Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 23851

 1                           Friday, 9 September 2011

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.

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

 6     everyone in and around the courtroom.

 7             This is case IT-08-91-T, the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and

 8     Stojan Zupljanin.

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

10             May we have the appearances, please.

11             MS. KORNER:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Joanna Korner and

12     Crispian Smith for the Prosecution.

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Slobodan Zecevic,

14     Slobodan Cvijetic, and Ms. Deirdre Montgomery appearing for

15     Stanisic Defence this morning.  Thank you.

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

17     Aleksandar Aleksic, and Miroslav Cuskic appearing for Zupljanin Defence.

18             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

19             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, before the witness comes in, may I

20     just return to something that happened yesterday which I suddenly

21     appreciated when I re-read yesterday's transcript.  Judge Delvoie stopped

22     me about the document that -- with the timings that was made at the

23     Registry.  And I'm afraid it was a complete misunderstanding by me.  And

24     can I just say that I wasn't attempting to go behind the question of

25     whether it was a privileged document or not.  I was trying to get at

Page 23852

 1     accurate times and dates, and I really wanted him to use it as a

 2     memory-refreshing document and I should have made that absolutely clear.

 3     But I can see now, on re-reading the transcript, why Judge Delvoie

 4     stopped me.

 5             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you, Ms. Korner.

 6             JUDGE HALL:  So would the usher please escort the witness back to

 7     the stand.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, while the -- with your leave, while

 9     the usher is bringing the witness in, there is a matter I would like to

10     raise with the Trial Chamber, but I propose, because it has to be in the

11     private session, that it be done at the end of the day.  I need three

12     minutes for that.

13             JUDGE HALL:  Three minutes?

14             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, five.  It's a short submission.  Information,

15     rather.

16             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Mr. Zecevic.

17             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you.

18                           [The witness takes the stand]

19             MS. KORNER:  I don't know whether Your Honour wants to deal with

20     this or whether you'd like me to ask the questions.

21             JUDGE HALL:  No.  It's -- you're cross-examining.  I would give

22     the witness --

23             Good morning, General.  I give you the usual reminder of your

24     solemn declaration, and I return the floor to Ms. Korner.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.

Page 23853

 1                           WITNESS:  VIDOSAV KOVACEVIC [Resumed]

 2                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

 3                           Cross-examination by Ms. Korner: [Continued]

 4        Q.   General, yesterday, as you know, you were asked by the Court,

 5     after the Court adjourned to go through your report and to see if you

 6     could identify the parts where you got assistance from Mr. Krgovic in

 7     your -- in resolving your dilemmas.

 8             Were you able to do that?

 9        A.   Ms. Korner, I read my report, and I recalled topics and details

10     which were the subject of my conversations with Mr. Krgovic.

11        Q.   Perhaps you'd be kind enough, then, to -- by identifying the

12     relevant paragraphs in your report, to let us know which they are.

13        A.   Ms. Korner, I told you yesterday that I had some dilemmas.  For

14     example, I asked Mr. Krgovic to what extent, within the topic given, I

15     should expound on the Law on Military Courts and Military Prosecutors.

16     He replied that this is a topic to be discussed by the lawyers

17     representing the Defence and that I should limit my activity on the

18     military topics, or, more precisely, the use of police units in combat

19     activities, within armed forces.

20             Other issues that we discussed were more of technical nature: How

21     this trial is supposed look like; whether I can have at hand textbooks

22     and rule-books during the trial; how many days I'm supposed to spend

23     here; and other similar issues that were not related to the report itself

24     or a specific paragraph of the report.

25        Q.   Yesterday after court, did you speak to Mr. Krgovic over the

Page 23854

 1     telephone?

 2        A.   No, Ms. Korner.

 3        Q.   Are you sure?

 4        A.   I'm sure.

 5        Q.   So you just recall, did you, yesterday, when you went through

 6     your report that it was only on the military courts and military

 7     prosecutors that you raised with Mr. Krgovic, and his only input was that

 8     this was a topic to be discussed by the lawyers.

 9             That's it, is it?

10        A.   Exactly, Ms. Korner.  Maybe I omitted one more thing.

11             It was I who helped Mr. Krgovic by explaining some military

12     phrases to him; for example, the difference between attaching and

13     resubordinating.  And many other military terms.  It was I who helped

14     Mr. Krgovic, and not the other way around.

15        Q.   Right.  What you said yesterday was this, and this is at

16     page 23836 of the transcript.

17             No, it's not in your report, General.  I'm reading to the Court

18     what you said yesterday, and I'll read how this all happened.

19              "Did you speak" - this is at line 9 - "to Mr. Krgovic or any

20     member of the Defence team before you delivered your final version about

21     the contents of your report?

22              "I spoke to Mr. Krgovic on a number of occasions while I was

23     working on the report.

24             "Q.  Did you tell him what you were going to put into the report?

25             "A.  Yes.

Page 23855

 1             "Did you make any changes to what you were going to put into the

 2     report, as a result of your conversation with Mr. Krgovic?

 3             "A.  It was more of a consultation.

 4             "Q.  What do you mean by 'a consultation'?"

 5             You said:

 6             "I wouldn't bring him a document so that he could put in some

 7     corrections.

 8             "No.  But I want to know what you mean by 'consultations.'

 9             "Sometimes I had a dilemma.  Then I would ask him, he would give

10     me a reply.  I would memorize it.  I will go home.  I would sit behind my

11     computer, and I would put it into the report that I was currently working

12     on.

13             "Give us an example of a dilemma in which Mr. Krgovic gave you

14     the answer.

15             "I can't remember with any precision right now.  I'm merely

16     answering your questions."

17             And then I will skip the next two question -- answer, because it

18     was about the duties of an expert.

19              "... I emphasise once again:  That I drafted the report on my

20     own.

21             "But, General, I understand that you did the physical drafting

22     of ... your own.  But from what you just told us, it contained input from

23     Mr. Krgovic who solved your dilemma.

24             "A.  More often, or to be more precise, it was really a

25     suggestion.  Or I shouldn't say really [sic] 'suggestion.'  In those

Page 23856

 1     cases when I had small problems in interpretation of certain laws and

 2     regulations.

 3             "Q.  Do you mean he gave you the interpretation, General?

 4             "He helped me.  He helped me to resolve a dilemma.  Legal

 5     dilemma."

 6             And then we went back to ask you - I'll skip the next question

 7     and answer - about what your report might suggest to the reader.

 8             "Q.  And, in actual fact, the reality is ... isn't it?  It

 9     contains parts that you got from Mr. Krgovic who solved your dilemmas.

10     Is that right?

11             "Q. [Sic] There is no such thing in this report.  The dilemmas

12     were only inside my head.

13             "Well, firstly let's go back to these dilemmas.  How many times,

14     if you can recall, did you consult Mr. Krgovic about a dilemma that was

15     in your head?

16             "For instance, three or four times."

17             Now, what you've said this morning is effectively there was just

18     once, and he didn't resolve a dilemma he just told you not to put -- I'll

19     just the exact words:

20             "I asked Mr. Krgovic to what extent, within the topic given, I

21     should expound on the Law on Military Courts and Military Prosecutors.

22     He replied that this is a topic to be discussed by the lawyers

23     representing the Defence and that I should limit my activity on the

24     military topics, or, more precisely, the use of police units in combat

25     activities, within armed forces.

Page 23857

 1             "Other issues that we discussed were more of technical nature:

 2     How this trial is supposed look like ... textbooks ..."

 3             Now, what would make you go back to your -- memorize what he

 4     said, go back to your computer, on at least three or four occasions, on

 5     what you've just told us this morning?

 6        A.   Ms. Korner, I met with Mr. Krgovic three to four times, and I

 7     told you what we discussed.  It was more me talking to him than him

 8     talking to me.  Also, Mr. Krgovic had a need of his own to meet up with

 9     me.

10             As for dilemmas, as we are -- if you are now going to launch into

11     a discussion of what dilemma is, you have to understand that for me a

12     dilemma was how to address the Judges and other personnel here at the

13     Tribunal.  But, of course, this is not a dilemma that found its way into

14     my report.

15        Q.   What was it you had to memorize, go back to your computer, and

16     type out?

17        A.   I memorized the fact that I should not delve in to the military

18     courts and military laws, and that's why I did not write anything about

19     that in the report.

20             You asked me how it went, and I told you.  I would go there, I

21     would arrive, I would get something, or I would not bring anything.  You

22     insisted on some notes.  I told you that I had no notes.

23        Q.   I'm sorry.  What you're now saying is it's a negative.  In other

24     words, having spoken to Mr. Krgovic about military courts for one thing,

25     you didn't put it into your report.  But what you told us yesterday was a

Page 23858

 1     positive, that something he said on at least three or four occasions was

 2     memorized by you and put into the report.

 3             Now, do you see the difference between what you said yesterday

 4     and what you're saying this morning?

 5             MR. KRGOVIC:  I object to that because it's not correct

 6     interpretation what the witness said.

 7             MS. KORNER:  I think he speaks English, so it doesn't make any

 8     difference.

 9                           [Defence counsel confer]

10             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] The only thing that I want to say

11     here is that Ms. Korner sub-lined two answers of this witness; one

12     pertained to the method used, and the second was about how many times we

13     met.  This was not the answer to one question.  It was the compilation of

14     two answers to two different questions which had been linked in a wrong

15     way and quite purposefully.

16             One question related to how many times we met, and another

17     question was about what -- what it looked like, our encounters.

18             JUDGE HALL:  I confess, Mr. Krgovic, that I too had difficulty

19     with Ms. Korner's question but not for the reason that you've stated.  I

20     myself now appreciate the conflation of the two issues.  But to the

21     extent that I may have had difficulty with the question and you may have

22     had difficulty, the witness may also have had.  So I would invite her to

23     rephrase the question.

24             MS. KORNER:  Does Your Honour mean the last question I asked him?

25             JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated] About negative -- yes.

Page 23859

 1             MS. KORNER:  I see.  Your Honour found that difficult to follow.

 2     Very well.

 3             If there's -- I read out -- I should add, before I rephrase the

 4     question, that I read out accurately and completely the General's

 5     questions and answers yesterday.

 6        Q.   Right, General.  I will repeat the question I asked you.

 7             Yesterday you told the Court that you had dilemmas, and, again, I

 8     will make sure that I get this accurately.

 9             Again, going bake to page 23836?

10             "Ms. Korner, I wouldn't bring him a document so that he could put

11     in some corrections.

12             "... what you mean by 'consultations.'

13             "... I had a dilemma."  Sometimes.  "Then I would ask him, he

14     would give me a reply.  I would memorize it.  I would [sic] go home.  I

15     would sit behind my computer, and I would put it" - in other words, what

16     had you memorized from your conversation with Mr. Krgovic - "into the

17     report that I was currently working on."

18             That's what you said yesterday.  And that's what I mean by a

19     positive; something was added to the report.

20             This morning, what you told us is that as a result of your

21     conversations with Mr. Krgovic you didn't put something into your report

22     about military courts or military law because he told you not to bother,

23     and that is a paraphrase.  Which, in other words, is a negative action.

24     You're not doing something.

25             Now do you see the difference?

Page 23860

 1             I hope that's clearer to you.

 2        A.   I told you about the dilemmas that I had.  But those dilemmas

 3     were resolved during the conversation.  And it is true that this dilemma

 4     I did not include into my report.  I was speaking in principle.  You

 5     asked me about the methodology of drafting the report.  You asked me what

 6     did I do, bearing in mind that I didn't have any written notes.  And I

 7     simply wanted to describe vividly the process of making it.  I really

 8     don't see what the problem is and why you're asking me all this and

 9     whether it has anything to do with the contents of my report.

10             I would like, here, to expound on the contents of my report, if

11     you would permit me.

12        Q.   What were -- what were the dilemmas which were resolved which did

13     go into your report?

14             JUDGE HALL:  Ms. Korner, there -- there's something I'm not --

15     and it may be only me, but it's something that I would certainly have to

16     clear up with the witness, and certainly mean no criticism of the

17     interpreters when I pose this question.  The word dilemma in English

18     carries certain connotations.  And I'm wondering whether those

19     connotations are what the witness intended to convey.

20             So my question to the witness is that:  When you say what we --

21     the word that has continuously come up is "dilemmas," what do you mean?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I gave an example.

23     Maybe it would be more precise to say that I didn't know some things.  I

24     didn't know, for instance, how to address people here at the Tribunal,

25     and I consider that a dilemma.  That's why I asked Mr. Krgovic to tell me

Page 23861

 1     how to address the president of the Chamber, how to address another

 2     Judge, how to address another lawyer, how to address Madam Prosecutor.

 3     These were the unknowns for me.

 4             I didn't know whether I was allowed to take out my textbook out

 5     of my brief case and use it during the work here.  That's what I asked.

 6     And other similar questions.  And, of course, all this did not find its

 7     way into my report.

 8             And since Ms. Korner is insisting, I gave one concrete example.

 9     There was the question of whether I should use the Law on Military Courts

10     and Military Prosecutors and to what extent.  And I told you the reply

11     that I received from Mr. Krgovic.  So that's how call it Serbian,

12     dilemmas, unknowns.  That's what I met.

13             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you very much, sir.

14             Yes, Ms. Korner.

15             MS. KORNER:

16        Q.   How to address me or the Judges or anything like that is not

17     something that you would memorize and put into your report by typing it,

18     is it?

19        A.   That's right.

20        Q.   And --

21        A.   But, still, I have to remember it, memorize it.  It has to be

22     inside my head so that I would know how to behave here.

23        Q.   Yes.  But, again, I return to what you told us yesterday.

24     Something that you memorized - more than one thing, apparently - you went

25     back, sat down, and typed into the report that you were writing.  What

Page 23862

 1     was it?

 2        A.   Ms. Korner, I was speaking to you in general terms about how I

 3     worked, because I didn't make any notes.  And I did not include any of

 4     these dilemmas in my report.

 5             I may have been less than precise yesterday when I finished my

 6     sentence.  I allow for that possibility.

 7        Q.   I'm going to ask you -- well, can I explain why we're

 8     concentrating on this aspect, General.  Because yesterday I asked you

 9     about what you understood to be the duties of an expert and then put to

10     you various things.  Were you aware that the opinions the expert

11     expresses should be the expert's own, formed independently, and not the

12     views of either the client or any other person?

13        A.   I'm aware of that, Ms. Korner.

14        Q.   Are you sure that you didn't have a conversation with anybody

15     from the Defence team last night when it was explained to you that if you

16     couldn't identify the parts of the report for which you received

17     assistance from Mr. Krgovic your report might be disallowed?

18        A.   Ms. Korner, I didn't consult anybody from yesterday's session

19     till today.

20             MR. KRGOVIC: [Previous translation continued] ... I didn't object

21     to that.  But basically Ms. Korner used our private conversation between

22     parties about the topics for cross-examination.  I mean, it's not proper.

23     Because we discussed about this topic what was the dilemma, and I told

24     Ms. Korner privately what was my conversation between expert on that

25     topic.

Page 23863

 1             JUDGE HARHOFF:  When you say "we," Mr. Krgovic, you are referring

 2     to yourself and Ms. Korner?

 3             MR. KRGOVIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... me and Ms. Korner.

 4             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you.

 5             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, I very carefully didn't do that because

 6     I didn't want to put Mr. Krgovic in even more an embarrassing position.

 7     But it is -- it is certainly the reason why I'm asking these questions.

 8             In any event, I don't believe that I can take this topic any

 9     further with the witness.  Your Honours have heard the answers.

10             MR. KRGOVIC:  I'll just say, I'm not in an embarrassed position

11     at all.

12             JUDGE HALL:  So we move on.

13             MS. KORNER:

14        Q.   I'm afraid, General, you're going to have to answer more

15     questions about who you spoke to in respect of the evidence that you're

16     giving and your report.

17             You told us yesterday that you spoke to a number of generals

18     after you had submitted your report for filing to Mr. Krgovic.  Can you

19     give us, please, first of all, the names of the generals to whom you

20     spoke?

21        A.   I do not know whether the people want me to mention their names

22     in public.  I have no problem with that, but I don't know what their

23     reactions might be.

24             MR. KRGOVIC: [Previous translation continued] ...

25                           [Trial Chamber confers]

Page 23864

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Ms. Korner, inasmuch as this was after his report

 2     was submitted, we have a difficulty seeing the relevance of this

 3     question.

 4             MS. KORNER:  But he's given evidence, Your Honour, a great deal

 5     of evidence, which was not contained in his report.  And I'm going to the

 6     same issue.  Is this his own knowledge or somebody else's.  He's obliged

 7     to identify this.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  I think I follow you.

 9             Mr. -- I'm wondering whether the General's reservation, which may

10     be unfounded, would be resolved by moving into private session to deal

11     with the names of the persons.

12             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, I can see absolutely no reason at all

13     why the names of generals he spoke to should not be said in public.

14             JUDGE HALL:  I probably agree with you.  It's just that the

15     witness has expressed reservations.

16             MS. KORNER:  Well, if he explains why he has reservations and why

17     he doesn't want to mention them, that's another matter.

18             JUDGE HALL:  Do you understand our concern, General?  The -- as

19     to why -- could you explain why it is that you are reluctant to mention

20     the names of these persons with whom you spoke after your report had been

21     completed?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I believe that I

23     stated clearly that I have no problem with saying those names, but I

24     don't know if the people in question want me to mention their names in

25     public.

Page 23865

 1                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, Mr. Zecevic --

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I may have to request a break and

 4     make some phone calls, but then I'm surely not allowed to do that.  I'll

 5     repeat that I have no problem, because these are facts.  I'm talking

 6     about two generals and a colonel, but I think I should ask them first.  I

 7     don't know if you understand.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC:  May I, Your Honours?

 9             JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated] Yes.

10             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, Your Honours, it seems to me that what the

11     witness is expressing, he's expressing the concern because he doesn't

12     know whether -- whether the people that he talked to might have some

13     consequences out of that fact.  Therefore, for whatever reasons he might

14     have these reservations.

15             And I honestly don't see the problem that we go in a private

16     session, he tells the names so Ms. Korner has that, we have the

17     information, it's just not public, and the people are not having any

18     consequences out of that.  That is precisely why the private sessions

19     exist in this Tribunal, among other things.

20             Thank you.

21                           [Trial Chamber confers]

22             JUDGE HALL:  Ms. Korner, if, for your own purposes, you would

23     wish the witness to name these generals with whom he spoke, we would move

24     into private session only to receive the names.  And depending on how

25     things develop, the status of that may be removed at some point.  But at

Page 23866

 1     this point, if you -- if you are pursuing that question, we would move

 2     into private session.

 3             MS. KORNER:  Yes, I am pursuing that question.

 4             JUDGE HALL:  So we go into private session.

 5                           [Private session]

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 23867











11 Pages 23867-23868 redacted. Private session.















Page 23869

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25                           [Open session]

Page 23870

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

 2             MS. KORNER:

 3        Q.   I'll repeat the question that I asked.

 4             Were you consulting the persons you have named because you

 5     personally knew nothing about the events between 1992 and 1995, as they

 6     affected the VRS?

 7        A.   Ms. Korner, I must repeat that I have never said that I didn't

 8     know anything about the events in the VRS from 1992 through 1995.

 9        Q.   Okay.  All right.  Well, I may come back to that when we deal

10     with your -- your history.

11             Now, can we move, please, to further matters to do with your

12     report and your discussions with counsel.

13             You originally said that the problems you had were to do with

14     legal matters.  Do I understand, then, that you yourself have no

15     expertise in the interpretation of laws?

16        A.   I have never said that I had serious legal problems.  I did say

17     to you yesterday that within my responsibility I was often duty-bound to

18     interpret some new rules or regulations to other members or units once

19     these were published.

20        Q.   I will quote what you said yesterday when you were dealing with

21     Mr. Krgovic's interventions.  This is at page 23837:

22             "Most often, or to be more precise, it was really a suggestion.

23     Or I shouldn't really say 'suggestion.'  In those cases when I had small

24     problems in interpretation of certain laws and regulations."

25             Now, that's right, isn't it:  You are not an expert in the

Page 23871

 1     interpretation of laws and regulations?

 2        A.   To my mind, Ms. Korner, we should draw a line between strictly

 3     legal regulations, on the one hand, and military regulations, on the

 4     other.

 5             The rules of service that I mention in my report and the Law on

 6     the Armed Forces, for example - I also mention that in my report - are

 7     military regulations.  And I'm trained and competent to interpret them.

 8        Q.   All right.  Had you, before you came here to The Hague, met

 9     Mr. Cvijetic?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   And how often did you -- well, sorry.  First question:  When was

12     the first time that you met Mr. Cvijetic?

13        A.   The first time in Belgrade, just before I left, in Mr. Krgovic's

14     office.

15        Q.   Yes.  When you say just before you left, do you mean last week?

16        A.   No, I think it was the week before.

17        Q.   All right.  And for how long did you meet Mr. Cvijetic in

18     Mr. Krgovic's office?

19        A.   Perhaps two hours.

20        Q.   Did you see him again when you came to The Hague?

21        A.   Yes.  Yes, we met here, together with Mr. Krgovic.

22        Q.   And for how long did you see Mr. Cvijetic here in The Hague?

23        A.   It was a whole morning that Mr. Cvijetic spent with us.

24        Q.   And the purpose of Mr. Cvijetic's meeting you back in Belgrade

25     and here for the whole morning was to take you through each and every one

Page 23872

 1     of the documents he proposed to show you; is that right?

 2        A.   Mr. Cvijetic showed me some documents, but it was more me

 3     explaining to Mr. Cvijetic some military terms and resolving some of his

 4     dilemmas, because I understood that I am part of the team of the lawyers

 5     of the Defence and that I'm supposed to help them with the things

 6     pertaining to the military topics.

 7        Q.   Right.  Your understanding of your role in this case is that you

 8     are part of the team for the lawyers to help them with the things

 9     pertaining to military topics.  That's your understanding, is it?

10        A.   Ms. Korner, I am the expert for the Defence.  I think that's my

11     official title.

12        Q.   Yes.  Well, you see -- well, all right.  Let's be quite honest

13     and straightforward about this, shall we, General?  You see your role as

14     helping the Defence to win the case, don't you?

15        A.   Well, it's a little bit strange for me to say "to win the case."

16     It reminds me of military terminology which is improper for the setting

17     of a courtroom.

18        Q.   Well, all right.  To help -- I'll rephrase that.  It is, you see

19     it, your role as to assist the Defence in its role of obtaining an

20     acquittal for their client, Stojan Zupljanin.  Is that a better way of

21     putting it?

22        A.   Yes, that's correct.

23             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honours, I see the time.  I know it's a

24     bit early, but I wonder if perhaps the -- there's a matter I want to

25     address Your Honours on, but it may be that -- I mean, certainly the

Page 23873

 1     General ought to leave court.  And perhaps we could take, as far as he is

 2     concerned, the adjournment earlier?

 3             JUDGE HALL:  You mean the adjournment for this session, I take

 4     it.

 5             MS. KORNER:  Oh, for the session, yes, yes.  I don't mean for the

 6     whole day.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  General, there is a procedural matter which counsel

 8     wish to address.  So, like yesterday, we would ask the usher to please

 9     escort you from the courtroom while we deal with that matter.

10                           [The witness stands down]

11             JUDGE HALL:  Ms. Korner, before you begin, if I may, there are

12     two matters which, because I don't trust my own memory, I might forget by

13     the end of today, which I am to remind -- one that I'm to remind counsel

14     about; the second is an invitation.  The first one is to reminder to

15     Mr. Krgovic about his revised batting order.  The second matter is that

16     counsel would recall that on, I think it was Tuesday, there were two

17     documents that were referred to which, to the surprise of counsel,

18     were -- had been filed confidentially and it has been brought to our

19     attention that there are a fairly large number of documents which have

20     been entered confidentially which probably don't need to be

21     so-classified.  So we would invite counsel to go through the list of

22     these documents and agree which documents can have that confidential

23     classification removed.  And we would -- this isn't an urgent matter, but

24     lest it slips from counsels' own recollection, we would invite you to do

25     this by the time we resume after the November -- you know, with the

Page 23874

 1     sharing-time with the other trial, whatever the date is in November when

 2     we come back with this trial.

 3             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, yes.  I think one of the problems is

 4     that a lot of the documents which, on the face of themselves, don't

 5     identify who produced them but have come in through a witness who

 6     testified in closed session.  As I understand the problem, which is why

 7     they are confidential, if anybody wants to see how they are produced, it

 8     raises the problem of closed session testimony or private session

 9     testimony.  And I think that's the problem.  But we can certainly have

10     a -- another look at -- I think most of the documents to which this

11     applies are the documents produced -- well, actually, no, they're also

12     Defence documents that were put to certain witnesses.  So -- but we'll

13     certainly -- I hope Your Honours don't require an urgent response to

14     this.

15             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, I said November.

16             MS. KORNER:  Well, yes.  All right.

17             JUDGE HALL:  Thanks.

18             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, I'm afraid we're back to the same

19     topic I was raising yesterday.  And it's this:  It is absolutely now

20     plain as a pikestaff, and I commend the General for his honesty on this,

21     that this is not an independent expert.  Leaving aside the contradictory

22     answers that he's given about the input from Mr. Krgovic; in effect, now,

23     he's saying, I do see my role as assisting the Defence to obtain an

24     acquittal for Mr. Zupljanin.

25             JUDGE HALL:  Ms. Korner, the -- the opening paragraph of the

Page 23875

 1     report is: "I have been engaged by the Zupljanin Defence team,"

 2     et cetera.  And isn't this the -- isn't this the inherent nature of

 3     experts who are not called by the Court?  I recall, and I appreciate that

 4     the thinking in the system with which you and I would be more familiar

 5     may have developed, but I remember as long as 25 years ago there was an

 6     article in the New Law Journal dealing with experts as hired guns, and

 7     that's a problem that -- that persists in adversarial proceedings, isn't

 8     it?  And to the extent that these -- the proceedings before these

 9     Tribunals have that character, the -- it is - I'm trying not use the word

10     "inevitable" - but it is not surprising that the expert called by one

11     side, as opposed to an expert, as I said, who the Court itself calls,

12     would -- that his -- his testimony would be -- would reflect the side

13     that calls him.  So, as a Tribunal, the -- the witness's answer to your

14     last question, I don't find surprising.

15             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honour -- [microphone not activated] --

16     suggests surprising.  Well, I mean, surprising, I suppose, in its

17     honesty.  That may be what lies behind a lot of experts' opinions, as we

18     all know from experience, but, Your Honour, there is a clear, clear duty

19     on an expert which is certainly developed in, as Your Honours puts it, in

20     the jurisdiction from which we practice, which is, there has to be at

21     least, I suppose if nothing else, an appearances of objectivity and

22     impartiality for the evidence to have any credibility at all.

23             Now, Your Honours, this is not an unknown situation in this

24     Tribunal.  It's largely arisen, it's fair to say, and I think this is the

25     first time it's arisen with a Defence expert witness, with the expert

Page 23876

 1     witnesses that the Prosecution have called, because they worked, some of

 2     them, they worked for the Office of the Prosecutor, therefore their

 3     evidence should be excluded.  And short of any evidence that there was

 4     real involvement in the development of the Prosecution case, by and large

 5     it's been left as a matter of weight.  But as Mr. Zecevic is familiar

 6     with it, because he was in the case, in the Milutinovic case - and,

 7     Your Honours, I can produce copies -- I'd have to go and get them, but I

 8     can produce copies of these cases - the Trial Chamber there disallowed

 9     the evidence of one of the Office of the Prosecution's witnesses with

10     anything other than factual information.  No opinion evidence was to be

11     given - I'm summarizing, and, as I say, I can produce it - on the basis

12     that he was far too closely connected with the investigation and all the

13     other matters in that case.

14             And, Your Honours, I raise this now so that we

15     can [indiscernible] the last time I raise it.  But it is my submission

16     that given what's happened, given what we now know has happened with the

17     General and how he came to write the report and his own views of what his

18     role is, that this evidence really should be excluded under the term

19     provisions of Rule 95.

20             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in reply, I can say

21     the following --

22             JUDGE HALL:  Sorry, was Ms. Korner finished?

23             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, that's my -- it's my, if you like,

24     preliminary submission.  If Your Honours wish to hear more, then I can

25     get the authorities that --

Page 23877

 1             JUDGE HALL:  No, I only thought you were still on your feet.

 2     Thank you.

 3             MS. KORNER:  No.  I'm -- I'm -- that's my submission.

 4             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, thank you.

 5             Yes, Mr. Krgovic.

 6             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I think that the jurisprudence

 7     quoted by Ms. Korner is improper.  The witness Coo in the Kosovo case was

 8     excluded because he interviewed both witnesses and the accused during the

 9     investigation phase.  That was the reason that he was excluded as an

10     expert.

11             The jurisdiction mentioned by Ms. Korner, the Prosecution staff

12     are normally not called as experts.  However, the jurisprudence of this

13     Tribunal allows each of the sides to call their own experts.  And now

14     Ms. Korner was putting things in the mouth of the witness in explaining

15     his role.  The Defence called him to help shed light on certain facts.

16     He said that the fact that he was called by one of the sides has nothing

17     to do with what he stated at the beginning of the trial.  He said that he

18     thinks that he's speaking the truth in order to help the Tribunal and the

19     parties to the proceedings.  That's what he emphasised.

20             In any case, I already stated yesterday that our practice was

21     that only after the cross-examination and re-direct examination are

22     finished we should discuss these issues.

23             I think that that was the practice in this case and in other

24     cases before the Tribunal.

25             MR. ZECEVIC: [Previous translation continued] ... Your Honours,

Page 23878

 1     just very briefly:  I'm actually very grateful to Ms. Korner that she

 2     brought up the -- this issue because that is precisely -- that was the

 3     basis of -- of our submission concerning the expert witnesses which were

 4     employees or former employees of the -- of the Office of the Prosecutor

 5     and testified in this case, and we cited that particular jurisprudence

 6     from -- from Milutinovic case.

 7             Now, Your Honours, I don't really see that we need to go at

 8     length into this matter.  It -- it is obviously a misinterpretation.  You

 9     have to -- we always have to keep in mind that there -- that the witness

10     is hearing in his earphones what is the interpretation of the question.

11     It goes without saying that the witness is the expert for the Defence.

12     Of course it goes without saying that the interests of the Defence of

13     Mr. Zupljanin is to acquit Mr. Zupljanin.  So if I call an expert, of

14     course he assists me.  And if you ask me what -- how am I assisted by --

15     by the expert, I'm assisted by expert so I can acquit my client.  Because

16     that's my ultimate goal.

17             Therefore -- I mean, I don't really -- I don't really find what

18     Mr. -- Ms. Korner, I'm sorry, what Ms. Korner found in his answer.  I

19     think it is just the matter of misinterpretation.  And we are using, for

20     the third time, like, 45 minutes on the matter, which I don't think

21     deserve that kind of attention.

22             Thank you very much.

23             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour --

24             JUDGE HALL:  Anything in response?

25             MS. KORNER:  Yes, Your Honours.  There's a fundamental

Page 23879

 1     misunderstanding with respect by the Defence of the duties of an expert.

 2     And as I say, I do not blame for the General for anything that's

 3     happened.

 4             The duty of an expert is to render an impartial, objective

 5     opinion.  It does not matter whether he works for the -- whether he's

 6     employed by the Defence or employed by the Prosecutor, provided the Court

 7     is satisfied, and they have to be satisfied of this before they can admit

 8     the evidence, that this is an independent report and evidence; the

 9     witness's own expertise, and not that of others; that he is qualified to

10     give that evidence; and he is not there simply to express the views of

11     his "client."  And in each and every case when the objection has been

12     made in respect of witnesses from the OTP, the Chamber has been satisfied

13     before it admitted the evidence that the reports were done by the

14     experts.  If assistance was offered, that was explained.  That was the

15     independent opinion of the expert, whoever they worked for, and that they

16     had followed all the rules that pertain to experts.  In this particular

17     case, obviously, particularly Mr. Brown and Dr. Nielsen.

18             Your Honour, it is quite apparent that that's not what has

19     happened here.  And had all of this been made clear in the accompanying

20     submission of the expert general report, then the objection would have

21     been made before he gave evidence.  But we didn't know any of that.  The

22     Defence knew exactly about the expert witnesses we've called, from

23     Dr. Donia through to Mr. Brown, knew everything about them; we didn't

24     know anything.

25             So that's why this objection is being made now.  And I do not

Page 23880

 1     think it is a waste of the Court's time, because this is a -- clearly an

 2     important matter.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

 4                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 5             JUDGE HALL:  So we would take the break and return at the usual

 6     time.

 7                           --- Recess taken at 10.22 a.m.

 8                           --- On resuming at 10.59 a.m.

 9             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, I appreciate you're going to rule, but

10     can I just, effectively to deal with what Judge Hall put to me, actually

11     read what your own decision was on the 29th of December -- September,

12     2010, on the decision allowing us to call Ms. Hanson as a witness.  In

13     paragraph 10, you -- I'm sorry, Your Honour.  Yes.  Sorry, having said I

14     was going to read it to you ...

15             Sorry, Your Honours.  In any event, Your Honours do deal with -

16     can I look at it? - the question of a potential bias of an expert -- no,

17     I'm sorry, Your Honours, I did have it a moment ago.  Oh, yes.  Here we

18     are.

19             Your Honours quoted Nahimina.  I've got the wrong decision;

20     that's why I'm ... it's paragraph 9:

21             "An expert is expected to make statements and draw conclusions

22     independently and impartially.  The fact that the witness has been

23     involved in the investigations and preparation of the Prosecution or

24     Defence case or is employed or paid by one party does not disqualify him

25     as an expert witness or make the expert statement or report unreliable:

Page 23881

 1     In the Nahimina case, the Appeals Chamber said:

 2             "An expert is required to testify with the utmost neutrality and

 3     with scientific objectivity."

 4             Your Honours, I appreciate that it's -- it's -- you're going

 5     rule, but I just thought I'd remind you of that.  And that -- it was the

 6     5th of November, 2009, your decision.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Ms. Korner.

 8             In terms of the application that is, at present, before us, we

 9     are not persuaded that we should, at this point, disqualify the witness

10     as an expert or his report.  And, therefore, we invite the counsel for

11     the Prosecution to continue her cross-examination of the witness.

12                           [The witness takes the stand]

13             MS. KORNER:

14        Q.   Now, General, shortly before you explained what you perceived

15     your role to be as an expert witness for the Defence, I was asking you

16     about your conversations with Mr. Cvijetic.  And at page 21, line 14:

17     "Mr. Cvijetic showed me --" you told us:

18             "Mr. Cvijetic showed me some documents, but it was more me

19     explaining to Mr. Cvijetic some military terms and resolving some of his

20     dilemmas."

21             Now, did Mr. Cvijetic, during this -- the first meeting and the

22     half-day meeting you had just before you testified, take you through all

23     the documents that he was going to ask you about?

24        A.   I do not remember exactly.  You're saying all the documents.  I

25     don't think we really went through all the documents.

Page 23882

 1        Q.   All right.  Did he tell you exactly what questions he was going

 2     to ask you and ask you about your answers?

 3        A.   We spoke more about the topics that would be discussed.

 4        Q.   Yeah.  You see, the reason I ask you that is that between

 5     pages 23775 and -776, because that really dealt with your report, he took

 6     you through -- 23776 and 23778, he put a whole series of propositions to

 7     you based on laws and regulations.  For example, at line 7 of page 23777:

 8             "I'll list some of the [sic] laws and regulations, such as:  The

 9     Law on All People's Defence; the strategy of All People's Defence and

10     social self-protection; and Yugoslavia, as a Federation, was also

11     signatory to all international conventions, governing, among other,

12     international humanitarian law; is that correct?

13             "I agree with you.

14             "Q.  The federal units, republics, had the right to further

15     elaborate the system of All People's Defence and social self-protection

16     and take it to even lower levels.  That is, municipalities, enterprises,

17     and so on.  And to achieve that, they had the right to adopt republican

18     legislation ...?

19             "That's how it was regulated."

20             And so on and so forth.

21             And most of the times you just said "that's correct."

22             But did you actually know any of that, or did he tell you that

23     when you met him?

24        A.   Ms. Korner, I was familiar with the subject matter.  I used some

25     of those documents and laws when I worked on my report.

Page 23883

 1        Q.   All right.  Well, let's return to some of the matters I was

 2     asking you.

 3             When you were asked to do a report, you say you met Mr. Krgovic.

 4     Did you ask for him to put down, in writing, exactly what he wanted the

 5     report to be about?

 6        A.   No, I did not.

 7        Q.   But as a military officer, weren't you concerned to make sure

 8     that you perfectly understood what your instructions were?

 9        A.   I knew perfectly well what the topic of my work was, and that was

10     the use of police units in combat.

11        Q.   That's all you were told, was it, that you were asked to deal

12     with, the use of police units in combat?

13        A.   You asked me whether I understood what I was supposed to do.  And

14     I replied that I knew that perfectly well --

15        Q.   [Previous translation continued] ... yes.

16        A.   -- and that I didn't -- didn't ask for written notes.

17        Q.   Yes, but, I'm sorry, so it was a simple instruction, you write a

18     report about the use of police units in combat?  I imagine he added

19     "please."

20        A.   The topics I have also spoken about were also mentioned in

21     passing as the expected integral parts of my report; such as, command in

22     the army, the organisations of one and the other army.  And I said that I

23     was clear about that.

24        Q.   [Previous translation continued] ... you have covered quite a lot

25     of topics in your report completely outside the topic of the use of

Page 23884

 1     police units in combat, haven't you?

 2        A.   That is correct.  I had to deal with some other topics too --

 3        Q.   [Previous translation continued] ... so did you --

 4        A.   -- to clarify.

 5        Q.   Sorry.  "To clarify."  So did he ask you to do that, or did you

 6     volunteer to do that?

 7        A.   It was my choice, my approach.

 8        Q.   So is the answer to my question:  You said -- you volunteered to

 9     write reports on other topics?

10        A.   Ms. Korner, these are not other topics.

11             Let me explain what the main theme is.  Or, rather, if you want

12     to elucidate the main theme, you have to study many documents and explain

13     many concepts.  Who commands whom, why, how that is regulated, what kind

14     of relationships are in place.  And that is why I also introduced other

15     themes.

16        Q.   All right.  So was it your idea to introduce the chapter on the

17     defence of towns or cities, or Mr. Krgovic's?

18        A.   I don't quite remember whose idea it was.  I think it was mine.

19     Because I knew, based on the insight I had acquired, that such commands

20     were in existence during the war.

21        Q.   Well, I mean, Mr. Krgovic explained to you, didn't he, very

22     clearly, or had you been following the trial in any event, what the

23     various issues were that had arisen in this case, as they affected the

24     military?

25        A.   That is correct.

Page 23885

 1        Q.   All right.  Now, finally, because we've got really sidetracked

 2     from it, can you tell Court, please, now, without referring to any

 3     documents, how long you spent writing this report between the

 4     1st of March and when you delivered it to Mr. Krgovic sometime before the

 5     28th?

 6        A.   Little short of a month, Ms. Korner.  I worked for up to ten

 7     hours a day.

 8        Q.   So are you saying that you worked - let's call it 27 days,

 9     because it's filed on the 28th - you worked something like 270 hours?

10        A.   That is correct.

11        Q.   All right.  Did you feel that was sufficient time for you to

12     produce a report for this case?

13        A.   Before answering this question, I believe that in my reply to

14     your previous question I said that sometimes I worked for up to ten

15     hours.

16        Q.   Are you reading the transcript in English?

17        A.   No.  My English is not good at all.

18        Q.   All right.  But, I'm sorry, but I'm asking you whether you felt

19     that the time that you were given was sufficient for you to produce a

20     proper report.

21        A.   Ms. Korner, I accepted that duty, and I knew that since I'm

22     retired and have no other activities, I have good work conditions and I

23     have access to all books and literature.  I accepted to write this report

24     in such a short time, but, of course, that is relative.

25        Q.   All right.  You said, and we'll come on to it in a moment, on

Page 23886

 1     your notes on methodology, you've listed the documents that you had

 2     looked at and you said:  "All the documents" -- I'm sorry.  You generally

 3     talked about the documents you'd looked at.  And you said:  "All the

 4     documents are listed in the bibliography."

 5             That's right, is it, the documents you looked at are listed in

 6     the bibliography to the report?

 7        A.   That is correct.

 8        Q.   So can I ask: Who -- who provided you with the -- the -- the

 9     documents that you looked at?  Did -- did Mr. Krgovic provide you with

10     any documents, or Mr. Cvijetic -- well, no, because you didn't see him

11     before.

12             Did Mr. Krgovic or anybody else provide you with documents to

13     look at?

14        A.   I had my own copies of the military rules and regulations, but I

15     also used the library of the Military Academy.  I did receive some

16     documents from Mr. Krgovic.

17        Q.   So can you roughly tell us how many documents you got from

18     Mr. Krgovic?  I mean, we'll look at the list of documents in your

19     bibliography in a moment, but can you roughly remember?

20             I see you're looking at your bibliography, General.  I just --

21     we'll come on to that in a moment.  Did you get any documents from

22     Mr. Krgovic outside of those which are listed in your bibliography?

23        A.   No, Ms. Korner.

24        Q.   Did you yourself, as a result of your researches, ask for any

25     documents to be given to you by Mr. Krgovic or anybody else?

Page 23887

 1        A.   I think that I asked for a transcript.

 2        Q.   Was that the transcript of the evidence of General Milovanovic in

 3     Popovic?

 4        A.   I think so.

 5        Q.   Because you quote that.

 6             Were there any documents or quotes from books that you decided

 7     not to include?

 8        A.   Not as far as I remember.

 9        Q.   Well, let's have a look, please, at your bibliography.

10             MS. KORNER:  If we could have up on the screen.  The report is

11     00031D2, and it's the last -- well, it's the -- it's - one, two - three

12     pages before the end.

13        Q.   All right.  Now, there's your bibliography.  Items 1 through

14     to 13 are books, are they not, written by other people about the strategy

15     and events?  So when I say "strategy," military strategy and/or the

16     events of the conflict.  Do you agree with that?

17        A.   I do.

18        Q.   Through -- 14 through to 27 are effectively -- well, they're

19     slightly mixed.  But, again, they're textbooks or laws relating to the

20     military.

21        A.   That is correct.

22        Q.   28 to 30, do those represent original documents that you looked

23     at?

24        A.   They were copies of these documents.

25        Q.   Yes, I'm sorry, obviously they were copies.  What I mean is,

Page 23888

 1     though, the actual decision of the Presidency itself, as opposed to a

 2     reference in a book.

 3        A.   It was the actual decision of the Presidency.

 4        Q.   Right.  So, as I say, 28, 29, and 30, you're talking about the

 5     actual document.  And, in fact, 31, I suppose.  Is that right?

 6        A.   That's right.

 7        Q.   Then, the next is the Book of Rules, which is going back to a JNA

 8     manual, as it were.  The -- which is 32.  33, instructions; that's a

 9     document that we've seen in this court.

10             Then we go back between 34 and 41, do we not, to regulations

11     dating back to the JNA; is that right?

12        A.   That's right.

13        Q.   42 and 43 are actually VRS orders, is that right, that you looked

14     at, copies thereof?

15        A.   That's right.

16        Q.   45 to -- sorry, 44 to 46 are three documents relating -- issued

17     by the MUP side of -- of -- of these events; is that right?

18        A.   That's right.  44, 45, and 46.

19             MS. KORNER:  And then if we go to the next page, please.

20        Q.   47.  47 to 55 are actual documents emanating from the VRS during

21     the period; is that right?

22        A.   That's right.

23        Q.   And then we get 56 and 57, expert report - and I'll come back to

24     that in a minute - of Mr. Butler.  And, finally, the transcript you asked

25     for of General Milovanovic.

Page 23889

 1             So if we analyse that, 14 of the documents you looked at are

 2     academic books, if you like; 18 are, sort of, JNA doctrinal manuals;

 3     9 are RS laws or decrees; and for this report, you looked at precisely

 4     11 contemporaneous documents issued by the VRS; and three relating to the

 5     MUP.

 6             Do you think that 11 contemporaneous documents from the VRS and

 7     three from the MUP was sufficient for you to give an overview of what

 8     happened in 1992 -- was sufficient to give you an overview what happened

 9     in 1992 between the VRS and the MUP?

10             MS. KORNER:  And I see Mr. Krgovic wishes to object.

11             MR. KRGOVIC:  To be honest with the witness, Ms. Korner forgot to

12     quote two expert reports.

13             MS. KORNER:  No, I didn't.  I'm coming back to them [Overlapping

14     speakers] ...

15             MR. KRGOVIC:  -- relating to V--

16             MS. KORNER: [Overlapping speakers] ... I'm coming back to the

17     expert reports --

18             MR. KRGOVIC:  Relating to VRS.

19             MS. KORNER:  I am coming back to Mr. Butler's report.

20        Q.   And my questions remains: Do you think that 11 contemporaneous,

21     actual VRS documents and three MUP documents is sufficient for you to

22     write a proper report?

23        A.   I believe that the Chamber is going to judge the validity of my

24     report.  I found it sufficient to write about the topic given to me by

25     the Defence lawyers.

Page 23890

 1        Q.   Because a lot of the documents you looked at in the course of

 2     your evidence adduced by Mr. Krgovic, and later by Mr. Cvijetic, were

 3     documents you had only seen, were they not, after you'd done your report?

 4             MR. KRGOVIC:  I'm sorry, Your Honours, but there is one part of

 5     his previous answer missing in transcript.

 6             The witness said which -- or ask him to repeat last sentence,

 7     because you start asking him and the last part of his answer is not ...

 8             MS. KORNER:  All right.

 9        Q.   General, the answer you gave to my question, when repeated,

10     whether those documents were sufficient, as recorded, is:

11             "I believe that the Chamber is going to judge the validity of my

12     report.  I found it sufficient to write about the topic given to me by

13     the Defence lawyers?"

14             And I gather you said something else.  Can you repeat that?

15        A.   I said for the needs of the Defence lawyers and for the needs of

16     this Tribunal, this Honourable Tribunal.

17        Q.   Right.  You see, as you said in your introduction, you were

18     engaged to write an expert report on the topic of command in the armed

19     forces of the Republika Srpska, including resubordination and

20     co-ordinated action of police units of the RS minister -- Ministry of the

21     Interior.

22             Now, are you seriously saying that from -- that -- that the

23     14 documents in total, leaving aside Mr. Butler's report - and I'll come

24     back to Mr. Butler's report - that's enough for you to give an accurate

25     depiction and come to a conclusion?

Page 23891

 1             MR. KRGOVIC:  Your Honour, I object to this line of question

 2     because it's really misleading the witness, because witness never said

 3     it's on -- his report based on related VRS based on only of this

 4     document.  That's what Ms. Korner trying to establish.  But he never said

 5     that his expert report was based on this -- only these documents.

 6                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 7             MS. KORNER:  Well, all right.  I -- I'll deal with that.

 8        Q.   Is your expert report, please, then based on Mr. Butler's report

 9     for the Popovic case, largely?

10        A.   Ms. Korner, I read a great deal more of material, books.  I have

11     my own experiences.  I lectured.  I wrote the expert report in the

12     Popovic case.  So I assert that this report is based on the laws and

13     regulations, that it has a sound scientific basis, that it is truthful.

14     And I repeat:  That it is up to the Trial Chamber to make their own

15     decision.

16        Q.   Yes.  But in order to make an informed decision, General, I would

17     suggest that they need to consider not only what's in your report but how

18     you came to write it.  And, so, I -- I go a back to where I started.

19             Before you wrote this report, the only original - and by

20     "original," I mean the actual documents that you had looked at that

21     related to the VRS and the MUP, about whom you were -- you are saying you

22     are talking - are those 14 documents.  That's right, isn't it?

23        A.   I also spoke about my personal information, about the situation

24     and relationship within VRS.

25        Q.   [Previous translation continued] ...

Page 23892

 1        A.   I often went to Prnjavor.  I have relatives there.  My seven

 2     brothers served in the VRS.  Three of them were killed; one was seriously

 3     wounded.  The command post of the Krajina Corps was in the immediate

 4     vicinity of my place.  This means that I had information, I had contacts,

 5     and I claim that I was able to write about this topic and draft this

 6     report.

 7        Q.   Yes, I appreciate that you -- you claim that.

 8             Now, Mr. Butler's report was dealing with issues of command and

 9     control in the VRS in relation to the events at Srebrenica; is that

10     correct?

11        A.   I think so.

12        Q.   Well, did you re-read it before you wrote the report?  Before you

13     wrote your report, this report.

14        A.   I read it.

15        Q.   All right.  And it had absolutely nothing to do with the

16     relationship between the police and the army during 1992, did it?

17        A.   I don't remember the details.

18        Q.   Well, we can let you have another copy of Mr. Butler's report and

19     you can refresh your memory from that, if you didn't bring it.

20             But more to the point, General, is: Did you know that there had

21     been an expert report dealing with the very issues that you were asked to

22     write a report about, namely, the VRS in 1992, specifically in the

23     Autonomous Region of Krajina area, specifically about General Talic,

24     which dealt with those issues?

25             Were you told that by Mr. Krgovic?

Page 23893

 1        A.   I do not remember this detail.

 2        Q.   Well, having worked with Mr. Krgovic before, and when he

 3     instructed you for the Popovic case, although, as it turned out, you

 4     didn't give evidence, and he told you about Mr. Butler's report, are you

 5     telling us he didn't tell you that there was an expert called Mr. Brown

 6     who had produced a report on these very issues?

 7        A.   I remember the document by Mr. Brown.

 8        Q.   Well, are you telling us you did know that he had delivered a

 9     report and given evidence and you were given a copy of that report?  Is

10     that what you're saying now?

11        A.   If I quoted it in my bibliography, then I was certainly given the

12     report.  I believe it can be found in the bibliography.

13        Q.   Well, it isn't in the bibliography, General.  So please tell

14     us -- and we'll give you a copy now and you can have a look at it.

15             MS. KORNER:  To the usher, just show it to Defence counsel,

16     please.

17        Q.   Were you given a copy of that report by Mr. Krgovic?

18        A.   No, I haven't seen this document.

19        Q.   Well, then, how do you know about Mr. Brown?

20        A.   I remembered the man from the media.  Sometimes I followed some

21     of the trials in Serbia, so that's why I thought that perhaps I used some

22     of that material.  But I would have to take a closer look at my

23     bibliography.  I claim that everything that I perused and everything that

24     was at my disposal can be now found in the bibliography.

25        Q.   Right.  Mr. Brown's report does not appear in your bibliography.

Page 23894

 1     And you've just told us you don't recognise the report.  So does that

 2     mean you were not given a copy?

 3        A.   Of course I wasn't, if I didn't put it in my bibliography.

 4        Q.   Well, if you had known that there had been an expert testifying

 5     about those events, is -- would you have asked to see that report before

 6     you wrote your own report?  In the same way that you saw Mr. Butler's

 7     before you wrote your report for the Popovic case.

 8        A.   What if.  I was not aware of this report, but I'm sure that I

 9     probably would have used it in my work.

10        Q.   Do you -- well, first of all, would you like to read through

11     Mr. Butler -- Mr. Brown's report?

12        A.   I would be glad to read it, if permitted to do so by the

13     Trial Chamber.  Maybe I can take it with me over the weekend.

14        Q.   That's exactly I was going to suggest, General, that this can be

15     your light reading for the weekend, if Their Honours are happy with that

16     and the Defence don't object.

17             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have no idea how

18     this can be relevant for this testimony, for this expert testimony.  But

19     I do not object.  I'm simply not quite sure whether it's relevant for

20     this witness, whether he read the report by an analyst of the

21     Prosecution.

22             JUDGE HALL:  You're looking expectantly towards the Chamber --

23             MS. KORNER: [Overlapping speakers] ... no, no, Your Honours.  The

24     General said he would like to have a look at it, so if that's -- if

25     Your Honours don't think there's anything wrong with that, that's what

Page 23895

 1     I'm going to invite him to do, to take it with him over the weekend.

 2        Q.   Did you know, were you ever told, that a further expert had

 3     testified for the Prosecution about the role of the MUP in 1992?

 4        A.   No.

 5        Q.   Would you have liked to know that as well?

 6        A.   I personally like to read a lot.  So, yes, I would like to read

 7     it.

 8        Q.   No?  I'm not, at the moment -- although you can have that as

 9     well, if you like.

10             I want to know: You, as an expert instructed by the Defence,

11     knowing that, on the last occasion, there had been an expert for the

12     Prosecution, whether you would have liked to have been told that an

13     expert on police matters had already testified.

14        A.   But I told you that I didn't know that.

15        Q.   I appreciate you weren't told that.  I'm asking you, as an

16     expert, whether you would have expected or liked to have been informed by

17     Mr. Krgovic that your evidence would be weighed up against two other

18     experts who had testified for the Prosecution.

19        A.   Even if I had read it, I have to say, once again, that this

20     report would have looked exactly the same that it looks now.

21        Q.   Sorry, does that mean that whatever you had seen in those reports

22     could never have affected your opinion that you were going to deliver?

23        A.   Well, Ms. Korner, I cannot figure out from your question which of

24     my opinions expounded in my report are incorrect and why I should correct

25     them.  We still haven't really touched upon any of the opinions and views

Page 23896

 1     in my report.

 2        Q.   Don't, worry, General, we are going to come to those opinions and

 3     matters which I'm going to suggest to you you are in error on simply

 4     because you don't know, and you don't know because you haven't looked at

 5     the relevant documents.

 6             But for the moment I'm just concerned as to the whole methodology

 7     by which you approached your task; because, you'll have to accept it from

 8     me, that's important.  Are you saying that regardless of what you saw or

 9     read in those reports, with the various documents footnoted, you would

10     not have changed anything in your report?

11        A.   In order to answer you, Ms. Korner, I would really have to read

12     both reports.  Only then would I be able to answer your question.  And

13     specifically related to my report, and parts of it, if any, which would

14     be in contradiction to the reports by the two Prosecution witnesses.

15             So if I compare my report to the reports drafted by the

16     Prosecution experts, I would have to see those details specifically.

17        Q.   Yes.  I was actually trying to get at your whole method of work,

18     but that's not the point.

19             And, finally -- and you can have -- we'll give you Dr. Nielsen's

20     report as well so -- as you say, you enjoy reading.

21             Finally, on this topic, you heard Mr. Krgovic's objection.  When

22     you were writing your report, either for the Popovic case or for this

23     case, did you rely on Mr. Butler's report?  Did you use Mr. Butler's

24     report as the basis for anything that you've said?

25        A.   Mr. Butler's report is contained in the bibliography of my

Page 23897

 1     report, which means that I used it in drafting the report.

 2        Q.   Yes, but what -- what parts of the report are based on

 3     Mr. Butler's?  You don't indicate -- you don't footnote Mr. Butler's

 4     report anywhere.

 5             So which parts of your report are based on Mr. Butler's?

 6             MR. KRGOVIC:  I object.  The witness didn't say that he used the

 7     Butler report as a base on his own report.  He just said that he wrote --

 8     read this.

 9             MS. KORNER:  No, he said:  "I used it in drafting this report."

10             Really, Mr. Krgovic must not interrupt to help the witness out

11     like this.

12        Q.   Now, which part of your report is based in any way on

13     Mr. Butler's report?

14        A.   If I didn't quote Mr. Butler and no footnotes can be found, it

15     means that I did not use any quotes from his report.  But I read the

16     document.  I can't tell you off the top of my head which parts I used.  I

17     read it, and I probably derived some conclusions that I included in my

18     work.  But right now, it would be necessary to compare my report with

19     that report in order to ascertain that precisely, to see whether I used

20     anything, and I emphasise "in case I used anything."  But I did read it,

21     since it can be found in the bibliography.

22        Q.   All right.  That's as far as I can take this.

23             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, I'm going to start on the topic of --

24     of his actual military career, so perhaps this would be an appropriate

25     moment.  I know it's five minutes early.  I can certainly start the

Page 23898

 1     topic -- but ...

 2             JUDGE HALL:  It's actually ten minutes early.

 3             MS. KORNER:  Oh, is it?  All right.

 4        Q.   Right.  Let's turn, shall we, to your military history, please.

 5             Can we have up your CV on the screen.

 6             MS. KORNER:  Sorry, the CV is 00030D2.

 7        Q.   I'm concerned -- General, I want to ask you about your actual

 8     military career, as opposed to the schooling which we see, the education

 9     and advanced training.

10             MS. KORNER:  So can we look at page 2 in English.

11        Q.   You were promoted to major on the 29th of July, 1991, and became

12     a lieutenant-colonel in July of 1995.  So for the majority of the period

13     of the conflict, you were a major; is that right?

14        A.   That's correct.  It's a high rank in the military.

15        Q.   And if we look at the various posts that you had, would this be a

16     fair summary - and correct me if I'm wrong - that the majority of your

17     work, until such time as you went to the Military Academy, was as a

18     morale officer.  And that's -- I know it's a general term, and I'll come

19     on to the specifics of what's meant in a minute.

20             But would that be fair?

21        A.   Yes.  But I should add that while I was performing those duties,

22     you can see that I went through all the levels of command in existence in

23     the military.  I am one of the few officers whose career moved all the

24     way from company, as the lowest level; through battalion; regiment, which

25     is equivalent to a brigade; three corps; air force, as a strategy

Page 23899

 1     groupation [as interpreted]; air force command; and ending in the

 2     General Staff, which is the highest level of command.  After that, I was

 3     also in the Military Academy, part of the educational sector under the

 4     Ministry of Defence, which means that I had a chance to acquaint myself

 5     with the politics going on within the Ministry of Defence.

 6        Q.   Yes.  And the majority of your military experience, is this

 7     right, was in the air force, rather than the army itself, if we look at

 8     it?  And, again, correct me if I'm wrong.

 9        A.   That is correct.  Air force units usually shares their garrisons

10     with the army.  And one of my duties was -- or consisted in the

11     co-operation between army units or navy units and air force units in

12     which I served.

13        Q.   All right.  Now, can I just outline to you the responsibilities

14     of an officer for moral guidance, religious, and legal affairs.  Was it

15     moral guidance, tradition and cultural activities, information,

16     co-operation with state authorities and other social entities, religious

17     affairs, legal affairs?

18        A.   That's right.

19        Q.   Is it also correct that the -- the organ or the sector for moral

20     guidance, et cetera, did not engage directly in matters of conducting

21     combat operations and did not have an influence on the use of units?

22        A.   That is not correct.

23        Q.   Really?  Because I'm quoting to you what you wrote in your report

24     for the -- for General Gvero in the Popovic case, and General Gvero, as I

25     understand it, was the morale officer.  At page 29.

Page 23900

 1             MS. KORNER:  Perhaps we could have up the Popovic report.

 2             MR. KRGOVIC:  Your Honours, the witness -- this part of the

 3     report must shown -- must be shown to the witness.

 4             MS. KORNER:  I'm going to.

 5             MR. KRGOVIC:  Not to put out of the context.

 6             MS. KORNER:  I'm going to, Your Honour.  That's just what I've

 7     done.

 8             The report is 20232, 65 ter.  24 in B/C/S.  24 in B/C/S; 29 in

 9     English.

10             Perhaps we better go back, I suppose, to page 27 in English,

11     first of all, and 23 in B/C/S.

12             JUDGE HALL:  Ms. Korner, with this -- would this be a convenient

13     point to take the break?  You're about to start this document.

14             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honour, I'd rather deal with this, if I

15     may.

16             JUDGE HALL:  Very well.  Very well.

17             MS. KORNER:  If I may.  I'm sorry.  Now that I've started.

18     That's why I said, you know ...

19             JUDGE HALL:  I thought you were having some difficulty, that's

20     why I suggested --

21             MS. KORNER:  No, no.  No.  I've found it.  Thank you,

22     Your Honour.

23        Q.   That's the paragraph -- well, certainly in B/C/S.

24             MS. KORNER:  But in English it's -- we need to go on to 27,

25     please.  Oh, I see, well, can we pull it up?  Is that the bottom of the

Page 23901

 1     page?  Yes, but it should say moral guidance.  All right.  I seem to have

 2     a different version somehow.  Could we go, in English, on to page --

 3     could we go on to page 28, please, in English.  Yes.

 4        Q.   Responsibilities.  That's what I just read to you and which you

 5     agreed.  Do you accept that that's from your report?

 6        A.   That's correct.

 7        Q.   Now let's find the bit I've just further read to you.

 8             MS. KORNER:  At page 29 in English, and I think it's 24 in B/C/S.

 9     Yep.  Should be the line 42 in B/C/S, and the English part is the last

10     paragraph.  Can we highlight that.

11             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Could Ms. Korner please ask a

12     specific question to the witness.  The duty of the morale -- the

13     assistant for morale in the Main Staff, rather than the duties of an

14     officer for moral guidance, et cetera, in general.

15             The paragraph was not correctly cited, because this speaks about

16     the responsibility of the assistant commander for moral guidance,

17     et cetera, as opposed to the general duties and responsibilities of an

18     officer in charge of moral guidance.

19             MS. KORNER:  I'm sorry, the -- according to the CV of the

20     General, he was the assistant commander for moral guidance, 1989 to 1991.

21             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] But not with the Main Staff of the

22     VRS.

23             You are confusing the witness, because you are taking excerpts

24     from a quotation that was about a specific person at a specific place and

25     at a specific time.  This is about a totally different level of command.

Page 23902

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, maybe I can assist.

 2             MS. KORNER:

 3        Q.   Certainly, but --

 4             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, I appreciate it's time for the break.

 5        Q.   Just, General, if you want to tell us, fine, you explain what

 6     you'd like to explain.

 7        A.   I wanted to ask you to repeat your previous question.

 8        Q.   All right.  I think that will probably have to wait until after

 9     the break.

10             JUDGE HALL:  So we return in 20 minutes.

11                           [The witness stands down]

12                           --- Recess taken at 12.07 p.m.

13                           --- On resuming at 12.43 p.m.

14             JUDGE HALL:  We appreciate that we had an extended break at this

15     point, but, Ms. Korner, I'm reminded about Mr. Zecevic's request for five

16     minutes, and the Chamber needs five minutes.  So, if you could keep an

17     eye on the clock end wind up with, say, 1.35.

18             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, yes.  Mr. Zecevic informed me -- I also

19     recall that he'd asked for time.  I think he wants a little longer than

20     the ten minutes that he -- so if we say half past 1.00?

21             JUDGE HALL:  Very well.

22                           [The witness takes the stand]

23             MS. KORNER:

24        Q.   Now, General, my original question, before I pulled up your

25     report, was that I read to you what you'd written there and asked you if

Page 23903

 1     that was correct.  And you said:  "Not exactly."

 2             So in what way is it not correct?

 3        A.   Ms. Korner, I wanted you to ask me the question about, if I

 4     remember correctly, whether it was correct that the organ for morale does

 5     not participate in the preparation for military operations.  And I said

 6     that it wasn't -- that it wasn't correct.  Or I think you phrased it:

 7     participate in the preparation of operations.  And that's why I answered

 8     in the negative, because all organs participate in the preparation.

 9             However, here, you showed me a context where it reads: The

10     execution of combat activities.  Which is something else altogether.

11     Once the execution of combat activities begins, it is clear that only the

12     commander decides and is responsible for that.

13             So I repeat: I understood your question to refer to preparation,

14     which is one thing, something different from the execution.  And that is

15     why I replied as I did, because that's how I understood your question.

16        Q.   All right.  I actually read to you word for word what had you

17     written in the report in English, or the translation, but I will accept

18     there may have been a translation error there.

19             The -- but you agree that you -- the -- the combat morale officer

20     did not, as you put it, take part, engage directly, in matters of the

21     execution of a combat operation, and the second part, did not have an

22     influence on the use of units?

23             MR. KRGOVIC:  Again, I object.  Because it is not said

24     that officer for morale.  It was said the specific person in charge,

25     meaning General Gvero.  Not officer for morale in general terms.

Page 23904

 1             MS. KORNER:  Do you know, this is really getting a bit much.  I

 2     am reading to the General from his own report in respect of a morale --

 3     the duties of an assistant commander for morale, in this case,

 4     General Gvero, who was in the corps.

 5        Q.   General, are you saying that there is a difference between the

 6     duties of an assistant commander for morale in a corps or in a -- in a

 7     lower unit, a brigade, say?  Are there difference [sic] in his duties?

 8     Responsibilities, I should probably say, not duties.  Responsibilities.

 9        A.   Certainly there are differences between the levels of command.

10     The lower the level of command, the -- the less is included in these

11     responsibilities; and the higher the level, logically, the zone of

12     responsibility and the territory are greater, and that is why they have

13     more things to take care of.

14        Q.   Yes, the greater -- I accept that entirely.  And just to confirm

15     this, can we have a look, please, at the document you refer to quite

16     often in your report, which is the Defence document at tab 23, and which

17     I -- 47D2, Article 21.

18             MS. KORNER:  Which is, in English, at page 13; and, in B/C/S, at

19     page ... no idea.  I mean, it's page 22 -- sorry, it's page 13 in English

20     and it's page 22 of the document -- page 19.  Thank you.  19 in B/C/S.

21        Q.   Assistant command of political and legal affairs -- oh, sorry,

22     this is the -- I should say that this is the book of rules on the

23     responsibility of the ground forces corps command in peacetime.  And that

24     sets out, do you agree, the -- the responsibilities of the assistant

25     commander for political and legal affairs?

Page 23905

 1        A.   I agree.

 2        Q.   All right.  Thank you.  And so can I go back to my original

 3     question before I was interrupted.

 4             Is it right, as you put in your report on behalf of

 5     General Gvero, that an assistant commander for moral, political, legal,

 6     religious affairs did not have -- at whatever level - brigade, corps -

 7     did not have an influence on the use of units?

 8        A.   Ms. Korner, what are you talking about is something that I used

 9     as a witness statement and included it in my report.  That witness was

10     a -- was an immediate participant, and he stated about a specific person,

11     namely, General Gvero, that he had no influence on combat activities.

12             It's a well-known fact that morale organs were not popular during

13     the war because they were considered commie officers.  And this was

14     written in that context, if I remember the transcript of that officer's

15     statement correctly.

16        Q.   Yes.  I'm sorry, but, first of all, I accept entirely you -- you

17     wrote this when you were assisting the Defence of General Gvero.  But you

18     don't just say General Gvero.  You say it has a general statement, based

19     on what this witness, Mr. -- who you put -- no, Mr. Trkulja said, and

20     from that you interpolate, you as the expert in this case, a general

21     principle.  Do you agree that's what you've done in that sentence in that

22     report?

23             I suppose you better go back to the report again.

24             MS. KORNER:  What's the number?

25             20232.  No.  This is the Defence ... no, this is the Gvero --

Page 23906

 1     sorry.  The Gvero report.  20232, please.

 2             Can we go back, please, to page 29 in English and to page 23, I

 3     think it was, in B/C/S.

 4             No, next page in B/C/S, so 24.  Thank you.

 5        Q.   At the bottom, you wrote:

 6             "The sector for MVP [sic] did not engage directly in matters of

 7     conducting combat operations and did not have an influence on the use of

 8     units."

 9             So you weren't just saying that about General Gvero.  You were

10     actually saying that in general.

11        A.   Ms. Korner, this is a quotation from a transcript, if I can see

12     it well enough.  It is the testimony of Nedeljko Trkulja, who

13     specifically said about that case.

14        Q.   [Previous translation continued] ... well, but I take it,

15     General, that you wouldn't have quoted it and put it into your report if

16     you didn't agree with it as an experienced morale officer.

17        A.   Ms. Korner, as far as I remember, the focus of that report was

18     command responsibility.  And there, I wrote that the assistant commander

19     assists his commander before a decision is taken.  Once it is taken, and

20     combat activities begin, then there's only one officer who decides, and

21     that's the commander of the unit.

22             This is the context in which this was written.

23        Q.   Yes.  The idea was to help the Defence secure the acquittal of

24     General Gvero from the events in Srebrenica by putting in to your report

25     that he had absolutely no command or control responsibilities of the

Page 23907

 1     troops; that's right, isn't it?

 2             Is that right?

 3        A.   You're right.  But not when you say that only helped

 4     General Gvero.  I wanted to explain that this is a principle present in

 5     the army, and I wanted to assist the Trial Chamber, first and foremost.

 6        Q.   Right.  Now, I -- that's -- that was the general.  I want to come

 7     back to the specifics of your career.

 8             Can we have, please, back up again your CV.

 9             MS. KORNER:  30D2.  And can we go, please, to page 3.

10        Q.   The first time, is this right -- I'm sorry, page -- I beg your

11     pardon.  Page 2.  Under Posts, at number 8, administrative officer in the

12     moral guidance, religious, and legal affairs organ in the air force

13     anti-defence command of the VRS from 1995 to 1996.

14             And as I think you told us, that was after the Dayton Agreement;

15     is that right?

16        A.   That's correct.

17        Q.   And, as you also told us, you left Bosnia, Bihac, on

18     May the 10th, 1992, and became, I take it, a member of the VJ.

19        A.   That's correct.

20        Q.   So you have no personal experience of being in the VRS until the

21     conflict was over.

22        A.   I had a tremendous war experience that I acquired in Slovenia and

23     Croatia.  And also there were skirmishes in Bosnia already when I was

24     there.

25        Q.   I'm sorry, Mr. -- I'm going come on to your actual combat

Page 23908

 1     experience in a moment, but I'm now talking about your experience of the

 2     VRS as an army.

 3             You personally have no experience of the VRS as an army, the

 4     Republika Srpska army, until after the conflict was concluded, because

 5     you left before it had been established?

 6        A.   I was not a participant in those events in that period.

 7        Q.   Please, answer the actual question.  You have no experience of

 8     the VRS as an army until after the conflict was concluded?

 9        A.   Madam, experience is a wide term.  While I was in VJ, I was

10     following the events in the VRS, both because of my family and as an

11     officer.  But, as I stated, I did not participate personally in those

12     event, just as you said.

13        Q.   Did you ever, during the period, see the orders issued by

14     General Mladic, General Talic, or any of the other commanders during the

15     period 1992?

16             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry, Your Honours, we have -- we're

17     experiencing some problems with the transcript.  It's not going.

18     Stopped.

19             MS. KORNER:  Oh, so it has.

20                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

21             JUDGE HALL:  We're advised that it's a LiveNote problem, not a

22     transcript problem.  So we can continue.

23             MS. KORNER:  We can?

24             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

25             MS. KORNER:  Thank you.

Page 23909

 1        Q.   Right.  General, please, my question, and I'll repeat it:  Did

 2     you ever, during 1992, see the orders issued by any of the commanding

 3     officers at whatever level?

 4        A.   I don't remember.  But I believe that as part of my education at

 5     the Military Academy -- as part of the education at the Military Academy

 6     you can see that it was approximately at that time that I graduated from

 7     the Command Staff Academy of Land Forces.  We analysed the experiences

 8     from that war, and it is possible that there were some documents there.

 9        Q.   Well, anything's possible.  Did you see the orders issued by

10     General Mladic during 1992 itself?

11        A.   Not in that period.

12        Q.   Did you have any meetings during the period 1992 with any of the

13     generals in charge of executing the Supreme Command's desires?  I'm going

14     to put it that way.  Probably not the right word.  Plans.

15        A.   I told you that the command post of the Krajina Corps in, I

16     think, 1993 or 1994 - I'm not sure - was situated close to my birth

17     place.

18        Q.   Yes.  For the moment, please, just concentrate on 1992.

19             During 1992, with the beginnings of the conflict, did you have

20     any meetings with General Talic or any of the Command Staff of the

21     1st Krajina Corps?

22        A.   I spent almost half a year at the Bihac airport in 1992.

23        Q.   After --

24        A.   And during that period, it is possible that I encountered those

25     officers.  But not after that.

Page 23910

 1        Q.   All right.  Did you ever see any of the combat reports in 1992

 2     that were sent by the 1st Krajina Corps to the Main Staff?

 3        A.   Not in that period.

 4        Q.   You personally, General, what combat experience do you actually

 5     have?

 6             And can I say, it's not a criticism at all, this, but I would

 7     like you -- to know what combat experience you've had.

 8        A.   Combat experience is a wide term.  I can tell you some of my

 9     activities which I have undertaken by helping the blockaded units, in

10     helping those units to extricate themselves from Slovenia, and to

11     transfer themselves to Croatia, Serbia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina.

12             Likewise, later on, in the Republic of Croatia, I spent more than

13     two months as a commander of a defence sector.  I was personally in the

14     trench with my soldiers and officers.

15        Q.   Have you ever come under attack?  Have you ever been attacked by

16     an opposing force?

17        A.   I was under the attack of enemy forces at the time when I was the

18     commander of the defence of a sector at the Plejso airport.  In the

19     course of the aforementioned combat activities, the order arrived to

20     cease the combat activities.  I transmitted the order to all my fighters.

21             Later on, one of my fighters requested me the permission to

22     destroy a house.  He had observed an enemy soldier firing from that house

23     before.  I did not permit this.  I had some problems because of that when

24     we returned to the command.  The story got out that the captain would not

25     allow a soldier to destroy a Ustasha house.  I defended my right and,

Page 23911

 1     subsequently, always behaved in the same manner.  That is why I am one of

 2     the few officers from the war who remained in active service after

 3     democratic changes in Serbia, and I was even promoted.

 4        Q.   Right.  In fact, you must have been a major at the time.  But

 5     never mind that.

 6             All I'm asking:  Is that the summit of your combat experience,

 7     that whilst you were at the airport -- do you mean you -- actually the

 8     trenches were coming under attack by infantry troops, or that there was

 9     bombing?  What do you mean?

10        A.   There were infantry forces.

11        Q.   [Previous translation continued] ... were you actually attacked

12     by those infantry forces?  That's what I'm asking you.

13        A.   That's correct.  By the then-paramilitary formations of the

14     Republic of Croatia.  Because the Republic of Croatia was, at the time,

15     part of the federal state.

16        Q.   Yes, all right.  Leave aside that part of it.  It's your combat

17     experience I'm interested in.

18             Is that the one and only time that you were engaged in combat?

19        A.   All the time during the NATO aggression on the Federal Republic

20     of Yugoslavia, I was at combat posts.  This entails air force units and

21     the land forces units throughout the territory.  You know very well that

22     we endured constant bombing from air, that huge quantities of materiel

23     and personnel had to be moved on a daily basis, and that very important

24     issues had to be resolved.

25        Q.   Yes.  During what you call, and did call in your report, the

Page 23912

 1     NATO aggression, you were actually the chief of psychological and

 2     propaganda activities, weren't you, in the air force?

 3        A.   That was my functional title.  Every officer is assigned a

 4     functional duty once he is accorded a post.

 5             However, during the war, one has to do everything that his or her

 6     commander orders that is not contrary to the law.

 7        Q.   During this incident at the Plejso airport, were you in command

 8     of the -- the troops of the JNA?

 9        A.   Specifically I was the commander in charge of this particular

10     sector of the Plejso airport.  There was a number of similar sectors.

11        Q.   And, finally on this, then, apart from this incident at Plejso

12     airport, is there any other time in your career when you were faced by

13     infantry troops firing at you?  Just to make very clear what I mean.

14             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Just one more thing.  Could

15     Ms. Korner specify the meaning of the "incident"?  I think that she's

16     misinterpreting the testimony.  Because according to the witness's

17     testimony, this wasn't an incident.

18             I would like her to be more precise in her quotation of the

19     previous testimony.

20             MS. KORNER:  I'm calling it an incident because that's what the

21     General described and how he stopped somebody burning down an Ustasha

22     house.

23        Q.   But, General, let's be absolutely precise:  The -- the time that

24     you have described, where you say you were attacked -- your trenches were

25     attacked by infantry paramilitary groups from Croatia, how long did that

Page 23913

 1     last?

 2        A.   It lasted from the 15th of September, 1992, until the end of

 3     November of the same year.

 4        Q.   [Previous translation continued] ... yes, but I think you mean

 5     1991; is that right?  Not 1992.

 6        A.   That's correct.  Thank you.

 7        Q.   And are you saying that for a period of two months you were under

 8     continuous attack from infantry -- I say "infantry," but infantry

 9     paramilitary troops from Croatia.  Is that what you're saying?  Day after

10     day after day?

11        A.   No, that's not how it was.  During the time when I was not in the

12     trench, I used to go to the units.  On the way there, I would be

13     intercepted by paramilitary formations in the attempt to stop or arrest

14     me and my men.  As you can see, they did not accomplish this.

15        Q.   Yes.  All right.  And what are we talking about?  A dozen men,

16     six men, hundreds?

17        A.   The groups varied.  The groups at check-points.

18        Q.   Yes.  Are you telling --

19        A.   Ten to 20 men.  When they see a military vehicle, they would

20     normally run out in front of you, armed, and normally right behind them

21     there would be large groups of civilians.  That was their way of

22     protecting themselves, because we were not allowed to shoot at civilians.

23        Q.   Right.  So this is not exactly combat, is it, in the sense of one

24     group firing or attacking another?

25        A.   That was the true combat.  There was a case --

Page 23914

 1        Q.   [Previous translation continued] ... no --

 2        A.   -- of a major who was killed in precisely this manner.  He was on

 3     his way from Zagreb towards Sisak --

 4        Q.   [Previous translation continued] ... yes, all right --

 5        A.   -- with a water cistern.

 6        Q.   Yeah, I'm sorry, because we're short of time and I want to ask

 7     you about one more thing before we adjourn.  I'm sure that people did get

 8     killed at these check-points, but it's not the point I'm trying to deal

 9     with.

10             I want you to look, finally, please, because of your experience

11     with the air force, at a video-clip, please, and with the army.

12             MS. KORNER:  And it's P2014, and it's at tab 94A of our

13     documents.

14        Q.   And I want you to tell us, please -- what you're about to see is

15     news reel footage of what happened beginning of July in Kotor Varos.

16                           [Video-clip played]

17             MS. KORNER:  Can we pause, please.

18        Q.   Can you tell us, sir, with your military experience, is that a --

19     well, first of all, obviously, is that a tank?

20             MS. KORNER:  Well, perhaps we ought to reverse it slightly.  Oh,

21     okay.  There may be a better one coming up.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I believe so.

23             MS. KORNER:

24        Q.   Right.  Now, tell us, please, what kind of tank is that?

25        A.   It seems to me to be a T55, the old tank.

Page 23915

 1        Q.   When you say "the old tank."  From the JNA; is that what you

 2     mean?

 3        A.   From the JNA, yes.

 4        Q.   All right.

 5             MS. KORNER:  Let's just continue on.

 6                           [Video-clip played]

 7             MS. KORNER:  Don't worry about the interviews.  Let's go to the

 8     last part of the ...

 9                           [Video-clip played]

10             MS. KORNER:  Can we pause just before we see --

11        Q.   Are you able to identify that aircraft for us?

12        A.   I think this is the Eagle aircraft.  "Orao."

13        Q.   Which the JNA had; is that right?

14        A.   It's a well-known fact that a number of these airplanes remained

15     in the Republika Srpska air force.

16        Q.   All right.  They were handed over by the withdrawing JNA to the

17     Republika Srpska air force; is that right?

18        A.   That's correct.

19        Q.   Well, let's just finish this clip, shall we?

20                           [Video-clip played]

21             MS. KORNER:  Stop there, please.  Thank you.

22        Q.   Exactly what sort of weaponry is being fired there, General, at

23     this village or area?

24        A.   Rockets.

25                           [Video-clip played]

Page 23916

 1        Q.   Capable of causing massive destruction, would you say?

 2        A.   It depends on the pilots' precision and training.

 3                           [Video-clip played]

 4        Q.   Have you ever seen that footage before?

 5        A.   No.  This is the first time.

 6        Q.   Would you say that was a proper use of force?

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Is that a fair question, Ms. Korner?  There's no

 8     context with --

 9             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, bombing a village?  Or firing rockets

10     at village?

11             MR. KRGOVIC:  I mean, what's the point?  Where is the village on

12     this place, on these videos?

13             MS. KORNER:  Well, if Your Honours think it's an improper

14     question, then I'll withdraw it.

15             JUDGE HALL:  I didn't say whether it was improper -- I asked

16     whether it was because on the face of it there was no context, as I said,

17     to the way the question was put.

18             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, we can roll the video back and you

19     will see where the rockets are being fired.

20             JUDGE HALL:  Well, it's obvious that rockets are being fired,

21     Ms. -- anyway, let's not have an argument.

22             It's time to deal with those administrative matters with which we

23     have to.

24             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  And one last thing before the General leaves:

25     We've got a copy of Mr. Butler's report for the General to add to his

Page 23917

 1     reading over the weekend, if he wants to, because I'd like him to confirm

 2     on Monday that it has absolutely nothing to do with anything other than

 3     command and control during 1995 and contains no reference to the police.

 4             JUDGE HALL:  General Kovacevic, as we have indicated, as you may

 5     have heard, there are a number of procedural matters again with which we

 6     have to deal before we take the break for the weekend, so we would again

 7     ask the usher to escort you out a little ahead of us.  And this being a

 8     weekend break that we're coming upon, I would remind you of my caution on

 9     Monday that you cannot discuss your testimony with counsel from either

10     side.  And, furthermore, in such communications as you have with anybody

11     else, you can't discuss the -- sorry, you can't have any contact with

12     counsel from either side.  And such communications as you have with

13     anybody else, you can't discuss your testimony.

14             So we would continue with your cross-examination on Monday.  You

15     are excused.

16             Yes, please go ahead.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I gladly accepted

18     these documents, which are rather comprehensive, because I appreciate the

19     work and the effort these people made, and I would like to get acquainted

20     with what they did.  But to what extent should I familiarize myself with

21     it, and will I be questioned about the contents of these documents

22     subsequently?  I mean, I hope I have the right to ask this question.

23             JUDGE HALL:  Well, the -- counsel, as I understand it, for the

24     Prosecution, has invited you to look at them, and I suppose she would --

25             MS. KORNER:  No, Your Honours.  I asked him whether he'd like to

Page 23918

 1     see them, and he said he would.  Which is why we got copies.  The only

 2     question that I -- well I say and I may ask him some other questions if

 3     he reads them, but it's entirely a matter for him, save for the Butler

 4     report which he's already read and references in his own report.  I do --

 5     I will be asking him to confirm that that report is concerned with

 6     command and control issues during 1995 and does not deal with any

 7     relationship between the military and the police.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Ms. Korner.

 9             So, General, I trust that that answers your question.

10                           [The witness stands down]

11             JUDGE HALL:  So before we go into private session to deal with

12     Mr. Zecevic's matter, the -- I would return to the -- to two of the

13     matters that I raised earlier.  And in terms of Mr. Krgovic's batting

14     order, could we have that by today week.  It will be Friday,

15     the 16th of September.

16             And in respect of these confidential exhibits which we have

17     invited counsel to look at and consider how we would deal with them, the

18     suggested date is the 7th of November.  But if counsel think that that is

19     insufficient time, we could make it later, sometime in December.  But

20     we're open to what your inclination is in that regard.

21             And the other matter which the Chamber wishes to raise is that,

22     in terms of -- well, there's an ancillary matter.  The --

23             Mr. Krgovic, there is an e-mail that we have seen in terms of --

24     of next week's witnesses, and we -- do we correctly infer that there's a

25     typographical error in that and that in fact you would not be in a

Page 23919

 1     position to begin 003 next week?

 2             In any event, while you ponder that, Mr. Zecevic, the -- we would

 3     need your estimate for your expected cross-examination of this witness.

 4             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'll check, but I

 5     don't think that I changed the batting order.  There must be a mistake,

 6     perhaps due to miscommunication.  But I haven't changed my batting order.

 7             At any rate, I will provide feedback should there be any changes.

 8                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 9                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zecevic, is it -- sorry, sorry.  Mr. Krgovic.

11             Sorry, Mr. Zecevic.

12             Mr. Krgovic, in your mail for on Friday, 16, it is said SZ-103,

13     is that --

14             MR. KRGOVIC: [Microphone not activated]

15             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone for counsel, please.

16             MR. KRGOVIC: [Microphone not activated] ... probably a typo.

17             JUDGE DELVOIE:  A typo.  It's 003?

18             MR. KRGOVIC: [Microphone not activated] ... yes.

19             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

20                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

21             JUDGE HALL:  So -- so, Mr. Krgovic, the batting order would be,

22     bearing in mind the fact that some of the witnesses in the old batting

23     order has been removed and the --

24                           [Trial Chamber confers]

25             JUDGE HALL:  And others were added.

Page 23920

 1                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 2             MR. KRGOVIC:  Your Honour --

 3             JUDGE HALL:  The 92 bis additions.  Thanks.

 4             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours.  I'm working on

 5     the organisation, to see why -- to try to accommodate the witnesses.  If

 6     there is time, depending on the total amount of time used by these

 7     witnesses, I may call a witness between two others to give short

 8     evidence, and I may combine them with some of the viva voce witnesses.

 9                           [Trial Chamber confers]

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Is it likely that we complete Mr. Kovacevic's

11     evidence or testimony on -- on Tuesday?

12             MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated]

13             JUDGE DELVOIE:  No.

14             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] That was the plan before Ms. Korner

15     spoke at [sic].  But I understand the Prosecutor wants to examine

16     Mr. Kovacevic on Wednesday, too.

17             I may need about an hour for re-direct examination, probably even

18     more, so that we can start with the following witness on Thursday or

19     Friday.

20             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So we have --

21             MS. KORNER: [Overlapping speakers] ... but it seems to me -- I'm

22     sorry, Your Honour was still speaking.

23             JUDGE DELVOIE:  No, go ahead, Ms. Korner.

24             MS. KORNER:  But it seems to me that with what's been happening

25     that it's -- I've got a lot, factually, to cover with him.  I'm surprised

Page 23921

 1     that Mr. Krgovic is able to estimate his re-examination without hearing

 2     any other evidence.  But I think it's (redacted)

 3     won't start until Thursday.

 4             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So, Mr. Krgovic, to make this completely clear,

 5     there are two issues: First one is the -- the -- the witnesses ordered

 6     for next week, so now we here that ST-003 [sic] would come on Thursday.

 7             But the other matter is the batting order for future.  And so

 8     we're expecting a new batting order in which all the changes are

 9     incorporated by the end of next week at the latest, please.  Thank you.

10             MS. KORNER:  And, Your Honours, we would be grateful - because

11     obviously we're working [indiscernible] - if there are witnesses

12     presently on his list who are definitely not coming, we could be told

13     about.

14             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I understand, Your Honours.

15             However, at this moment I cannot reply to Ms. Korner's last

16     remark because some witnesses still have medical problems.  And I have no

17     feedback about that.  But you will certainly be informed in due course.

18             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

19             MR. ZECEVIC:  May I --

20             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  So we no go into private session.

21             MR. ZECEVIC:  Not, Your Honour.  Before I --

22             JUDGE HALL:  Sorry.

23             MR. ZECEVIC:  I was requested by the Trial Chamber to -- to give

24     the -- to give our estimation on -- on cross-examination of the next

25     witness and in respect to confidential exhibits, and I think I can do

Page 23922

 1     that in the open session.  If it pleases the Court at this point.

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Very well.  But I -- I expected it by e-mail.

 3             MR. ZECEVIC: [Overlapping speakers] ...

 4             JUDGE HALL:  But if you're in a position to -- [Overlapping

 5     speakers] ...

 6             MR. ZECEVIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... yes, I am.  I am in a

 7     position --

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, please go ahead.

 9             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, Your Honours, in respect to these

10     confidential exhibits, we believe that 7th of November is okay, as far as

11     Stanisic Defence is concerned, and we will -- we will meet the deadline

12     as set -- as -- in accordance with your -- with the Trial Chamber's

13     ruling, yes.

14             JUDGE HALL:  You would recall that it's a joint report that we

15     expect?

16             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes --

17             JUDGE HALL:  I appreciate that you're in a position to --

18     [Overlapping speakers] ...

19             MR. ZECEVIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... yes, but that is exactly

20     why I said in respect of -- "as far as Stanisic Defence is concerned."

21     However, Ms. Korner has a significantly bigger number of these documents

22     than us, so ...

23             And I'm informed by Mr. Cvijetic that our cross-examination

24     expected for the Witness 003 will be one session, one and a half hours.

25             And now we can move to private session, Your Honours.

Page 23923

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

 2             MS. KORNER:  As I explained to Mr. Krgovic, we can't give an

 3     estimate because we don't have the benefit, as does Mr. Cvijetic and

 4     Mr. Krgovic, of knowing what the witness is going to say.  So at the

 5     moment, at a rough and ready guess, we're doubling the six hours that

 6     Mr. Krgovic has asked for.

 7                           [Private session]

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 23924











11 Page 23924 redacted. Private session.















Page 23925

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21                           [Open session]

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

23             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, so we rise, to resume on Monday.  If memory

24     serves, we are bouncing around both in terms of time and courtrooms next

25     week, so we'll be someplace on Monday morning.

Page 23926

 1             I trust everybody has a safe weekend.

 2                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.49 p.m.,

 3                           to be reconvened on Monday, the 12th day of

 4                           September, 2011, at 9.00 a.m.