juridicus for the record, whatever the plural is in Latin

12     for the rest of the year.

13             MS. KORNER:  Oh, they abolished Latin in English some time ago,

14     so I've forgotten all the Latin I've learned.

15                           [The witness takes the stand]

16             MS. KORNER:

17        Q.   Mr. Djeric, still on the -- this Assembly meeting.

18             MS. KORNER:  Could we go, please, to the second page in B/C/S and

19     the third page in English.  Actually, no, back to the last page in B/C/S.

20     I don't know why that -- I see, because the numbering at the top is not

21     the same.  Can we go back, I'm sorry, to the last -- that's it, but we

22     need page 2 in English.  Okay.  Well, that's not -- page 3 then, please.

23     Different page numbers.  Page 3.  Sorry.  Yes.  Thank you.

24        Q.   Does that show that the Council of Ministers included yourself at

25     number 7.  Number 3 just to note, Dr. Zepinic, and at number 19 Mico

Page 2294

 1     Stanisic.

 2             MS. KORNER:  And then can we go, please, in the B/C/S to page 4

 3     and in the English to page 5.  To the bottom of page 4 in B/C/S, please.

 4     Thank you.

 5        Q.   You there -- you spoke, Mr. Djeric, and you started by saying

 6     that you had completed your consultations, consulting with the presidents

 7     of the Serb autonomous districts.  What were you consulting with the

 8     presidents of the Serb autonomous districts about?

 9        A.   What is being discussed here is the forming of the government,

10     candidates and so on.  So I spoke.  I assume, I don't see it here, but I

11     spoke in the sense that I wanted to point to a certain procedure, that it

12     was necessary to carry out certain consultations.  And if I don't -- if I

13     remember correctly, at that time I put forward the names of two

14     candidates.

15        Q.   Yes, you did, and we'll go to the next page, but I just want for

16     a moment to stick with the -- in the next page in B/C/S, please, which is

17     page 4.

18             So you were consulting with the presidents of the SAOs about

19     candidates for government ministers.  Is that what you're saying?

20        A.   These were people who were deputies in any event at the Assembly

21     of the Serbian People there.  I didn't go and travel around the areas to

22     do the consultations.  This was all done in the break between the -- of

23     the Assembly sessions.

24        Q.   Yes, but you specifically mentioned them.  Does that mean that

25     they had some kind of say in who became a government minister?

Page 2295

 1        A.   You're thinking of the deputies, are you?

 2        Q.   The presidents of the SAOs who, as you say, were also deputies to

 3     the Bosnian Serb Assembly, did they have some kind of influence in

 4     respect of whom should be appointed a government minister?

 5        A.   I am not talking about the presidents of the SAOs.  I'm talking

 6     about the deputies in the Assembly of the Serbian People from different

 7     areas.

 8        Q.   Does it -- it says in the English, and tell me if this is

 9     correct:

10             "I have completed my consultation in the meantime, consulting

11     also with the presidents of the Serbian Autonomous Districts ..."

12             And then you go on to propose the two candidates.

13             Now, do you agree you said, according to this record you had been

14     consulting with the presidents of the SAOs?

15        A.   To tell you the truth, I don't recall that, but on the basis of

16     this it's possible that we are talking about these two representatives

17     here.

18        Q.   Can we go -- I'm sorry, because in the B/C/S, unfortunately it's

19     still on the previous page.  We need to go back to page 3.

20             Right.  Does the second paragraph say that you've been consulting

21     with the presidents of the SAOs, in your language, in the Serbian

22     language?

23        A.   [No interpretation]

24        Q.   Right.

25        A.   I also -- after this consultation I noted that they were the

Page 2296

 1     presidents of the SAOs.  I guess this is where the two candidates came

 2     from, from Herzegovina and from the Sarajevo-Romanija region.  We're

 3     talking about Buha and Mico Stanisic.  Of course, at the time the

 4     consultations were -- well, first of all, they had to do with the party,

 5     with its work and so on and so forth, because the party was the one that

 6     was offering the candidates.

 7             I apologise.  I wasn't able to pick any candidates other than the

 8     ones that were put forward by the party.  I could perhaps talk about --

 9        Q.   Don't -- pause.

10        A.   -- it more to get a little bit better acquainted with the

11     candidate --

12        Q.   Right.  First of all, you said you had to put forward the

13     candidates that those were the party -- which party?

14        A.   Well, it was the only and the ruling party, the SDS, the Serbian

15     Democratic Party.

16        Q.   Right.  And my question was:  Did the presidents of the SAOs of

17     which there were five, have a say in who would get nominated for a

18     minister?

19        A.   I assume so, yes, but it was proceeding through the party

20     mechanism.  As part of the party certain people were filtered, and

21     specifically I was given these two names:  Buha and Stanisic.

22        Q.   Right.

23        A.   So I was provided the names, and it's possible that I and the

24     deputies from Herzegovina and from the Sarajevo-Romanija region talked

25     and kind of asked them about these candidates, because I didn't know

Page 2297

 1     them.

 2        Q.   All right.

 3        A.   I think -- well, I didn't know much, because it was just a brief

 4     period of time while these political events were going on there.

 5        Q.   Yes, but you say -- as you say, you corrected yourself.  You did

 6     know them, didn't you, because they both served with you, for example, on

 7     the National Security Council and the Council of Ministers.

 8        A.   Well, when I say knew here, it's not that I -- well, I don't know

 9     somebody much, if I didn't know somebody for a longer period of time,

10     you know.  It's superficial acquaintance.  And even as part of these

11     consultations it was sort of kind of in passing.

12        Q.   All right.  Did you --

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  I have an intervention in the transcript.  I

14     believe the -- 64 -- page 64, 2 to 5, is the answer of Mr. Djeric is

15     recorded and not the question.  This can be corrected, please.  It is his

16     answer, it is not the question by Ms. Korner.  Thank you.

17             MS. KORNER:  I agree.  I agree.

18        Q.   Are you saying that you would have proposed other people for

19     these posts than Stanisic and Buha if you'd been given a free-hand?

20        A.   For sure.  Potentially there could have been other people, but

21     here you were being given people.  It was exclusively the offer of the

22     party.  So you could, thus, put that forward or not put it forward.

23        Q.   All right.

24        A.   The candidates' names were put forward by the party.  That's how

25     it was.  There was no other mechanism.  I didn't have full freedom in

Page 2298

 1     that regard.

 2        Q.   All right.  And who from the party told you that you had to

 3     propose these two men for these two posts?

 4        A.   I think that it was speaking with Karadzic.  I was speaking with

 5     Karadzic.  I don't know if anyone else was there, but as the president of

 6     the party, he asked that it be these people, the Minister of the

 7     Interior, Mico Stanisic, and Buha for reasons of a political nature.

 8     They needed somebody who was going to affirm Republika Srpska in the

 9     international framework as a region, and that is why the ministry for

10     foreign affairs was formed.  There was another key ministry, the Ministry

11     of Defence, but they didn't find adequate candidates, so only these two

12     were confirmed.

13        Q.   Right.  Was the -- how important a ministry was the Ministry of

14     Internal Affairs?

15        A.   Well -- well, it should be important, you know, like in any other

16     country, the Ministry of the Interior or internal affairs, but you have

17     to bear in mind that this government and this ministry were just in the

18     process of being established, and there were certain objectives they had.

19     One of those was to promote and affirm the role of Republika Srpska.  And

20     just allow me to say one other thing.  We have to bear in mind that the

21     government had peacetime objectives, and that is very important.  And the

22     minister who was appointed here, that was -- those were his only

23     objectives.

24             And I would like to note it now, because maybe I won't give -- be

25     given an opportunity to do it later, but this government which was

Page 2299

 1     being -- in the process of being formed in April and May, they would have

 2     remained unless two events happened.  This was one -- was the Cutileiro

 3     commission and the other there was an attack on a Yugoslav People's Army

 4     column in Sarajevo.  So these two events actually completely changed the

 5     whole situation, and had they not happened, I am -- I can claim with full

 6     certainty here that this government would -- that this government would

 7     have kept within those frames.  What else would have happened, I don't

 8     know, because it wasn't -- it was out of our hands, but this minister was

 9     not appointed to wage war but, rather, to carry out his duties within the

10     government in Republika Srpska.  And you have to bear in mind that we

11     always called it and it was always stressed that this was the Serbian

12     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  So no one was talking about any

13     Serbian state.  It was just a question of democratisation within Bosnia

14     and Herzegovina.

15        Q.   All right.  Well, I think you've made your point, Mr. Djeric, on

16     this.  Can we move through the rest of this Assembly, please.

17             Mico Stanisic, as we've seen, was proposed by you as was

18     Mr. Buha, and was then the Assembly elected them, and Mico Stanisic made

19     a speech.  I want to look, however, at -- at something that was said by

20     another member of the Assembly, Mr. Vjestica.

21             MS. KORNER:  Could we look at page 12 in the English, please, and

22     in the B/C/S it is page 9.  Page -- yes.  Sorry, we need to go -- page 12

23     in the English needs to come up.  I'm sorry.  Further down the page,

24     please.  Thank you.  And I hope we've got it up in the B/C/S now.  I'm

25     sorry.  Wait a minute.  No, page 9 on the -- no, it's one page further.

Page 2300

 1     Page 10, sorry -- it's one page further than -- yes.

 2        Q.   Mr. Vjestica, is it right that he was president of what was

 3     called the Serbian municipality of -- or the Assembly man from Bosanska

 4     Krupa?

 5        A.   He attended the Assembly session, but as for the formal aspects,

 6     I'm really not privy to that.  I assume that that's what he was.

 7        Q.   But he came from Bosanska Krupa.  That's all I want you to

 8     establish.  Do you accept that?  Would you agree to that?

 9        A.   Yes.  Yes, he was from Krupa.

10        Q.   Right.

11        A.   That I know.

12        Q.   He said here that:

13             "... the Assembly should adopt a conclusion instructing the

14     president of the government of the Serbian Republic of Serbia and

15     Bosnia -- Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the ministers to be --

16     prepare by Friday an operational plan for assuming power, that is, for

17     establishing power in the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina ...

18     particularly in the field of internal affairs," et cetera.

19             Now, first of all, you were the president of the government,

20     weren't you?

21        A.   Yes, I was designate, prime minister designate.

22        Q.   Exactly.  And he was saying that there should be a plan, an

23     operational plan, for assuming power.  Now, what was he referring to when

24     he said "an operational plan for assuming power," particularly in the

25     light of what you've just said, this was meant to be a peaceful Assembly?

Page 2301

 1        A.   I don't know what he was referring to, but I can tell you that in

 2     January, I think in January of 1992, the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and

 3     Herzegovina was proclaimed, and I think that it was either then or --

 4     well, possibly then the constitution of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia

 5     and Herzegovina was adopted, and the political objectives were to

 6     strengthen the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina on its own

 7     territory.

 8        Q.   Yes, but the territory that was being claimed was not only that

 9     of Serbs, was it, Mr. Djeric?

10        A.   Well, clearly no one ever had any issue with that.  What we're

11     talking about here is the Serbian Republic of -- Republika Srpska of

12     Bosnia and Herzegovina.  So you have a unitary state which cannot move

13     forward until some political issues are resolved.

14        Q.   Okay.  Mr. Djeric, is your answer to --

15        A.   As to what this gentleman was referring to specifically, I really

16     wouldn't know.

17        Q.   Yes, but he was referring to you specifically.  So did you ask

18     him at any stage what he wanted you to do?

19        A.   Well, no.  He clearly states here that this is what needs to be

20     done.  This is his proposal at the Assembly session.  This is his

21     contribution to the discussion.  He is saying here what the president of

22     the government and the ministers are to do, and this is what he's

23     proposing.

24        Q.   Yes.  Right.  Well, let's have a look at what your response to

25     this was, shall we?

Page 2302

 1             MS. KORNER:  Can we move in the English to page 13, and in the

 2     B/C/S to page 11.

 3        Q.   What you said Dr. -- Mr. Djeric, was:

 4             "The government will have a duty to draw up an operational plan

 5     and submit it for adoption.  We shall do our best to speed things up, to

 6     gain time wherever possible.  There is no reason to think we are running

 7     late in assuming power, because a lot has been accomplished by now.

 8     Please do not take things into your own hands.  You will receive your

 9     instructions and you will proceed as instructed."

10             Now, what did you mean, first of all, by the fact that you were

11     going to speed things up to gain time wherever possible?

12        A.   What I had in mind was the peace plan of the international

13     community, the Cutileiro Plan.  This was the proposal that was offered to

14     us.  The constitution and the structure of Bosnia and Herzegovina were

15     offered, certain functions were offered so that in fact this plan was in

16     a certain sense the implementation of the Cutileiro Plan which would be

17     favourable to us.

18        Q.   Well --

19        A.   So the basis for this was this international document.

20        Q.   I see.  What about the words "Please do not take things into your

21     own hands.  You will receive your instructions"?  What was concerning

22     you?

23        A.   Well, what was concerning me was that there was a certain

24     disorderly conduct of some people who were trying to do things on their

25     own to actually take political action without coordination, and this was

Page 2303

 1     something that gave rise to my concern, and that is why I said that

 2     people shouldn't do that, because they were to know how everything was

 3     envisaged with this -- within this Cutileiro Plan.

 4        Q.   What disorderly conduct are you describing?

 5        A.   Well, most of these people were ordinary people who saw politics

 6     as certain practices.  How should I put this?  There was even a certain

 7     degree -- there was a certain degree of tension, because -- I have to

 8     remind you of what time we're talking about here.  This was from the 1st

 9     of March, 1992, and onwards when the Serbian people was voted over by the

10     other two ethnic groups, and this was against the constitutional

11     provisions.  In other words, the Serbian people, the rights of the

12     Serbian people, were put in jeopardy, and there was a certain revolt

13     among -- there was a certain dynamics in some parts of

14     Bosnia-Herzegovina, and this is why I was saying here that no one should

15     take things into their own hands or make -- take measures on their own,

16     because they should not actually give priority to the local government

17     but, rather, they should keep within the framework of the higher

18     authorities.  So there was the Bosnia and Herzegovina authorities, and

19     then there were also the authorities on the ground.  So what is important

20     here is the referendum of March 1st.

21        Q.   Yes.  All that I'm asking you is about the disorderly practices.

22     Are you talking about people seizing power by force?

23        A.   Well, you see, to be honest there was some functioning

24     authorities, some functioning local government there.  As of March, there

25     was still the army.  Troops were still there.  So it's not as if there

Page 2304

 1     was no government at all.  But there was a certain fear.  People felt

 2     afraid, existentially afraid, and this could have led to some of the

 3     parts of Bosnia to sort of assume power or grant power and give their own

 4     priority to that of the authorities of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and

 5     Herzegovina and -- Bosnia and Herzegovina.  These processes arose --

 6        Q.   Right.  Was it clear to you and only -- I'm only asking about

 7     you, Mr. Djeric, that if the Cutileiro Plan failed, there was likely to

 8     be violence?

 9        A.   Well, no.  I was just thinking that if this plan failed, then

10     there would come other plans.  Well, you know, politics is a process.

11        Q.   Because did you know that in the territory of the planned Serbian

12     state in Bosnia there were people living who were not Serbs and might not

13     like the idea of being ruled by Serbs?

14        A.   Well, that is true.  There are always people like that.  But

15     there's also the fact that the unitary Bosnia and Herzegovina was

16     untenable because it did not provide sufficiently for the Serbian people

17     for their advancement.  So this was a question that was to be resolved

18     through political process where these different approaches were to be

19     brought together.  So it was natural to express these various interests

20     and also to try and coordinate them through various procedures.

21        Q.   Well.  All right.  Let's leave that document, shall we?

22             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, I take it that none of the documents

23     are admitted until all of this is finished.  Right.

24        Q.   Can we look at another document, please, where you did give some

25     instructions, and we'll look at the one that was attached to --

Page 2305

 1             MS. KORNER:  Can we have -- I think it's already been marked.

 2     P -- well, the 65 ter number was 10036, and the exhibit is now P170.20, I

 3     hope.

 4             Can we look at -- can we look at the last page, please, in the

 5     B/C/S and in the English first of all.  All right.  Can we go down to the

 6     bottom.  Yes.

 7        Q.   Is that your signature, Mr. Djeric?  You saw this document in the

 8     Krajisnik case, I think.

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   Right.

11        A.   It looks like my signature.

12        Q.   All right.  Well, let's go to the first page then.  In English

13     and in B/C/S.  Can we see the title.

14             It's called excepts from the instructions on the functioning of

15     Crisis Staffs of the Serbian people in municipalities.

16             First of all, was there a longer document from which this was

17     taken?

18        A.   I can't recall.  I think it was standard practice to send them

19     out like this.  I can't remember.  I can't really claim with certainty.

20        Q.   Right.  Did you personally draft these instructions?

21        A.   No.

22        Q.   Who did?

23        A.   I think it was someone who -- can you tell me when exactly this

24     was?  Let me see.  The 21st of May --

25        Q.   No, 26th of April.

Page 2306

 1        A.   I think this was from the Ministry of Defence.

 2        Q.   The 26th of April these ones are dated.

 3        A.   Well, whether this is from the Ministry of Defence or some other,

 4     I really can't recall exactly who was in charge of working on this.

 5        Q.   And who told you that these were to go to the municipal Crisis

 6     Staffs?

 7        A.   Well, it was my assessment that this should be sent to all the

 8     participants and all those individuals who were crucial for further

 9     developments.  I felt responsible, I felt personally responsible to send

10     this because I wanted them to have certain things in mind, to bear in

11     mind that are certain rights, certain laws, certain provisions,

12     conventions, documents that were binding.  And that was my only purpose

13     as one of the actors on this political scene.

14             And these Crisis Staffs in municipalities which were unable to

15     convene a meeting, that was also a fact of life.

16        Q.   Sorry, which Crisis Staffs were unable to convene a meeting?  Do

17     you mean the Municipal Assembly or the Crisis Staff?

18        A.   Well, you see, where the municipal Assembly was in operation,

19     that was the organ.  However, where they could not operate, where

20     Municipal Assemblies could not operate, in those cases the Crisis Staffs

21     were the body that was to be informed of what to take care of.

22        Q.   All right.  Now the only part of this I want you to have another

23     look at is paragraph 4.  So we need to move -- it's all right on B/C/S,

24     but in the English.

25             You -- or, rather, the Ministry of Defence who drafted it but you

Page 2307

 1     signed off on it:

 2             "The command of the TO and police forces is completely under the

 3     competence of professional staff, and therefore any interference

 4     regarding the command of the TO and the use of the police forces must be

 5     prevented."

 6             What was the purpose in putting this paragraph in?

 7        A.   Well, the situation was such there were weapons.  There was also

 8     the Territorial Defence in some areas.  Bosnia and Herzegovina was set up

 9     in such a way that there was the Yugoslav Army on its territory, but

10     there was also the Territorial Defence that was -- that operated within

11     the framework of the army.  So there was a problem here.  There was the

12     issue of these various actors interfering and taking over the functions

13     of commanding these territorial forces, police reserves -- reservists,

14     and police and so on.  So they were to be clearly told that they were the

15     one who were -- who had the authority to do that, because there was no

16     better way for me to proceed about this but to write this down and send

17     it.

18        Q.   All right.  Thank you.  Well, now that's all I want to ask you

19     about that document.  Can we move now, please, to 65 ter --

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry.  74, line 18.  I think -- I think the

21     witness said in negation to this, not --

22             MS. KORNER:  Sorry?

23             MR. ZECEVIC:  He said they were to be told that they had no

24     authority.

25             MS. KORNER:  Sorry, yeah.

Page 2308

 1             MR. ZECEVIC:  Not that they had the authority.

 2             MS. KORNER:

 3        Q.   Mr. Djeric, just to clarify this, you were saying to the Crisis

 4     Staffs that they did not have the authority to take over commanding

 5     police and territorial forces?

 6        A.   Yes, this was --

 7        Q.   Thank you, sir.

 8        A.   Nor any party militias or anything of that sort.  You understand.

 9        Q.   Can we look then, please, at the next document, 105.

10             Now, on the 30th of April, so some four days after the last

11     document is -- was dated, you sent an order to the Crisis Staffs saying

12     that those instructions weren't valid.  This is because "an unfinished

13     text of instructions had been delivered to you by a mistake."

14             Was that what happened, that there should have been a different

15     set of instructions sent to them?

16        A.   I don't remember this document.  And secondly, it wasn't

17     something -- I didn't have the habit of annulling something or destroying

18     something.  I don't recall this.

19        Q.   Yeah, but that's your signature and stamp, is it?

20        A.   Well, the signature, it does resemble my own, but the content of

21     this, I don't recall this.  It wasn't -- I wasn't in the habit -- I don't

22     know what might have happened here, but I knew what the reasons were for

23     seconding those instructions.  But as for this one here, I am not clear

24     on what this document is about, what it was doing here and -- so I didn't

25     have the habit of annulling something.  I could add something, but

Page 2309

 1     annulling something, that I --

 2        Q.   Right.  You may not have been in the habit of it.  All I'm asking

 3     you at the moment is whether that is your signature and the stamp.

 4        A.   Well, the stamp and the signature, yes.

 5        Q.   Right.  Thank you.  That's all I want to ask about that document.

 6     Now, I jumped forward because I wanted to link up your instructions about

 7     what was said in the Assembly in March, but I want you to go to another

 8     document, the 31st of March of 1992, 65 ter number 61.  Unless there's

 9     something else you want to say about this document.

10        A.   Well, about the signature, the first part resembles mine, but the

11     rest -- I mean, I think we should really have a handwriting expert here

12     to compare this.  I can't really claim this.  All I'm claiming is that

13     this was not -- I wasn't in the habit of doing things like this, so ...

14        Q.   Mr. Djeric, are you suggesting that this document was not sent

15     out by you?  Is that what you want to say?

16        A.   This one.  Well, this wasn't something that I normally did within

17     the framework of my job, but I can't really recall what this would have

18     been caused by, what would have -- what could have been the reason for

19     this.

20        Q.   Well, I'm --

21        A.   I simply can't remember.

22        Q.   All right.  Well, Mr. Djeric, I don't propose to take this any

23     further on this document, so can we look at another document, please,

24     which is -- I'm sorry, the number was changed.  It's not -- it's not --

25     it was -- it's 10135.

Page 2310

 1             Right.  This is an extract from "Glas" newspaper, 31st of March,

 2     1992.  Were you familiar with "Glas"?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   And it's headed "Zepinic called off from BH MUP."  And it says:

 5             "Today we learned from confidential sources that the

 6     Bosnia-Herzegovina SDS called off - I think it means fired - Dr. Vitomir

 7     Zepinic from the position of deputy minister of the interior.  We acquire

 8     this information after -- this English translation beggars belief -- the

 9     new mandate of the government of the Serbian Republic.  Professor Djeric

10     talked to Dr. Zepinic.

11             All I want to know is, was this newspaper report accurate?  Had

12     in fact Dr. Zepinic been, as it were, removed after he'd spoken to you?

13        A.   No, because I never spoke with him.  He was being recalled by the

14     party for some reason.  I don't know which reasons.  I don't know if it

15     was a question of confidence or -- because he was an old cadre who was no

16     longer suitable for new changes, democratic changes, and so on and so

17     forth.

18             I don't know, but I didn't speak with him at all, so all this is

19     just journalist's interpretation.

20        Q.   All right.  Well, then I won't take that any further.  Thank you.

21             Then I omitted -- I just want you to confirm, could you look,

22     please, very quickly at 65 ter 28.  I jumped ahead a bit.

23             That was in the gazette, and it's 21st of December decision

24     showing you as number 6 on the Ministerial Council, Mico Stanisic at

25     number 18, and Dr. Zepinic as number 2.

Page 2311

 1             Now, next can we look, please, at the constitution as it was

 2     published that you already mentioned, which is 65 ter -- 65 ter 49.  If

 3     we look at the first page in the B/C/S and the English to begin with.

 4             Published in the gazette on the 16th of March of 1992.  And could

 5     we go, please, to Article 12 onwards, which is the second page in the

 6     B/C/S and the third page in the English.

 7             Article 12:  "No one can be deprived of or limited in freedom

 8     except in cases and compliance with the procedures provided for by law."

 9             Article 14:  "No one may be subjected to torture, cruel inhuman

10     or humiliating treatment ..."

11             Article 15:  "Unlawful deprivation of freedom is punishable.

12             "No one may be deprived of freedom without a court decision ..."

13             And "A person suspected of having a criminal offence ..." et

14     cetera.

15             Now, Mr. Djeric, as events went on in 1992 were those articles of

16     the constitution adhered to?

17        A.   No.  I think we're all aware that simply many things were going

18     on there.  That is, you know, the way that the constitution requires.

19        Q.   Right.  And just on one other article, 80 -- sorry, well, two

20     other articles.  Article 81, please.

21        A.   But with the following remark:  I was finding that out on the

22     basis of certain information that was addressed to the government, and we

23     reacted pursuant to those -- the information.  I wasn't able to find out

24     what the situation was in reference to the constitution.

25        Q.   All right.  Can we look at -- I'm sorry, I should have given you

Page 2312

 1     the page number.  Article 81 is on the B/C/S at page -- I don't know.

 2     0040-8011 at the top, and in the English at page 13.  Yes, you've got it.

 3             That says that:

 4             "In the event of a state of war or immediate threat of war, the

 5     president of the republic shall at his own initiative or on a proposal

 6     from the government pass enactments on questions falling within the

 7     jurisdiction of the Assembly which enactments he shall give to the

 8     National Assembly for confirmation as soon as it's able to convene."

 9             Was -- what was your understanding of what that meant, of what

10     powers were given to the president by the constitution in the event of an

11     imminent threat of war?

12        A.   He was at the head of the council for national security, and the

13     task of that council was to take care of the security of the people and

14     so on and so forth, and in that sense, you know, to take certain actions

15     and to propose certain documents, regulations, and so on.

16        Q.   All right.  Did that give him power -- sorry.

17        A.   And thus when the Assembly was unable to convene, he was

18     performing this function while it, you know, would be able to convene.

19     He was the -- he was the executive organ, and at the same time carrying

20     out the function of the Assembly.  And many regulations were sent to him

21     for signature.  What was not possible -- what the Assembly could not

22     verify, he would sign and proclaim those regulations to be in effect.

23        Q.   What I'm trying to get at, understand from you, is your

24     understanding of this, that in a time of immediate threat of war the

25     president had the power to make laws without consulting the Assembly or

Page 2313

 1     to make decisions without consulting the Assembly?

 2        A.   Not that -- it was not a question of consulting, but just when

 3     the Assembly was unable to convene, then he could.

 4        Q.   Right.

 5        A.   The Assembly was unable to convene because for different reasons

 6     you didn't have the communications required throughout the whole

 7     territory.  You were not absolutely sure that you would be able to reach

 8     the venue and so on and so forth.  It was this kind of thing.

 9        Q.   All right.  And finally, please, on the constitution, Article

10     100, which is page 17 of the English, and the page in the B/C/S is --

11     it's got -- it's 0040-8012.

12             It says:

13             "Regions shall be organised in the republic as political and

14     territorial units and cities and municipalities as local units of

15     self-management."

16             And then under Article 104, the regional Assembly.

17             At this stage and we're talking about March of 1992, was

18     regionalisation a part of the constitution?

19        A.   This was an issue -- well, if you speak about regions here, then

20     thus it is a question of the constitutional capacity, local

21     administration and so on and so forth.  Thus this simply existed as a --

22     as a possibility in the constitution.  That is what it says.

23        Q.   Yes.

24        A.   It's a -- it's an Assembly matter adopted the way it was adopted.

25        Q.   All I'm asking you is at this stage in March 1992, was

Page 2314

 1     regionalisation envisioned as part of the political structure, if you

 2     like, of the Serbian Republic?

 3        A.   It existed as an idea, as an idea.  Of course, based on the

 4     principles of some kind of regional and world peace.  What we were trying

 5     constantly to do here is to implement a certain regionalisation that

 6     suited the Serbian people but with agreements, you know, through certain

 7     political procedures and compromises.  And I said earlier that we hoped

 8     that this all would pass nicely, but some events happened which could not

 9     be controlled and which threw the government and all of us right into a

10     different track.  We did have the intention to work on a serious effort

11     at regionalisation in accordance with the European experience.

12                           [Trial Chamber confers]

13             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, I was just waiting until you'd

14     finished.  I wondered whether you had something to say.

15                           [Trial Chamber confers]

16             MS. KORNER:  All right.

17             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Ms. Korner.

18             MS. KORNER:  Yes.

19             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I was wondering in Article 80 it is said -- it is

20     said that the president of the republic, and so you know, you were just

21     discussing this with the witness.  Who was the president of the republic?

22             MS. KORNER:  Very good -- actually I'm just taking -- I was just

23     assuming that --

24        Q.   Mr. Djeric, could you tell the Court who was the president of the

25     republic.  I don't know that we ever mentioned his name.

Page 2315

 1        A.   Well, this is a document that we're talking about here.  First

 2     the constitution was adopted, and then work -- further work proceeds

 3     pursuant to the constitution.

 4        Q.   No, stop, stop, stop, Mr. Djeric.

 5        A.   We -- we --

 6        Q.   Just wait.  All you're being asked is who was the president of

 7     the republic?  Give us the name.

 8        A.   I am telling you the president of the republic at this point in

 9     time did not even exist.  What did exist were two members of the

10     Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina from Republika Srpska, and we

11     continued to consider them as -- as the presidents.  You understand.  So

12     one thing is the document, but the sources were never extrapolated

13     according to the constitution for the president of the republic.  There

14     was just the constitutional capacity, thus the potential.  Biljana

15     Plavsic and Professor Koljevic were members of the Presidency of Bosnia

16     and Herzegovina, and that means a certain, let me put it that way --

17        Q.   Right, but the --

18        A.   -- part of the collective Presidency that belongs to the Serbian

19     Republic so you're asking me something on the topic of the constitution

20     and I'm not really well-versed in the constitution topics.  I could

21     present my opinion here but these are legal and constitutional

22     procedures.  All I am doing is recalling that at that time we did not

23     have --

24             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I'm just trying to know, Mr. Djeric, nothing

25     more.  But there was Karadzic -- Mr. Karadzic as well in the Presidency,

Page 2316

 1     but he was only, if I may say, president of the party.  So that means

 2     more or less that this was functioning like a one-party state.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  This was a party state that was

 4     functioning in which the president of the party was carrying out all the

 5     functions practically.  We're going to speak about that.  You will see.

 6     Practically he was the government too.

 7             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

 8             MS. KORNER:  All right.

 9        Q.   The constitution that we've looked at, however, it's clear,

10     envisaged one person as president of the republic; is that right?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   All right.  Okay.  That's all that I needed to ask you about the

13     constitution.

14             Can we move on now, please, to one of the other -- oh, well

15     perhaps we'll just -- we'll just note in passing, because it refers to

16     the state, immediate threat of war, and can we look, please, briefly at

17     65 ter number 84, please.

18             This is a -- the Official Gazette actually for the 12th to the

19     17th of May, but it published at 1 -- at item 142 the decision to declare

20     an immediate threat of war, and that was on the 15th of April.  And as we

21     can see, in fact going back to Judge Delvoie's question, it's actually

22     signed "Presidency," Dr. Biljana Plavsic and Dr. Koljevic.

23        A.   Yes.  This is what I was telling you earlier.  The constitution

24     provides for certain solutions.  Those solutions need to be reached.  And

25     this is already a time, you know, when there were no elections for the

Page 2317

 1     president, but we had these two persons there who were carrying out the

 2     role of members of the Presidency.

 3        Q.   All right.  Yes.  Thank you.  Did you attend the 12th of May

 4     Assembly which was held in Banja Luka?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Right.  We've already looked at it with another witness, so I

 7     just want to ask you about a document that came out of it.  65 ter 118,

 8     please.

 9             This appears to be something -- a draft for the gazette, the

10     Official Gazette, setting out the six strategic goals that were

11     enunciated at the 12th of May Assembly.

12             Do you remember hearing about the six strategic goals?

13        A.   I did hear of that, but I wasn't really involved in that.  At

14     that Assembly there was talk or discussion about that.  I think for the

15     first time was -- that was, I think, the first time that I heard about

16     that.  These are more party, SDS party goals and so on and so forth.

17        Q.   All right.  All I want to ask you about this is apparently it was

18     drafted -- it wasn't actually sent to -- it wasn't published in the

19     gazette for some considerable time.  Do you know why that was?

20        A.   I don't know, because it's not in my jurisdiction.  I wasn't

21     really dealing with that, and I don't know, and I wouldn't have then, nor

22     would I today have agreed with much that is said here.

23        Q.   So you didn't agree with those goals.

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   [Overlapping speakers].  Okay.

Page 2318

 1        A.   I don't know where this figured, you know, but what I'm saying,

 2     you know, simply there is much here that is -- you know, has nothing to

 3     do with anything.  It's not in the spirit of the times and so on.

 4        Q.   Well, I think you're going to have to explain that a little bit

 5     more, Mr. Djeric.  What -- just a moment.  Wait for the question.

 6             Did you or did you not agree with those goals?

 7        A.   I did not express my opinion on these matters.  This was not

 8     submitted to the government.  This was not in my purview.  I'm speaking

 9     about it generally.  And as for my agreement and disagreement then had I

10     been in the position, and now I would not have agreed with that.  Well,

11     look at this division of the town of Sarajevo.  I mean, after Berlin

12     there can be no division of cities.  I knew that then and I knew this

13     now.  This is more of a rural option by some rural politicians who were

14     imagining Sarajevo as the urban part and some sort of rural environs of

15     that town and the division of cities.  Anybody who is barely literate

16     would know that this is something that is unfitting.

17        Q.   Well, what did you understand was supposed to happen with

18     Sarajevo?  What did the division of Sarajevo mean?

19        A.   I beg your pardon?

20        Q.   What did you understand when you heard this was meant to happen

21     in Sarajevo which you think was impossible?

22        A.   Any politician worth his salt, any serious political factor would

23     not think in a way like this, you understand.  You need to take care

24     that -- at that time we have the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and

25     Herzegovina.  Thus, what division of Sarajevo?  I mean, it's another

Page 2319

 1     matter the organisation of the state and so on, but division of Sarajevo

 2     simply is something that does not have much sense, much logic, and so on

 3     and so forth.

 4        Q.   Division of Sarajevo into what?

 5        A.   Well, you see, I am -- it says here.  I'm giving you my opinion.

 6     I didn't sign this.  I didn't agree with this.  I didn't work on the

 7     implementation of this and so on and so forth.  You understand.  So I

 8     don't know.  You would need to ask those who were putting this forward.

 9     I am unable to interpret the policy of the SDS or the SDS president, this

10     one or that one.

11        Q.   Just a moment, Mr. Djeric.  You've just said the division of the

12     city of Sarajevo was impossible.  What division do you mean was

13     impossible?

14        A.   Any kind of division.  A town is a town.  A city is a city.  It's

15     an entity.  I'm thinking of any kind of division.  How are you going to

16     divide a town?  Another thing is, you know, policies regarding these or

17     those interests, but something that had to do with division of a town.

18     It's something that really wouldn't be able to go through, and I assure

19     you that the people in Sarajevo of Serb ethnicity or thereabouts, that

20     was something that was out of the question.  People were surprised.  They

21     were flabbergasted with some of these solutions that were accepted in

22     relation to Sarajevo and so on and so forth.

23        Q.   Yes.  Right.  Well, if we look at the actual number 5, it says:

24             "Division of the city of Sarajevo into -- on Serbian and Muslim

25     part and creation."

Page 2320

 1             Are you saying that it was impossible the way that Sarajevo was

 2     inhabited to separate them into Serbian and Muslim parts?

 3        A.   It wasn't possible.  It simply wasn't possible, and it could not

 4     have figured, you know, as a goal.  This is what I'm talking about.  I

 5     don't know who thought of what and whose idea it was to initiate these

 6     goals.

 7        Q.   All right.

 8        A.   These were not goals of a --

 9        Q.   Thank you.

10        A.   Of a general -- but there were -- all right.

11        Q.   Thank you very much, Mr. Djeric.

12             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, I think in view of the time you asked

13     for that's probably an appropriate moment before I move to another

14     document.

15             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE HALL:  The -- your testimony has -- has a way to go yet, so

17     you are excused but not released.  Because you are sworn as a witness,

18     you cannot discuss your testimony with the lawyers from either side, and

19     in your conversations with anyone outside the Chamber, you can talk about

20     anything else but not your testimony here.  Do you understand what I've

21     said?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  Thank you.  Thank you.  Yes, I

23     understand.

24             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.  So you're excused to return to this

25     Chamber at 9.00 tomorrow morning.  Thank you.

Page 2321

 1                           [The witness stands down]

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  For the benefit of counsel and to give advance

 3     notice to the parties, the dates that have been decided on, and this is

 4     picking up where we left off yesterday, would be Monday the 9th of

 5     November, Monday the 30th of November, and I would remind the parties

 6     that that follows upon the Friday the 27th, which is a UN holiday, and

 7     then Friday the 18th of December.

 8             So the lawyers can, in terms of their witnesses, arrange their --

 9     make the arrangements accordingly.

10             MS. KORNER:  Well, thank you, Your Honour, for that indication.

11     We'll -- we'll -- that's -- so I'm assuming that means that all the

12     outstanding motions will be completed by Christmas.

13             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Hopefully before.

14             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

15                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.45 p.m.,

16                           to be reconvened on Friday, the 30th day

17                           of October, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.