1 Wednesday, 06 February 2002
2 [Open session]
3 --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Please be seated.
5 [The accused entered court]
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. This is case number IT-99-36-T,
8 the Prosecutor versus Radoslav Brdjanin and Momir Talic.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: So let's start with the usual routine.
10 Mr. Brdjanin, good morning to you. Can you hear me in a language that you
12 THE ACCUSED BRDJANIN: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your
13 Honours. I can hear you and I understand you.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: And General Talic, I put the same question to you.
15 Do you hear me in a language that you can understand?
16 THE ACCUSED TALIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. I
17 can understand you and I hear you very well.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning to you, too. So appearances for the
20 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, Joanna Korner and Nicholas Koumjian for
21 the Prosecution, assisted by Ruth Karper. Your Honour, may I say that
22 Mr. Cayley and I, as it were, are taking turns in being in court.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: I understand that.
24 Appearances for Mr. Brdjanin?
25 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I'm John Ackerman. I appear with
1 Milka Maglov, my co-counsel, and Tania Radosavljevic.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: For General Talic?
3 MR. DE ROUX: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I'm Xavier de Roux
4 for General Talic, and I'm assisted by Natasha Fauveau-Ivanovic and Fabien
6 JUDGE AGIUS: So, having cleared that stage, important stage, in
7 the proceedings, we can now proceed with the continuation of the
8 cross-examination of Witness Krzic by Maitre de Roux, but I see -- I
9 recognise Mr. Ackerman on his feet.
10 Yes, Mr. Ackerman.
11 MR. ACKERMAN: Thank you, Your Honour. This morning, I provided
12 the Chamber with the rest of the transcript.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I have seen it. It's not conclusive, and in
14 any case, let's be practical about it, Mr. Ackerman. Maitre de Roux needs
15 a whole day.
16 MR. ACKERMAN: Please do not hear me as asking for that day. I'm
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. All right.
19 MR. ACKERMAN: I will go today and change my reservations and
20 change my plans regarding Sarajevo because yesterday I told you I would,
21 and that's what I'll do.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. That's very much appreciated, Mr. Ackerman.
23 MR. ACKERMAN: The other thing that I wanted to do, before I
24 forget to do it today, is request permission of the Tribunal for my
25 co-counsel Ms. Maglov to be absent from our hearings next week. She will
1 return a week from Monday. She has obligations with regard to this case
2 in Banja Luka that I've asked her to perform.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Permission granted.
4 MR. ACKERMAN: Thank you.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Would you please bring in the witness, Mr. Muharem
7 Ms. Korner, incidentally, just to -- I would imagine that you've
8 been updated by Mr. Cayley and Mr. Koumjian, but we have had in the course
9 of the last two days, a number of documents that were shown to the witness
10 and supposedly they will be exhibited at the end of his evidence. Just to
11 remind you that this still has to be done. That's number 1. And that if
12 there are any other documents related to his evidence that you may not
13 have brought forward, that you make them available. I don't know if there
14 are any but I have a suspicion that there might be.
15 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, as far as I'm aware, all the exhibits
16 that we intend to -- that we intend to put through this witness have been
17 produced already. But I'm certainly aware of the fact that they've still
18 got to be given numbers, and if there are any others --
19 JUDGE AGIUS: They were given temporary numbers at the same time,
20 simultaneously, as they were being brought forward, which I suppose will
21 be the number that we would best follow.
22 MS. KORNER: Yes.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: I think that was the whole idea behind the exercise
24 that we went through last week.
25 MS. KORNER: If I may, we will confirm those numbers at the end of
1 the evidence.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Please. It's very important so that -- because what
3 I am doing, at least from this side, is that I have compiled, and later on
4 I will have in the same folder, witnesses' testimony, the entire
5 testimony, including that of cross-examination and all the documentation
6 that -- to which he has referred or asked -- has been asked to make
7 reference to. So it is important that we stick to the same numbering
8 because it will be very important for future reference, okay?
9 MS. KORNER: Yes, we quite understand that, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Thanks.
11 MS. KORNER: Thank you.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, please, bring him in.
13 [The witness entered court]
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning, Mr. Krzic. You will now be handed the
15 same document on which there is a solemn declaration which you are kindly
16 asked to read out and make. Thank you.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
18 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
19 WITNESS: MUHAREM KRZIC [Resumed]
20 [Witness answered through interpreter]
21 JUDGE AGIUS: You may sit down.
22 And now, Mr. de Roux has -- Mr. de Roux, Xavier de Roux, counsel
23 for General Talic, will continue his cross-examination and will be
24 directing some questions to you.
25 Yes, Mr. de Roux.
1 Cross-examined by Mr. de Roux: [Continued]
2 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Krzic, while I was rereading your book, your
3 testimony, I noticed that you always called the Serbs "Chetniks." Isn't
4 that a derogative term, and why do you always use this term?
5 A. I'm sorry that you got this impression. I have to deny that. I
6 didn't always use members or some of the members of the Serbian people. I
7 didn't always call them Chetniks. But that term has been present in our
8 territory for over a century, has been familiar, and it always related to
9 people who carried weapons. As far as the Bosniaks are concerned, we
10 always had terrible experiences with people for whom this synonym, this
11 term, was used. This term remind us Bosniaks of the genocide that was
12 committed in our territory, and not for the first time.
13 Personally, I think -- when I use the term "Chetnik," I am
14 thinking of people who hate other peoples and who, because of their
15 hatred, are prepared to use the most ruthless means. This term is
16 historically very clear. It has been clarified. I don't see why I should
17 clarify it here.
18 Q. Thank you. Let's return to 1992 -- 1990, when the Congress of the
19 League of Communists failed. There were elections in Bosnia and
20 Herzegovina. The three nationalist parties that were present, neither of
21 them won a majority vote. And an agreement was signed between these three
22 parties: the SDA, your party; the SDS; and the HDZ. What was the
23 objective of this agreement, and what were the rules?
24 A. I didn't have that -- I haven't had that agreement in my hands and
25 I haven't seen it in its entirety, if we're talking about an agreement at
1 the level of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. I haven't even seen
2 the written part at the level of the municipality of Banja Luka, from the
3 municipality of Banja Luka. But the agreement between those three, let's
4 say nationalist parties, at that time was made - and this is something I'm
5 deeply convinced of - firstly, because in the course of the elections
6 themselves, there was much fear that the left parties, that is to say the
7 Communist Parties, would win the majority and that Bosnia-Herzegovina
8 would remain under the influence of the Communist Party. So each party,
9 as far as I know, saw a particular danger for itself, saw the danger of
10 each party fighting for its own people, its own nation.
11 As the Bosniaks are concerned -- as far as the Bosniaks is
12 concerned, we thought that if the Communist Parties continued to govern,
13 that would prolong -- that would extend all the negative elements that
14 were present during the communist regime. I won't go into them all. We
15 were ready, therefore, to cooperate with parties who had at least stated
16 that they were democratic but that weren't prepared to support, let's say,
17 the Communist Parties.
18 According to that agreement, there's only one thing that I am
19 aware of: A division of government, a sharing of government was agreed on
20 in accordance with that agreement, which would be proportional, which
21 would represent the election results of each party, whereas the votes of
22 the left parties would also be distributed proportionally.
23 I will give you an example. If the left party got 100 votes,
24 then -- in the case of Banja Luka, 48 plus the remaining part that is to
25 be divided out of those 100 votes would be votes for the SDS. In the case
1 of the SDA, that would be 13, plus the remainder of the votes, et cetera,
2 et cetera. So that was an agreement, as far as I know, in which no
3 essential agreements had been reached on the strategic future, first of
4 all, of Yugoslavia and then, secondly, of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
5 Q. But in your opinion, there was not an agreement on the
6 governmental level. I'm asking whether this was the case or not. Was
7 there an agreement on the governmental level between the parties?
8 A. I am sorry, but I think you haven't heard my reply very well.
9 When I said the division of power, that concerns governing either
10 municipalities or the state.
11 My answer is yes.
12 Q. Mr. Krzic, I understood your answer very well but I was only
13 asking whether in 1990, there was a governmental agreement or not.
14 A. Yes. In -- expressed in percentages.
15 Q. Thank you. You said on several occasions that at this time,
16 tension was rising in Bosnia because of the arrival of Serbian people from
17 Croatia; they were arriving in large numbers. How can you explain this
18 arrival of Serbian refugees?
19 A. In the beginning, they were mentioning the figure of about 100 and
20 then of about a thousand - I never had the precise figure - for Banja
21 Luka. Once they even said that about 5.000 of them had been --
22 accommodation had been found for them in Banja Luka in the sports hall.
23 There were several thousand of them and so on. So it's very difficult for
24 me to give you a precise answer.
25 Q. Do you know approximately how many Serbs there were in Bosnia in
1 1990, and how many there are today?
2 A. I will provide you with some percentages. As far as I know, there
3 were between about 12 and 18 per cent of Serbs in Croatia. Today, I know
4 that there are -- the percentage is smaller, but I can only give you
5 impressions. I didn't -- I haven't really been involved in this question.
6 Q. Of course, of course. You said that the refusal to obey the
7 mobilisation call created second-class citizens in Bosnia, that is to say
8 those who refused to comply with the mobilisation order at the time Bosnia
9 was part of Yugoslavia, which was a federal state. Were you shocked --
10 did it seem to you to be shocking to defend federalism against nationalist
12 A. First of all, the first question that must be asked is what was
13 the objective of such mobilisation. The first question, in fact, is who
14 is authorised, in accordance with the constitution of the republic, to
15 call for a mobilisation. The second question is why was mobilisation
16 being carried out. This was not the first time that there was a
17 mobilisation in the area of the former Yugoslavia for -- the objective of
18 which was to seize territory, to occupy territory, or the objective of
19 which was to destroy other nations. So each man had to have his own
20 attitude, his own position, if mobilisation was being -- in the case of
21 mobilisation in the municipality of Banja Luka, mobilisation could be
22 called for only by the government, that is to say by the presidency of
23 Bosnia and Herzegovina. Therefore, mobilisation at the level of the
24 municipality of Banja Luka was considered by us to be illegal. In
25 addition, it contained elements - and this appeared in the public - which
1 indicated it was a mobilisation against the Ustasha. So this mobilisation
2 had, it seems, as an intention a fight against Croats. We mustn't forget
3 that Croatia was an independent state. And even if it hadn't been, it was
4 inconceivable that the people, the masses, should be used to fight other
5 people, other masses, who were only seeking, claiming, their own
6 democratic rights.
7 Q. The federal -- the Yugoslav federal army was in difficulty in
8 Croatia. The barracks had been surrounded.
9 A. I think that your questions are touching on the subject that --
10 about which I can express my opinion, but I am not competent to talk about
11 this. I'm not a historian.
12 Q. That's fine. I'm not asking you about your -- about your
13 competence. For the entire period of the indictment, you had a prominent
14 political position in Banja Luka, as you were the president of the SDA.
15 Who were you receiving instructions from?
16 A. To tell you the truth, the formation of political units, if we are
17 talking about the SDA, was quite spontaneous. It was not really
18 organised. It was a national movement, a people's movement, and although
19 the party was a legitimate one and had been established as a political
20 party, it was a people's movement, and this means that it had all the
21 insufficiencies that come along, that are entailed if it is not well
22 organised. So instructions, instructions for wide-ranging policies,
23 instructions for policies concerning relations within Yugoslavia and
24 concerning international relations, such instructions were non-existent.
25 We had a committee, and certain things were discussed there. There were
1 certain conclusions which were reached, but it was very -- we very rarely
2 discussed about such conclusions at lower levels, except for when we were
3 talking about politics, policies between republics.
4 At a local level, there were such suggestions, and I have to say
5 that I'm not the real person in this case either, because these
6 instructions you are talking about, in 1990, or the first half of 1991, at
7 that time, I wasn't the president. I was the secretary of the party.
8 Mr. Islamovic was the president at the time, and these questions should be
9 addressed to him for that period.
10 Q. That's fine. But I would like to return to your book, your
11 lengthy book, in which you described at length the resistance of the SDA
12 and the problem of Muslims arming, which -- to which you have dedicated
13 many pages in your book. You also spoke about victorious combats such as
14 in Vecici. How were the Muslim forces organised?
15 A. [No interpretation]
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Wait, Mr. Krzic, because I do not have any
17 translation in English any more. And I haven't -- I haven't had
18 interpretation of your last statement, since you started answering this
19 question. I can see the script here on the monitor but --
20 THE INTERPRETER: Your Honour, can you hear the interpreter now?
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I can hear the interpreter now.
22 THE INTERPRETER: Can the witness please be asked to repeat his
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Mr. Krzic, can you repeat what you had just
25 stated? Basically I can read it out for you. No, in fact, I don't even
1 have it in script here. I don't even have it in script here. So --
2 MR. DE ROUX: [Interpretation] I can ask my question once again.
3 Q. In the area of Banja Luka, how were the Bosniak armed forces
4 organised? What was their organisation there?
5 A. We did not have armed forces. As far as we were concerned, the
6 only existing armed force was the one that existed at the time. Again, I
7 am referring to the period of time when I was the president. So we did
8 not have any armed forces in Banja Luka. When you say "forces," I assume
9 that you are referring to some organised units, which did not exist at the
11 There must have been -- there were probably groups that I had
12 heard of consisting of 10, 12, 15, I don't know how many, young men who,
13 faced with the very dangerous situation at the time, attempted to protect
14 themselves in such a way. It was quite absurd -- an absurd idea to have
15 any kind of armed force in Banja Luka, which had a very big concentration
16 of soldiers and weaponry in its -- in its barracks. There were about
17 20.000 soldiers there, plus the population -- the local population that
18 already had weapons. But I know that there were attempts being made by
19 certain individuals to obtain weapons, because if you are surrounded, if
20 you live in a very practical -- practically in a concentration camp, you
21 have to find ways to protect your life. But we did not have armed
22 forces. When you say "armed forces," I assumed that you also refer to the
23 forces that were preparing themselves for some kind of attack. No, there
24 was not such force in Banja Luka.
25 Q. Yet in your book, you spoke about a person by the name of
1 Smiladzik who at the Banja Luka cemetery counted a certain number of
2 soldiers. And you say that it was a way of recognising Serb losses, which
3 means that there were battles and that there was fighting going on there
4 at the time.
5 A. I think that you are somewhat mistaken. The figures in question
6 refer to those killed in action at the front line. Every army deems such
7 information to be very useful, and not only useful but also confidential,
8 because every warring faction always tries to conceal such statistics.
9 Those figures referred to the soldiers who had been killed at the front
10 line in Croatia. That was something that was very important for us. And
11 it was also very important for us to find out at which front line such
12 events were taking place. And it was also important for the Serb people
13 to know that there were victims on both sides, because the military junta
14 at that time was trying to hide the number of victims, Serb victims, at
15 the front line, for reasons that you are familiar with.
16 Q. So the figures referred to Serb soldiers killed at the front
17 line. How far was the front line from Banja Luka?
18 A. Well, depends. If you're facing -- if you're looking in the
19 direction of Jajce, the front line was some 70 kilometres away by road,
20 not as the crow flies. But I think that as the crow flies, it would not
21 be not more than 35 kilometres.
22 If you're looking in the direction of Kotor Varos, that would be
23 less than 30 kilometres away.
24 As far as the area of Bihac is concerned, that was a bit further
25 away, perhaps 120 to 150 kilometres away. I believe that I have answered
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 your question.
2 Q. Yes, of course. Let us try to clarify things. When you speak
3 about the Vecici battle, you mentioned that a number of armoured vehicles,
4 armoured Serb vehicles, were destroyed on the way to the front. Is that
6 A. The Vecici battle was a spontaneous resistance. The area in
7 question had had some terrible experiences with Chetniks in the Second
8 World War, and the local population was aware of the difficult position
9 they found themselves in without weapons, if they didn't have any
10 weapons. So it was a local uprising, local resistance. I know that a
11 number of armoured vehicles, APCs were destroyed. When I say "armoured
12 vehicles," I'm also referring to tanks. But I also mentioned the Air
13 Force, which bombed them with napalm bombs and cluster bombs, which we
14 know are prohibited from the Banja Luka airport. So it is impossible for
15 us not to be on their side, especially in view of the statistics that I
16 had received, a number of murders, rapes that had taken place before the
17 conflict broke out in Kotor Varos.
18 I don't know what you're trying to say, but this was a case of a
19 local uprising, local resistance, and I think that it is a very bright,
20 shiny example of the way people attempted to defend their homes and to
21 resist a form of fascism and aggression. Croats and Bosniaks were
22 fighting on one side, and I believe that there were Serbs among their
23 ranks as well. And the other side -- well, you know who was the other
24 side. The fourth army in the world, in terms of its strength and one
25 of -- and the military -- the local military base was one of the strongest
1 in Europe.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, Mr. de Roux.
3 Mr. Krzic, I sense in a way that the way we are going might lead
4 us into a confrontation between you and Mr. de Roux, which this Trial
5 Chamber is definitely determined to -- not to let happen. Please try to
6 answer the questions that are put to you without going into other details,
7 unless these are absolutely necessary to explain further the point that
8 you wish to make. But please avoid going into matters which can only
9 provoke further questions and further answers and reactions from you,
10 which would eventually lead us into unnecessary exchange of
11 confrontational remarks.
12 I hope that you have both, Mr. de Roux and yourself, taken the
13 message. And I would invite you to proceed in accordance with what I have
14 suggested. Thank you.
15 Please, Mr. de Roux, go ahead.
16 MR. DE ROUX: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I don't think that
17 this is a confrontation. I'm trying to obtain some clarification. But I
18 believe that the witness could be a bit more succinct in his attempts to
19 provide this explanation to the Court.
20 Q. Let me go back to something that you mentioned in your testimony,
21 Mr. Krzic. You told us that Vecici was an area where Muslims remembered
22 very well the genocide they experienced in the Second World War. Don't
23 you think that the Serbs in this region also remembered very well the
24 genocide of which they were victims when Bosnia was annexed by Croatia
25 during the Second World War?
1 A. I'm not trying to deny that.
2 Q. Thank you. Let us go back to General Talic and what you said
3 about him. You mentioned two occasions on which you met with General
4 Talic. Your delegation was the one of the religious and social
5 organisation or association of local Muslims. You wanted to see General
6 Talic, and he received you. He was accompanied by members of his staff,
7 including Colonel Osman Selak. What was the ethnic background of Colonel
9 A. He was a Bosniak, as far as I know.
10 Q. In your book, you mention the fact that you were in constant
11 contact with Colonel Selak, who was a member of General Talic's staff but
12 who, at the same time, according to you, belonged to your network, to your
13 group of resistance. Do you think that General Talic would have kept
14 amongst -- in his ranks Colonel Selak, Colonel Osman Selak, because of
15 this tradition in the army, the multi-ethnic tradition in the former army,
16 or because he was simply mistaken as far as his loyalty was concerned?
17 A. First of all, I have to deny what you're saying. I did not have
18 frequent contacts with Colonel Selak. Quite the contrary. On the other
19 hand, it is perfectly clear to everyone that there were Bosniaks and
20 Croats within the former JNA, but it is also clear that, as time went by,
21 the ratio of personnel or staff within the former JNA deteriorated, as
22 regards their ethnic composition. It is common knowledge that Serb
23 nationals were predominant within the past ten years. But let us go back
24 to Colonel Selak. I believe that he will be the best person to describe
25 the situation. I don't see any reason for me to speculate. I can tell
1 you what my attitude is in that regard.
2 Q. I'm not asking you to speculate, Mr. Krzic.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Please finish your answer, Mr. Krzic, and try to be
4 as concise as possible. The question was a very direct one and you can
5 answer it in two -- in two sentences, actually.
6 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm sorry to interrupt, but the actual
7 question is -- was to the witness: Why was Colonel Selak kept on by
8 General Talic? How can he say?
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Exactly. "I can't answer the question myself," and
10 we certainly don't have -- but he's definitely not the kind of witness who
11 is not capable of giving the answer that you would have wished or
12 anticipated. I mean, he's a diplomat and he can answer that question very
14 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour --
15 JUDGE AGIUS: If he's not in a position to answer it, I can think
16 that he can tell us that --
17 MS. KORNER: I think he did. But I merely make the point he was
18 actually being asked what was in General Talic's mind.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: I know, Ms. Korner, but let him finish his answer
20 and then you proceed with the next question or another question related to
21 this one.
22 Yes, Mr. Krzic, can you tell us something more about this, and
23 perhaps conclude?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course, I cannot tell you what
25 was in General Talic's mind. However, I can tell you that it was my
1 belief that Colonel Selak and other Bosniaks who still existed within the
2 former JNA were the last remnants of this tradition. As far as Colonel
3 Selak is concerned, I think it was his professional attitude that
4 prevailed, because the members of the Army of Republika Srpska were to a
5 large extent dilettantes. However, Mr. Selak was a professional and he --
6 it would have been very difficult to replace him. I don't know to what
7 extent any personal attitude of General Talic may have played an important
9 MR. DE ROUX: [Interpretation] Mr. President, my question is very
10 specific. I'm not trying to --
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Allow, please, an interval of time between the end
12 of his reply, his answer, and the next question, because of
13 interpretation, for interpretation purposes. Could you please rephrase or
14 put your question again?
15 MR. DE ROUX: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Mr. Krzic, I'm not asking you to tell us what General Talic
17 thought about Colonel Selak. All I wish to know - and I'm basing myself
18 on your book - what was the information that Colonel Selak provided to
20 A. That is much more clear. Colonel Selak -- let me try to be as
21 direct as possible. Colonel Selak provided information on several
22 occasions about the prevailing currents within the Army of the Republika
23 Srpska at the time. He also provided some military information, military
24 intelligence, the most important one being about the existence of an air
25 attack against the town of Sarajevo, in my opinion.
1 Q. Thank you. As regards other staff officers of General Talic, do
2 you know Colonel Mensud Azutic? Are you familiar with that name?
3 A. No, I'm not.
4 Q. When you met with General Talic for the second time, on the second
5 occasion, that is on the 22nd of June - you had asked to see him
6 concerning security problems and security situation in Banja Luka - what
7 was the attitude of General Talic? How did he receive you?
8 A. I can say that he received us in a correct manner; however,
10 Q. I will go back to -- I'm now going to go back to what happened on
11 the 22nd of June. You described the meeting as being correct but
12 reserved. But concerning the first meeting which took place in the month
13 of May, you told us that he himself had told you, but that you had also
14 heard that in the corridor -- actually, that he had told the Banja Luka
15 mufti that there might be trouble in Prijedor, and you testified that he
16 had provided you with some important information. How did you use that
17 particular piece of information?
18 A. I discussed the information, once we were outside, with
19 Mr. Filipovic, who was also a member of our delegation, because, of
20 course, we were not sure as to what it meant. However, it was our
21 assessment that the information was valuable and that we should check for
22 ourselves what was going on in Prijedor, what the information related to.
23 And as you know, we went to Prijedor to check on the very spot, what was
24 going on, with the local authorities in Prijedor at the time.
25 Q. With the president of the Prijedor branch of the SDA, Mr. Mujagic?
1 A. Excuse me? Mr.?
2 Q. It's my pronunciation. Mr. Mujagic?
3 A. No. Mujagic came later on, but the -- the then president was
4 present. He was later killed. You will have to remind me of his name,
5 which escapes me at the moment, with the then president of the municipal
7 Q. That is perhaps not important. Apart from these two meetings, you
8 also told us that you had informed General Talic via an American diplomat
9 of the risk of summary executions in Celinac, and you also said that
10 General Talic had sent the military police in order to prevent these
11 executions. What was the relationship with Mr. Kelly, the American
13 A. I must say that I don't quite understand the first part of your
14 question. I don't know which period of time you have in mind. However, I
15 can give you a direct answer to the second part of your question, which I
16 believe is more important, no? Mr. Kelly, as far as I remember, was the
17 second secretary of the American embassy, and in that capacity, he visited
18 Banja Luka on several occasions. He showed interest in the events, and it
19 was easy to communicate with him because he spoke our language, which was
20 an honour for us, I must say, to have such a high-ranking diplomat visit
21 our area, which was, after all, a country.
22 Mr. Kelly didn't ask any questions regarding plans and -- or
23 prospects for the future of Yugoslavia, for example. His questions
24 concerned the local situation. I think that his -- the objective of his
25 visit was to gain some impression as to what was going on. However -- is
1 it okay? I'm sorry, I perhaps have not expressed myself accurately.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: The question was a very simple one. You may be
3 right that the first part of question as put forward to you was not that
4 clear, but the substance of the question was abundantly clear. Counsel
5 for General Talic wanted to know what kind of relationship you had at the
6 time with this Mr. Kelly, the second secretary of the American embassy,
7 who used to pay these visits to Banja Luka. Did you have any kind -- what
8 was the nature of your contacts? Or if there was a relationship between
9 you and this Mr. Kelly, what kind of relationship was it?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I tried to explain with these two or
11 three sentences what kind of relationship it was. I'm trying to find the
12 right word. It was a friendly relationship, without any commitments, any
13 obligations. I would answer his questions if he -- if he had any. His
14 questions were ordinary questions that one might have expected.
15 MR. DE ROUX: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Yes. But did you ask Mr. Kelly to intervene with General Talic so
17 that executions in Celinac might be prevented?
18 A. Yes, I did.
19 Q. Thank you. You then asked General Talic to liberate, to release a
20 certain number of prisoners from the Manjaca prison. Did you achieve
22 A. You're now referring to another group of people.
23 Q. Yes. It's a different question, and it concerns a different group
24 of people.
25 A. I did not make any personal request. This request was contained
1 in our memorandum. And yes, you are correct.
2 Q. You also asked that General Talic provide a safe conduct, a travel
3 authorisation for Zagreb. Did you obtain that safe conduct?
4 A. As far as I know, the request was accepted in principle. The
5 authorisation was given at one point in time, but then it was revoked. It
6 didn't concern me personally but a humanitarian organisation that needed
7 to go to Zagreb. And then the humanitarian organisation in question would
8 have provided the names of people who were supposed to travel.
9 Q. But you yourself did go to Zagreb on several occasions, didn't
11 A. No. I never went to Zagreb during the occupation. I was never
12 permitted to do so. I was granted authorisation on one occasion, but it
13 was subsequently revoked.
14 Q. When did you go to Zagreb, then?
15 A. The last time I went to Zagreb I believe was on the 2nd or the 3rd
16 of April, and I went back on the 6th or the 7th of April, 1992.
17 Q. It is possible that my memory doesn't serve me right, but you
18 spoke about a trip to Zagreb to negotiate weapons, to procure weapons.
19 When was that?
20 A. Oh, that was before I went to my company, to the seat of my
21 company, Pliva, to attend one of the meetings. And in a local cafe, I
22 asked a friend of mine if it would be possible to obtain weapons. I meant
23 a piece of -- a weapon for myself. But nothing came of that.
24 Q. Why did you ask for authorisation -- such authorisation or such
25 services from General Talic and not from local civil authorities?
1 A. The reason is a very simple one. You must know that terror
2 reigned in the area, that there were many -- there was a lot of crime
3 going on, and people were not prosecuted or tried. They simply
4 disappeared. There were no courts, properly speaking, for the members of
5 the non-Serb population. And of course that was the reason why we
6 believed that the only hope lied with the -- with the military, the only
7 hope that we had.
8 Q. On May 9th, 1992, the general staff of the 1st Army Corps
9 addressed to the crisis staff a request, given the situation, the
10 unsatisfactory security situation. Were you informed of the position of
11 the general staff in that respect?
12 A. No, I wasn't.
13 Q. During the crisis in Banja Luka, a crisis committee had been set
14 up which was set up on the basis of a resolution of the Municipal Assembly
15 of Banja Luka. And you said that the SDA had been represented at that
16 crisis committee by Emir Djanic. What was Emir Djanic's role within the
17 crisis staff?
18 A. Well, first of all, at the beginning it was -- at the beginning,
19 the staff was called differently. The Council of National Defence was its
20 name, and then subsequently, it became a staff. In the National Defence
21 Council -- in fact, this represented a body, a commission, so to speak,
22 which was on the basis of the municipal statute. It was in fact
23 registered in compliance with the statute. And in it, all the parties
24 that won at the elections were to take part.
25 In the National Defence Council, there were representatives of all
1 the parties, including the left wing parties. But as time went by -- and
2 here Mr. Djanic's role was to take part in the workings of the National
3 Defence Council, which was a regular body and which was not formed only in
4 crisis situations. And this was Mr. Djanic's role. As far as I know,
5 Mr. Djanic, as well as other representatives who were not the SDA party,
6 abandoned the National Defence Council, which subsequently became the
7 crisis staff.
8 Q. In 1990, two elected persons of the SDA to the Municipal Assembly
9 of Banja Luka became -- entered the government. This was Mr. Kuzmic
10 [phoen]. Why in 1992 were they ordered to leave, to abandon the
11 government, and why did they refuse to do so?
12 A. When the agreement between the parties in power had been -- was
13 being ignored, when it was not being carried out, in many different
14 spheres, and when in fact the practice was quite different, and which I
15 described to you, when not only participation of SDA representatives and
16 representatives of the HDZ was rendered impossible in the different
17 segments of the government -- not only made impossible. They were even
18 made to leave if Bosniaks and Croats were employed there. And when the
19 town was in fact occupied by the Serb defence forces -- it was actually a
20 putsch that was going on. And when our democratic rights were being
21 ignored, that is, the right to propose and appoint, that is, designate,
22 point to the negative events taking place -- when the deputies were being
23 threatened, in many situations we -- and when all this was added up, we
24 felt that the representatives of the SDA in such a government which was
25 basically an SDS government was no longer tenable both from the political
1 point of view -- how can you be in a political government when you have no
2 power at all? Also, from the moral aspect. And that is why we had
3 insisted that they should leave such a government.
4 Moreover, I explained that at the time, tremendous pressure was
5 being exerted on the non-Serb population. It was impossible for us to
6 take part in such a government, given those circumstances, which we in
7 fact informed Mr. Vance and Owen later on about. These two people did not
8 respect the decisions of the executive committee of the SDA.
9 Q. So the only reply that I was expecting was that Mr. Djanic and the
10 other gentleman mentioned remained in the government. Now that you
11 mention Lord Owen and Mr. Vance, during the entire period of the
12 indictment, international negotiations -- an international mission was
13 being conducted to try to find a solution to the Bosnian crisis, to the
14 crisis in Bosnia and Herzegovina. You yourself met Mr. Vance and Lord
15 Owen. Can we know what your opinion was of the plan that they had
16 proposed to submit to the different parties concerned?
17 A. Well, I didn't meet with them myself. There was a whole team of
18 people involved, where we had representatives of the SDA political party
19 and representatives of our deputy team, that is the president of the
20 deputies group. The Vance-Owen Plan, and similar plans, as far as the SDA
21 party was concerned, could only be discussed within a narrow circle of
22 persons. As regards decisions and positions in that respect, we could
23 only say this to this narrow circle of people, but for more important
24 decisions, a main council, a main board, had to be convened, and the
25 assembly of the party too. So these are matters that had been -- that
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 were being discussed on a very high level, but what we mentioned from time
2 to time in regard to the plan was something of a practical nature. If
3 governors of so-called cantons was to be -- were to be Serbs, there had to
4 be two deputies of Bosniak -- a Bosniak and a Croat. This was our
5 conclusion because, through that key, we saw a way of protecting the
6 interests of the people, and this we were able to do in this sense in a
7 practical way.
8 Q. In your book, you mentioned that you had set up a network charged
9 with intelligence work, information work. You were in permanent contact
10 with journalists, with diplomats, with members of humanitarian
11 organisations. To whom were these -- this information, in fact -- to whom
12 was this information intended?
13 A. You didn't mention which information, but that doesn't matter. In
14 our work, we were quite transparent.
15 Q. To be more precise, throughout the whole record, we examined a
16 number of documents addressed to His Excellency, Mr. Sacirbey, head of the
17 Bosnian mission to the United Nations. How did you think that
18 Mr. Sacirbey would use this information? And would this information be
19 able to exert an influence on the international mediators?
20 A. Well, to begin with, information was, of course, submitted to all
21 the international representatives in Banja Luka. All the information at
22 the time, which was sent out abroad from the political aspect, and from
23 the security aspect, the security aspect in respect of the population, all
24 this was sent to all the international organisations, the ICRC, the other
25 humanitarian organisations, to the international observers, and of course,
1 it was only natural that this information be sent to our mission too.
2 Why? Not only for the reason that you yourself mentioned, but because it
3 was impossible to communicate with Sarajevo. Perhaps it's also a question
4 of personal affinity because we believed that when information reached the
5 U.S.A., that it was very highly likely that it would be put to a good
6 use. The U.S.A. are considered to have a principled policy, generally
7 speaking, and especially in respect of conflict situations.
8 MR. DE ROUX: [Interpretation] Well, Mr. President, I have
9 completed my cross-examination of this witness.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Maitre de Roux. It's quarter past ten.
11 THE INTERPRETER: Excuse me, we cannot hear the Judge.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Maitre de Roux. It's quarter past ten.
13 Within 15 minutes, we will break. We will have the usual break.
14 Mr. Ackerman, we can either break now and then you start after the
15 break, or you can start now, stop in 15 minutes' time and then resume
16 after. I'm giving you the option.
17 MR. ACKERMAN: It probably makes sense for me to begin now, Your
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
20 MR. ACKERMAN: If I don't break everything before I start, I'll
21 start now, please. May I proceed, Your Honour?
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
23 Cross-examined by Mr. Ackerman:
24 Q. Good morning, Mr. Krzic. How are you today?
25 A. [In English] Thank you. I'm keeping well. And you? How about
2 Q. I'm okay. I didn't expect to be talking to you quite this early
3 in the day, but we will begin. You have given a number of statements to
4 investigators from the Office of the Prosecutor of this Tribunal, have you
6 A. [Interpretation] Yes, I did.
7 Q. The first one was given over a period of time extending from 27
8 December, 1994, through 23 August, 1995, yes?
9 A. Yes, on a number of occasions.
10 Q. It appears that maybe -- that there were about five different
11 sessions with regard to that statement before it was finally prepared and
12 signed by you.
13 A. I expect that was the case. I don't remember all the details.
14 Q. Can you tell the Chamber why it took so long for that statement to
15 be taken and finished? Were there some problems of any kind? What was
16 the reason it took so long to do that?
17 A. Of course, I cannot explain the reasons, but my impression was
18 that this protracted statement was due to the fact that we kept checking
19 up information. That is how I understood it.
20 Q. You mean checking -- the investigators were checking on the
21 information that you were giving them? Is that what you're saying?
22 A. Yes, I think that was the case. I cannot guarantee that this was
23 so, however.
24 Q. There was another statement that was given between -- given,
25 actually, on the 24th and the 28th of October, 1999. Do you recall that
2 A. Well, it's very difficult for me to say so, because I hadn't --
3 wasn't prepared for this kind of information, that is to say how long the
4 interviews took. This is not what I was told that I would have to say.
5 But all this information has been noted down.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, Mr. Ackerman.
7 Ms. Korner, this is precisely what I had in mind to address your
8 attention to this morning, when I said I would imagine that -- or I would
9 expect that there are further documents that ought to be exhibited later
10 on, because these statements were not actually brought forward yesterday
11 or the day before, during the evidence of Mr. Krzic. They were handed to
12 the Trial Chamber, and I also am aware that they had been disclosed to the
13 Defence teams. But unfortunately, we are in a situation now that the
14 witness is being faced with questions relating to these four documents --
15 four statements that he had made on prior occasions without him having
16 them in front -- in front of him to be able to -- so I think if we can
17 deal with that in a very expeditious manner, it would help the witness to
18 be able to answer. Because he's been referring to dates four, five, six
19 days -- seven days here, eight days there. It's not fair on the witness
21 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, the statements, of course, cannot become
22 exhibits unless by agreement or great chunks of it are put to the witness,
23 in which case an application can be made. But we can provide copies for
24 the witness. And Mr. Ackerman is going to pursue the matter of dates of
25 the statements. Or Your Honour, we can make an admission as to the dates
1 when the statements were made.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: I think we can start with that first.
3 MS. KORNER: Yes.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: But in any case, if the witness is going to be asked
5 to answer questions on the contents of these statements in particular or
6 events related in these stated statements -- as described in these
7 statements, he ought to have them in front of him. There's no question
8 about that.
9 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, we can certainly make -- we would
10 certainly agree the dates that Mr. Ackerman is putting to the witness. If
11 Mr. Ackerman wants to ask further questions, we'll make copies available
12 for the witness.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Ms. Korner.
14 MR. ACKERMAN: I'm going to suggest, Your Honour, that we go ahead
15 and break now, that the Prosecution provide the witness with these
16 statements, because I will question him about them for the balance of this
17 day and probably most of the next session.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, I take --
19 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm taking that the witness should be
20 provided -- they were written in English, but they've been translated. So
21 for his benefit, he would have to have --
22 JUDGE AGIUS: I think the witness has shown us that he understands
23 English as well. And in any case, in the very first part of his evidence
24 on Monday, he did state that he knows English but that he would be
25 obviously answering questions in his own language. So I don't think that
1 should present any problems. And there would be simultaneous
2 interpretation, in any case.
3 MS. KORNER: Yes.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you, Ms. Korner, for you cooperation,
5 and you, Mr. Ackerman, for yours.
6 I think we will break now, and we will resume at ten to -- ten to
8 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, may I --
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
10 MR. ACKERMAN: May I just make certain that they will be provided
11 to him in both languages, because I will want him to refer to the English
12 on occasion.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
14 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, we've got -- I'm assisted by
15 Ms. Karper. We've certainly got the English version here, and we can
16 almost certainly get the Bosnian language one.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Ms. Korner.
18 So we'll resume at ten to 11.00.
19 --- Recess taken at 10.23 a.m.
20 --- On resuming at 11.03 a.m.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Please be seated.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Korner?
23 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, we now have got versions of the
24 statements both in English and in the Bosnian language.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Perfect. And the understanding is the following:
1 You are perfectly correct that in the normality of things, these
2 statements would not form part of the exhibits, but if obviously the
3 witness is going to be asked on the contents, then eventually we will
4 definitely have to revise this position and -- because ultimately this
5 Trial Chamber will have to decide also on the credibility of the witness,
6 and that may entail an anticipation of what I am expecting from
7 Mr. Ackerman, some deep exercise.
8 So please call --
9 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, may I just say, my understanding is, and
10 it's, I suppose, the common law system but I think it's the same in the
11 United States, as in the U.K. -- as in England, Wales and Your Honour's
12 jurisdiction, is that if large parts of the statement are put in order, as
13 Your Honour says, at the end of the day, to remind yourselves of what was
14 in the statement and of -- to assess the credibility, then the statement
15 will be made an exhibit.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, perfect.
17 Yes, Mr. Ackerman?
18 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, something occurred during the break
19 that just has me -- I can't think of a proper word. "Flummoxed" is the
20 only word that comes to mind.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Is that a Texan word?
22 MR. ACKERMAN: It may be.
23 On the 13th of December -- and I hope the camera can see this. On
24 the 13th of December, I submitted this box of documents, at the
25 instructions of the Registry, to CLSS for translation. I was given to
1 understand that the people that I used to do translations for me on
2 occasion could not do translations of documents that I might -- that I
3 would seek to use or might seek to use as exhibits in the case, that they
4 had to be submitted to CLSS. There are about 1500 pages of material here
5 that was submitted on the 13th of December.
6 Today, during the break, almost two months later, they are brought
7 back to me with the explanation that nothing has been done with regard to
8 translating them, absolutely nothing, because somebody in the translation
9 department is taking the position that there may be a document or
10 documents in here somewhere that they have already translated in some
11 other case or for the Prosecution in this case. And thus, all this time
12 has gone by, and here I am with documents, many of which I was hoping I
13 could have back in time to use for cross-examination of some of these
14 Banja Luka witnesses, because these are Banja Luka documents. I was
15 labouring under the impression that the matter was proceeding forward
16 normally and properly, only to find today that not a page, not one, has
17 been translated.
18 To my knowledge, there is not one document in here that has been
19 previously translated. It would be foolish for me to submit previously
20 translated documents to them for translation. I wouldn't do that kind of
21 thing intentionally.
22 The other thing that they now want me to do - and I don't mind
23 doing that; I mean, this is a sensible thing - they want me to take the
24 time that it will take me to prepare an itemised index of these documents
25 before I resubmit them for translation. So it will be - I don't know how
1 many days - several days before I'll even have them in the condition that
2 I can submit them back in the form using their itemised index that they
3 want me to use. I was not told, at any time prior to my submission on
4 December 13th, that they would require an itemised index of these
5 documents. I put them together as well as I could. I described them as
6 well as I could. And I submitted a letter on the 13th of December to the
7 translation document, delivered the documents. And the first thing I've
8 heard about them since then was a few moments ago when they were brought
9 back to me in the Defence room.
10 I can't try a case like this. Nobody can try a case like this,
11 when they can't have the materials necessary to defend their client in a
12 very serious genocide case, when they can't have them processed and
13 translated in any kind of a reasonable way.
14 That man sitting over there is entitled to a fair trial. He's
15 absolutely entitled to a fair trial. He's charged with the most serious
16 offence that a person can be charged with. And for the Registry of this
17 Tribunal to sit on these documents for two months without advising me that
18 there was a problem that needed to be solved is unforgivable. And I don't
19 know what the Chamber wants to do about this, and I don't know what the
20 Chamber can do about this, but I've lost two months now. I have to start
21 over again from where I was back on December 13th.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Ms. Korner, do you have anything to say about
24 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, nothing at all. I think all sides have
25 raised the question of the problem with translations a number of times. I
1 don't know that we can assist any. I mean, as Mr. Ackerman says, he's
2 unlikely to have submitted documents which he knows that we've submitted
3 for translation. But without knowing what the documents are, we can't
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ackerman, I will understand that I will need to
6 discuss this with the other two Judges, and I'll -- we'll come back to you
7 on this matter later on.
8 In the meantime, I think it would help this Trial Chamber to know
9 precisely what kind of documents these are, if you are aware yourself. In
10 other words, what kind of documents are we talking about? I take your
11 words that you consider them necessary for the purposes of
12 cross-examination and also for the Banja Luka chapter, in any case;
13 however, the Trial Chamber would be in a better position to come forward
14 with a better decision if it is made aware of the nature of those
15 documents. In other words, we want to make sure that these are not
16 documents which we can easily do without. This is -- this is what we
18 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, I'll just -- I'll take a moment and give you
19 an example. This binder is full of what we call in the US onion-skin
20 paper documents. They're all originals. They have original signatures.
21 They have original stamps. The stamps are -- the stamps are blue. The
22 signatures are in ink. They are original documents. Every one of these
23 documents comes from the ARK, the Autonomous Region of Krajina. They are
24 signed primarily by Mr. Nikola Erceg, who was the president of the
25 executive committee of the Autonomous Region of Krajina. They are
1 extremely relevant to issues that are going on in this case. The
2 documents are important enough that I did have a significant portion of
3 them translated in rough draft form so that I could have some knowledge of
4 what it is they say. I intend, however, to use all or most of them as
5 exhibits, and so they must be translated officially by the Tribunal before
6 I can do that.
7 With regard to these documents, some of them have already been
8 provided to the Prosecutor in that rough-draft form. I'm in the process
9 of doing that with regard to the rest of them. They're -- to my
10 knowledge -- I'm convinced there is not one document in here that the
11 Prosecution has submitted for translation.
12 There are a number of newspaper articles that have been identified
13 by my staff in Banja Luka as being extremely important to the issues in
14 this case and as being additional to the newspaper articles that have been
15 submitted from that same area by the Prosecutor and tend to provide a more
16 complete picture of what was appearing in the newspapers during the period
17 in question.
18 This stack is a large number of documents that have been secured
19 from various government organs and individuals by my investigative staff
20 in Republika Srpska. I can only rely upon their representation to me that
21 these are extremely important documents for the presentation of our
23 This is another List of Documents in this package that I can
24 represent have come from a -- an archive of documents kept by someone who
25 was -- and I don't know everything about this particular group, but
1 they're documents that come from the Trnopolje Detention Centre. They're
2 documents that were kept in the regular course of the operation of that
3 Detention Centre during the course of its operation, and they shed a great
4 deal of light upon -- on how that facility operated and how -- I think
5 it's safe to say, although I'm a little reluctant, but I think it's safe
6 to say that they are extraordinarily contrary to what you heard in the
7 opening statement of the Prosecutor regarding the operation of that
8 particular facility.
9 I would not, and will not, submit documents for translation to
10 CLSS that I already have in translation from the Prosecutor or that I
11 think are of no relevance to what I'm trying to do in the defence of this
12 case. I don't operate that way. I'm not that kind of a lawyer. And I
13 don't think there is any history that I have with this Tribunal to cause
14 anybody to believe that I'm that kind of a lawyer. I will defend my
15 client vigorously. I'll defend my client to the absolute best of my
16 ability. And I will work myself ill almost to get that done. But I don't
17 know how to do that if I'm told that I have to do it a certain way, and
18 then when I do it that way, I'm told, "That's still not good enough, and
19 you can't have your documents." I don't know what to do. Maybe we should
20 have a two-month adjournment so I can start this process over again and
21 get these documents done.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: [Previous translations continues] ... Ms. Korner is
23 going to agree with you straight away.
24 MS. KORNER: No. Ms. Korner is going to raise something slightly
25 different, and that is this: Your Honour will recall that we had a
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 discussion about disclosure to the Prosecutor of documents that they were
2 aware that they were going to use. It appears from what Mr. Ackerman says
3 that he's aware, obviously because he has Serbo-Croat speakers both on his
4 team and with his client, that he is going to use these documents.
5 Apart from translation problem, I would ask that if these
6 documents will be used, that they be disclosed to us now. It may be that
7 we can assist in some way, in any event, particularly in respect of
8 newspaper articles, because we have sent a number in for translation which
9 haven't come back because they weren't high on the priority list, and we
10 were asked to prioritise our translations.
11 It seems to me that, as Your Honour and we have all discussed
12 before, that the only way to try and get over this in some form is to get
13 what are called draft or not properly authorised translations done by both
14 sides and then, only if there is a real dispute or the document is
15 obviously so important that we ought to have a properly authorised
16 translation, to submit it to CLSS. I regret to say that our information
17 is we have got the same problems as Mr. Ackerman, not quite to the same
18 extent, that the Milosevic trial is taking precedence over everything else
19 in this place, and I think every other trial is falling behind, and that's
20 the real difficulty.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: But that certainly shouldn't carry any weight in the
22 decision that this Trial Chamber will have to take eventually. So I think
23 what you have mentioned is actually the obvious. I mean, I certainly --
24 and I'm sure that my two colleagues on the Chamber agree with me, without
25 the need to consult them now. This is definitely important. However,
1 there is the time factor. Even if we adopt the solution that you are
2 suggesting, if you are suggesting it, there is still a time factor. We
3 will practically be opening, in the widest terms, the Banja Luka chapter,
4 if we haven't opened it already, very soon.
5 There is a further solution. I mean, there is always the
6 possibility to reserve for the Defence team, both teams obviously, the
7 right to summon back witnesses that would have already given evidence in
8 chief and in cross-examination, if fresh material, fresh evidence, emerges
9 from these documents once they are formally or informally translated. But
10 again, the idea terrifies me. The whole idea having to sit on a
11 moratorium not knowing exactly whether one particular witness is going to
12 be summoned here once, twice, possibly three times, as we go along, and as
13 we have new documents translated, is frightening.
14 So at this point in time, I think my experience tells me to sleep
15 on it for a while, a very short while, discuss it with my two colleagues,
16 and investigate further, within the possibilities that we have, what
17 possible other solutions there could be, and then come back to you, in the
18 spirit you all know it. I appreciate that you both consider this as a
19 problem. You yourself find yourself in the same situation, although not
20 as acute as it is for Mr. Ackerman at the present moment, and it's
21 certainly not a pleasant situation in the eyes of this Trial Chamber or
22 for the purposes of the work that this Trial Chamber has to conduct. I
23 mean, we have the same interest as you both have, that's the pursuit of
24 the truth and justice, and the striking of a balance of the rights,
25 substantial and procedural, of the accused with those of victims and
1 justice in general. But if it is necessary for these documents to play an
2 important part, then we have to find a way, we have to find a solution.
3 So Mr. Ackerman, I will, of course, give you the floor again but
4 this is what I intend doing. I intend to take my time, me and the other
5 two Judges on this Trial Chamber, and face the issue again, the problem
6 again, with a concrete solution. Yes, Mr. Ackerman?
7 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honours, I have a couple of things. I have a
8 suggestion and a comment. First a comment. I had felt that I was not in
9 -- on good ground, I guess is the way to put it, to -- at this stage in
10 the case, since I only submitted these two months ago, to complain that I
11 didn't have material translated that I could use for cross-examination of
12 witnesses that are coming up.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: That is something that, in my mind, the Tribunal,
14 the Chamber, could throw back in your lap.
15 MR. ACKERMAN: Yes.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: But let's --
17 MR. ACKERMAN: I understand that.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's go to something different.
19 MR. ACKERMAN: What I do want to tell you about that is that the
20 only documents that I have -- most of these documents I've not had before
21 I -- a few days before I submitted them.
22 The other thing that -- my suggestion, and it would require the
23 aid of the Chamber, I think, for this to work. I have two people ready,
24 willing and able to sit down and spend significant hours doing
25 translations of these documents. They are highly competent. They do
1 excellent work. But they have been told by the Registry of this Tribunal,
2 that they are not permitted to do translations of documents that are
3 destined to become or could become exhibits before the Tribunal. That is
4 -- I understand that to be a rule of the Tribunal that is somewhat
5 sacrosanct. If that rule can be relaxed because of the expediency of what
6 we are trying to do, I have no problem with that. I would submit these to
7 them tomorrow and get this process going. If I have to go through CLSS,
8 then it's going to take me a lot longer. It's going to take us all a lot
9 longer. So if you can aid me in that regard, it would be very much
11 JUDGE AGIUS: We will go into that and see if that could be done.
12 I know that there is something cooking that would streamline, more or
13 less, the practice as far as which documents ought to be translated and
14 which documents -- or not exactly which documents ought to be translated
15 but an order of precedence. But I can't give you more information on
16 that. I think we need time, as you would understand, to try and not only
17 to discuss it amongst ourselves, because this is not something that we can
18 discuss here and now. We require time. And we also, I think, have to
19 find out exactly what possibilities there are.
20 You have my word, we will come back to you as quickly as
21 possible. This is not something to be taken lightly.
22 I am unfortunately very much aware that the system that this
23 Tribunal -- that prevails in this Tribunal is problematic in itself,
24 because -- even as far as the Prosecution is concerned. I mean, they may
25 come tomorrow morning with the good or bad news that they have just come
1 across some fresh information, and as I understand it, with the
2 discussions that we have had, not I or those present, I mean all the
3 Judges, we are made aware of this and that this constitutes a big problem,
4 a major problem, because evidence comes in in the course of a trial which
5 may be fundamentally important. And so when I said I could throw back
6 those documents on your lap, saying -- I mean, you can't expect miracles
7 to happen from the 13th of December to date. At the same time, I mean, if
8 there was a problem in having those documents translated, there was no
9 reason on earth why you weren't told so at the -- then, if not necessarily
10 on the same day. I know that there was a Christmas recess but certainly
11 no justification for that. But anyway, we will go into it. We'll see
12 what can be done. I appreciate that you have not tried to make a divisive
13 issue out of this, that you see the problem and that you are cooperating
14 with the Trial Chamber. I appreciate that.
15 Yes, Ms. Korner.
16 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I think the only thing, though is --
17 because I said something else. We are making a formal request for
18 disclosure to us of documents that Mr. Ackerman now knows, whether
19 translated or not, he's going to be using.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman.
21 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour requires that I make disclosure of any
22 document that I intend to use as an exhibit in the case, as evidence in
23 the case. And I will comply with the rule, absolutely completely.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, please.
25 MR. ACKERMAN: As soon as I know that I'm going to use a document
1 as an exhibit, I will give it to the Prosecutor. I'm in the process of
2 giving them documents right now. It's just that with everything else I've
3 been doing --
4 JUDGE AGIUS: But from the way -- let's -- from the way you tried
5 to explain the importance and relevance of those documents, I understood
6 that it is certainly not your intention to -- not to use those documents.
7 It's certainly your intention to make use of those documents and fully
8 so. Because one set of the documents come from the ARK crisis. One set
9 of documents were given to you from or were collected by your
10 investigators from I can't remember where. And you attached so much
11 importance to those documents that you've managed to convince the Trial
12 Chamber here and now that it is certainly a set of documents that we ought
13 to take -- give serious consideration to in the light of what your
14 complaint was.
15 MR. ACKERMAN: Yes.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: So certainly I was not understanding that you still
17 had doubts as to whether you would be making use of those documents. If I
18 was reading your mind's -- your mind and your lips well, you certainly
19 were referring to documents that you are going to make use of, and full
20 use of.
21 MR. ACKERMAN: I suspect that I will. When I haven't read them,
22 it's difficult for me to make that decision. If they are what they were
23 represented to me to be, then, yes, I'll be using them. But I don't know
24 that they are until I look at them. I will say that I have received
25 documents that they weren't exactly what they were represented to be. But
1 I'll go through them as quickly as I can, because apparently I'm going to
2 have to index them in any event.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
4 MR. ACKERMAN: I now have someone who can help me and look at them
5 and tell me what they say. And I can make rather quick decisions about
6 whether I'm going to use them or not. And I will make disclosure as
7 quickly as I can, I really will.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Mr. Ackerman.
9 So perhaps we could bring in the witness.
10 Yes. Mr. Krzic, you will continue now being cross-examined by
11 Mr. Ackerman. Of course you don't need to make the solemn declaration
12 again. We take it that you will continue your evidence on that same
13 declaration that you entered before.
14 You may sit down. Thank you.
15 I suppose we better make available the documents that were
16 referred to earlier immediately to Mr. Krzic.
17 MS. KORNER: I'm just wondering, does Mr. Ackerman want him to
18 have all of the statements together or just one at a time?
19 MR. ACKERMAN: Yes.
20 MS. KORNER: All of them. Okay.
21 Your Honour, they've been marked. So the English version and the
22 date is shown. And then next to it is the Bosnian version. And there are
23 four statements. They've been numbered "1" through to "4."
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Ms. Korner.
25 MR. ACKERMAN: Chronologically, Ms. Korner?
1 MS. KORNER: Backwards, actually.
2 MR. ACKERMAN:
3 Q. All right. Mr. Krzic, welcome back. We were speaking about what
4 I believe is the statement that the Prosecution has numbered as number 2.
5 That would be your statement of 24 and 28 October, 1999. Would you see if
6 you can find that one, please.
7 A. Yes. I've found it.
8 Q. The statement indicates that there were interviews on the 24th of
9 October and the 28th of October. There was a three-day break between
10 those sessions, the 25th, 26th, 27th. Can you tell the Chamber why there
11 was a three-day break there?
12 A. Well, as regards the schedule of the investigation team, I think
13 that it was their position that was decisive in this manner. I've never
14 thought about it. I don't know why there were breaks.
15 Q. Would that be true with the breaks in the other two statements
16 that you gave, that you really don't know why there were gaps in the times
17 that they talked to you?
18 A. Yes. I do remember that there were reasons given to me for that.
19 I believe that they had something to do with the obligations and
20 commitments that they had in the relevant country. I was probably not the
21 only witness that they interviewed at the time, so I assume that perhaps
22 those were the reasons for these gaps.
23 Q. Throughout this period of time when you were -- from 27 December
24 1994 until 29 August 2001, which apparently was your last statement, the
25 last day you spoke with them, were you provided any kind of financial or
1 other assistance by the Prosecutor?
2 A. No.
3 Q. I take it you have had a chance to review all of these statements
4 after coming here to The Hague in preparation for your testimony in this
5 case. Is that true?
6 A. I didn't insist on reviewing the statements. I received a copy
7 each time, and it was -- I was able to decide whether to review it or
8 not. But because every statement was signed by me, I didn't think it was
10 Q. My question, then, is: Have you reviewed them in recent days in
11 preparation for the testimony you've given here?
12 A. What do you mean in recent days? During my stay here in The Hague
13 or -- I don't understand.
14 Q. I don't know how long a period of time you were involved in
15 preparing for your testimony here. But during that preparation time,
16 however long it was, did you review these four statements?
17 A. Here in The Hague, no. But of course I have all these
19 Q. Are you prepared at this point, as you sit here under oath, to
20 swear to this Trial Chamber that every statement made by you in each of
21 these four statements is absolutely true and correct?
22 A. Not once did I fail to speak the truth in my statements.
23 Q. Have you, in your review of the statements, found any translation
24 problems? I assume you reviewed them both in English and your native
25 language. Have you found any translation problems that you would like to
1 bring to our attention?
2 A. I usually had the translation in my language, and I never felt the
3 need to check the translation because I trust the interpreters. But also,
4 I must say that I'm not an expert in the English language. I don't know
5 it sufficiently well so as to be able to make any suggestions, especially
6 in cases of some nuances and so on and so forth.
7 Q. I want to direct your attention now to the first statement that
8 you gave, the one given over that period of several months in 1994 and
9 1995. Would you find that and get it in front of you, please?
10 A. Yes. I have it here.
11 Q. If you would look at what in the English version is the second
12 page, the statement indicates that you were granted an FAO scholarship to
13 Copenhagen in 1975. Can you tell me what an FAO scholarship is?
14 A. I applied for an FAO scholarship. It is a scholarship which
15 covers the area of agriculture, generally speaking, and in my case, the
16 area in question was meat processing industry, or more specifically meat
17 products. I don't know whether it is necessary for me to explain in
18 further detail. I can do it, if you want.
19 Q. My question is what is FAO? What does that stand for?
20 A. [In English] Food and Agricultural Organisation.
21 Q. And that was an organisation of what entity or government or
23 A. [Interpretation] Well, it is part of the organisation of United
25 Q. Okay. So the scholarship was actually provided to you by a
1 division of the United Nations?
2 A. Indirectly, yes, because it was provided by the government of
3 Bosnia and Herzegovina, which acted as a representative of a state agency
4 which was called Technical Assistance or something like that, and it was
5 through that particular agency that we applied for scholarships such as
6 the FAO scholarship.
7 Q. Yesterday, Mr. de Roux began his questioning of you, Mr. Krzic,
8 with a question about the goals of the SDA. You remember being asked that
9 question, do you not?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And you indicated that one of the objectives was to help the
12 development of democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina?
13 A. Yes. It follows from the provisions of the statute of the party.
14 Q. To work toward the development of a democratic society? Yes?
15 A. Well, of course, it is my -- my interpretation of it.
16 Q. That was your understanding of what the goals of the SDA was?
17 A. One of the goals.
18 Q. And as president, those were goals that it was your job to try to
19 put into reality?
20 A. By all means, yes.
21 Q. I want to ask what you meant on page 4 of your statement - and I
22 don't know where to find it in the Serbo-Croat version but the English
23 version, at the bottom of page 4, it reads: "We Bosniaks" - speaking of
24 the development of the SDA party - "We Bosniaks had the first possibility
25 to express our nationality for 70 years."
1 A. [In English] Could you tell me which -- [Interpretation] Which
2 paragraph are you referring to, please?
3 Q. It's under a section called, "Banja Luka SDA." It's on page 4 of
4 the English version, halfway through.
5 A. Yes, I see. I found it. Thank you. Thank you. What was your
6 question, sir?
7 Q. What were you -- what was your meaning, what were you intending to
8 convey, when you said, with regard to the SDA, "We Bosniaks had the first
9 possibility to express our nationality for 70 years"?
10 A. You see, during the so-called first Yugoslavia, if I may call it
11 that way, we did not have the right to declare ourselves as Bosniaks.
12 During the second Yugoslavia, in Mrkonjic Grad, at the meeting which took
13 place in 1943, which was a meeting where -- attended by the
14 representatives of all ethnic groups of Yugoslavia, as far as I know, it
15 was during that meeting that their nationality was recognised. But
16 practically speaking, during the communist Yugoslavia, we did not have the
17 right to refer to ourselves as Bosniaks. We were granted that right only
18 later on, although in the meantime - and I'm sure you are aware of that -
19 we were given the right to use the term "Muslims." And that is the reason
20 why I described that period of time the way I did, and the reason why I
21 felt that it was only then that we were given the right to use the term
22 "Bosniaks," which is something that had belonged to us as citizens of
23 Bosnia and Herzegovina for ages.
24 Q. So you weren't permitted to use the term "Bosniaks" until the
25 creation of the SDA?
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 A. We were not, no. Of course, it was possible to use the term
2 unofficially, but officially, no.
3 Q. Was there some kind of a law that prohibited you from calling
4 yourselves Bosniaks?
5 A. I'm sure that you know that during the times of the communist
6 Yugoslavia, we had three possibilities in Bosnia and Herzegovina to
7 declare ourselves in terms of nationality - Croat, Serb, Yugoslav - and
8 yes, there was a fourth possibility, as not declared. A huge number of
9 Muslims in Bosnia and Herzegovina chose not to declare themselves or to
10 declare themselves as Yugoslavs.
11 Again, I wish to emphasise that I'm not a politician and I have
12 not prepared myself for this subject, but it was only sometime in 1955 or
13 even later that we were given the right to declare ourselves as - no, I
14 think I'm mistaken; it was even later than that - as Muslims. So we often
15 declare ourselves as Muslims, although it was not a traditional,
16 historical term, and in my opinion, it was an unnecessary way of avoiding
17 the use of the term "Bosniaks." I still don't see the reasons for that,
18 because the term "Bosniak" is a traditionally acceptable term, whereas any
19 religious affiliation is not relevant when we are speaking about
20 citizenship and nationality and the fact of belonging to one particular
21 country or state.
22 Q. I take it you'd agree with me that at least by the time of the
23 1974 constitution, that you had been -- you were able to declare
24 yourselves as Muslims, at least.
25 A. Yes. But we were not consulted on this term. There was no
1 referendum organised for that purpose. We did not even have adequate
2 representatives who would have been our deputies and who would have
3 advocated our interests in this regard.
4 Q. Well, in 1974, the key system was in effect. There was
5 proportional representation of all of the nationalities of Yugoslavia in
6 the assemblies. You had a number of deputies in the assemblies that
7 reflected the population -- the Muslim population of Yugoslavia and
8 Bosnia-Herzegovina. That had been the case with Yugoslavia since its
9 creation following World War II. Isn't that correct?
10 A. I believe I have already stated that the Communist League made
11 sure that at least in terms of names or ethnic background, all ethnic
12 groups be represented in a proportional way. However, very often
13 attention was paid only to the name of the individual in question, not to
14 his background or his convictions. And as you probably know, two
15 individuals of two different ethnic groups could have the same name. Such
16 cases were also possible. But if it was all just a great show, it was the
17 way things looked like, the way they seemed. But to a certain extent, it
18 was satisfactory. One could be satisfied with the state of affairs to a
19 certain extent, because again, to a certain degree we were given
20 possibility to express our views.
21 Q. Is it your testimony that what you meant when you made the
22 statement we're referring to, "We Bosniaks had the first possibility to
23 express our nationality for 70 years," is it your testimony that all
24 you're talking about there is that you had the right to call yourselves --
25 finally after 70 years, to call yourselves Bosniaks?
1 A. I had in mind the fact that even during the Austro-Hungarian
2 times, the Bosniaks had the right to use the term "Bosniak." However,
3 after the Kingdom of Yugoslavia was created and during the communist
4 years, they did not have that right. And that was the period of time that
5 I had in mind.
6 Q. You recall, I'm sure, the census that was conducted in 1981. How
7 were the Muslim people permitted to identify themselves in that census in
9 A. I think that the majority -- again, I'm really reluctant to
10 mention any statistics. It would go beyond my competence. I would like
11 to leave it to experts. But it is true that the majority of Bosniaks
12 identified themselves as Muslims ever from the first census that gave them
13 that option.
14 Q. The next sentence after you say, "We Bosniaks had the first
15 possibility to express our nationality for 70 years," in the next sentence
16 you say: "We considered it a chance given to us by the West." What does
17 that mean?
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Before you answer the question, Mr. Krzic, may I ask
19 you, Mr. Ackerman, what are you trying to prove by this series of
21 MR. ACKERMAN: I'm trying to find out, Your Honour, what he means
22 when he makes these statements, what --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: But for the purpose of this trial, what's the
25 MR. ACKERMAN: Yes. The relevance is -- is his credibility, Your
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Go ahead.
3 Mr. Krzic, answer this question, and then we'll see about the
4 other questions that may be following.
5 A. Of course I am merely expressing my opinion here. And then you
6 must be aware of the fact that this was all written in a book which was
7 perhaps written without recourse to adequate and reliable information.
8 What I had in mind when I said that was the fact that the issue of ethnic
9 or national affiliation had long been solved in the West. The way it was
10 solved did not endanger or threaten anyone. All ethnic groups were
11 allowed to express themselves socially, politically, and culturally. And
12 it was that freedom of expression that I had in mind when I said this.
13 MR. ACKERMAN:
14 Q. I want to go to another issue now. On Monday, in this room, you
15 were asked by Mr. Koumjian about your tenure as president of the Banja
16 Luka SDA. And your answer from the transcript about how you left the
17 leadership of the Banja Luka SDA was as follows:
18 "Several members of the Executive Council of the SDA in Banja
19 Luka and some of the deputies of the SDA of Banja Luka convened a meeting
20 in Sarajevo. And during that meeting, the leadership of the party was
21 entrusted with a different person."
22 Do you recall that testimony?
23 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, Mr. Ackerman.
24 Yes, Mr. Koumjian.
25 MR. KOUMJIAN: Your Honour, could I just ask as a procedure to be
1 followed by both sides that when a transcript is quoted, for the sake of
2 the Trial Chamber and opposing counsel, we could cite the page so that we
3 could go to it and find what counsel is talking about.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Your observation is perfectly correct.
5 And Mr. Ackerman is kindly invited to state whether he is
6 referring from the official -- or an official transcript - because until
7 now, it will still be unofficial - and what page he is reading from.
8 MR. ACKERMAN: Page 1414, Your Honour, line 16 through 19.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. Ackerman.
10 And thank you, Mr. Koumjian.
11 MR. ACKERMAN:
12 Q. Do you recall that?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Well, let me just ask you this request: How was it that the
15 leadership was entrusted to a different person at that point? Were you a
17 A. Well, the explanation is a simple one. I was already in the state
18 service, in the public service. I was working in London. And I was not
19 able to work in the -- to participate in the work of the party. I was a
20 professional then. And to perhaps present party's views or an
21 organisation was unacceptable for me at the time, if that is what you are
22 referring to.
23 Q. So did you advise this group of people, then, in some way that you
24 had no interest in continuing as president of the Banja Luka SDA?
25 A. Well, I took advantage of my visit to Sarajevo to bring together
1 members of the -- other members of the executive council, and to see that
2 something be done in, in fact, animating the work, activating the work, of
3 the SDA.
4 Q. And at the same time, you resigned as president of the SDA in
5 Banja Luka, I take it?
6 A. In practical terms, yes, I did.
7 Q. Would you look, please, at the -- in the English version, it's the
8 last paragraph on page 5, and the last two lines of that paragraph, where
9 you say in your statement, "In 1993, I was secretly elected president of
10 the regional board of the occupied territories of Bosanska Krajina." Do
11 you find that?
12 A. Yes, I did.
13 Q. I have a number of questions about that. What do you mean when
14 you say you were secretly elected?
15 A. Well, the agreement was within the executive council of the SDA.
16 I mentioned this. Perhaps you have failed to realise what I said, that we
17 should formally proclaim ourselves in Banja Luka as a regional board of
18 the SDA, because members of the boards in other towns were either escaped
19 or were killed. We believed that we could only be protected - perhaps
20 this was not the right way of thinking - but we believed that we could be
21 at least partially protected from arrests and from being killed if we had
22 higher political functions. That is to say, when we -- if we were to be
23 arrested, that we could inform the international public and that this and
24 that person was arrested, and add to this his function in the SDA, and
25 also mention that he was one of the vice-presidents of the regional
1 board. In my case, it was said that I was also president of the regional
2 board of the SDA. It was believed that this would attract international
3 reaction if their position were to be mentioned.
4 This was not legally a valid act, but those were the conditions we
5 were living in within a concentration camp, so to speak.
6 Q. Let me go back to the question I asked you. Are you looking at
7 the transcript there on your screen? Do you see the transcript on your
8 screen, Mr. Krzic?
9 A. I am -- I occasionally glance at it.
10 Q. The question I asked you was: "What do you mean when you say you
11 were secretly elected?" I must ask you that again. What do you mean,
12 "secretly elected"?
13 A. Well, we didn't -- did not render this public through the press or
14 any other media. We wanted to avail ourselves of this only in instances
15 where we might be arrested.
16 Q. Now, when you speak, then -- thank you. I appreciate that. When
17 you speak of the occupied territories of Bosanska Krajina, what
18 specifically did you consider to be the occupied territories of Bosanska
20 A. Well, this was the territory controlled by the Serb army, or the
21 Army of the Republika Srpska, the so-called Army of the Republika Srpska.
22 Q. So I assume that you would, for instance, put the Banja Luka
23 municipality in that category?
24 A. Yes, I would.
25 Q. So, in effect, what you did, then, in 1993 was create a regional
1 organisation of the SDA party, or a sort of SDA autonomous region,
3 A. As you can see, these were not representatives of the people.
4 These were deputies, a group of people who, in a small room, decided that
5 this was the right way to act in order to save their lives. We did not
6 make this public, but the explanation, as you can see from the document,
7 was sent to our SDA members, explaining to them why we were doing that,
8 and simply to say to the journalists, "This is a political official and
9 let us have him saved." This was something intended for the press,
10 because it would not be possible to have interventions for every
11 individual person in Banja Luka. We had no other goal before us, neither
12 verbally or in writing, nor formally. Self-declaration of the members of
13 a non-existing political body, doing so to save our lives.
14 Q. I'm going to take you to a new subject now, on page 13 of your
15 statement, and that would be the English version. If you look at the very
16 bottom, the last paragraph, about halfway through that last paragraph, you
17 say, "There is no doubt" -- and you're speaking of a time when you had
18 been arrested. You say, "There is no doubt that the CSB leadership knew
19 that I was in the CSB building and that I was being interrogated and
20 tortured." You see that?
21 A. Yes, I do.
22 Q. Who was the CSB leadership that you were speaking of there?
23 A. Well, this, first of all, was in the building of the CSB, that is
24 in the SUP building where the security services were accommodated. I was
25 convinced that the head of that service, as -- and of the SUP as a whole,
1 was Mr. Zupljanin.
2 Q. And who else was the leadership? You seem to be speaking in
3 plural here, not just one person.
4 A. Well, I can't remember other individuals, that is his assistants,
5 if you're referring to them. I could not quote their names. But when I
6 was referring to the leadership, I had in mind the lower-ranking officers,
7 because such an information could not just pass unnoticed. It would have
8 been heard straight away, and I mentioned this.
9 Q. So when you used the term "CSB leadership," what you were
10 referring to was the lower-ranking officers of the CSB?
11 A. Yes, and on a higher level, too, the higher-ranking ones as well.
12 Q. What information do you have -- I mean, you say there is no
13 doubt. What information do you have that higher-ranking leadership
14 persons of the CSB were aware that you were there?
15 A. Well, because one of the police officers - who was indeed an
16 officer - were present when I was arrested, and once I even asked him to
17 inform one of the ex-SDA leaders, that is the lawyer, Mr. Bojanic, which
18 he accepted to do. And these were policemen. And as you know, the news
19 spread through the town and it was impossible for this piece of news not
20 to be known. And this piece of news was also transmitted through the
21 international news systems which were listened to carefully.
22 Finally, during the torture and the whole procedure, I was also
23 told quite openly that even Karadzic knew about my arrest.
24 Q. Thank you. But the sentence that I referred you to: "There is no
25 doubt that the CSB leadership knew that I was in the building and I was
1 being interrogated and tortured," you're referring to the present tense
2 there. You're saying at the time you were there, there's no doubt that
3 they knew you were there. I'm not asking about afterwards. I'm asking
4 about at the time that you were there. What proof do you have that Stojan
5 Zupljanin, for instance, knew that you were there being tortured and
6 interrogated? What proof do you have of that?
7 A. Well, policemen were present who were observing me through the
8 window. They were on duty. And they watched me when two soldiers took me
9 to the sports hall to beat me up, and they were present all the time when
10 I was being helped to stand up. These were military police members, and
11 it was impossible for them not to have informed their superiors of this.
12 Q. Well, Mr. Zupljanin was not the superior of military police, was
14 A. I cannot answer these questions exactly because I don't have the
15 documents to base myself on. But there was -- it was generally known that
16 any event of this kind could not pass unnoticed by Mr. Zupljanin.
17 Q. So it's your position, then, is it, that you're able to say that
18 there is no doubt that he knew of your presence there at the time you were
19 there because you were being observed by some police officers? To you,
20 that's enough to prove that there's no doubt that he knew about it;
22 A. Because the torture went on the whole day in the SUP building and
23 as policemen went upstairs and downstairs, there were lots of policemen
24 and lots of soldiers that were doing that, it was quite logical for me to
25 conclude that they knew. The soldiers were shouting amongst each other,
1 "Do you know what sort of person we caught," and even mentioned me. So
2 it was quite public.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman. I think it's time to move to
4 something else. I think he has answered this question abundantly clear to
6 MR. ACKERMAN: I'm moving, Your Honour.
7 Q. At the very bottom of the page, you describe yourself as a "man
8 who had stood up against the Chetniks." Now, I assume you're talking
9 about that period of time and not the Chetniks from World War II.
10 A. I apologise. I must refer to the Bosnian version.
11 Q. You don't have to apologise for doing that.
12 MR. KOUMJIAN: I would just explain. I believe that the page
13 numbering may be different, because this first statement was done in a
14 different font that's no longer on our computers. I know that when I
15 printed it out, I have different page numbers than Mr. Ackerman has.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: In any case, we're talking about the same paragraph,
17 so there shouldn't be great difficulties.
18 The same paragraph, Mr. Krzic, from which Mr. Ackerman had read
19 the short sentence regarding the CSB leadership. It's further down, two
20 sentences further down.
21 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. I have problems to find it.
22 MR. ACKERMAN:
23 Q. The heading of the section, Mr. Krzic --
24 A. [Interpretation] I've found it. I've found it.
25 You asked something about Chetniks. I apologise. Could you
1 repeat the question.
2 Q. The statement you made was -- let me give you the whole sentence
3 so that you'll have it in context. "I absolutely think that the CSB
4 leadership was informed from the beginning, otherwise they would have
5 killed me immediately."
6 And then the phrase I'm interested in: "As I was a man who had
7 stood up against the Chetniks." What do you mean that you were a man who
8 had stood up against the Chetniks? What Chetniks?
9 A. Well, I spoke about the crimes publicly. It was publicly
10 recognised by the perpetrators of the crimes that they were called
11 Chetniks. They were called Cetnika kums, vojvodas, and that they follow
12 the Chetnik tradition. I spoke about the crimes that they had committed
13 quite openly, and I can conclude that I would have been liquidated
14 immediately if they were to -- had decided about my fate. The soldiers
15 surrounding me often said that they were that, and I think that I have a
16 right to draw that conclusion.
17 Q. Mr. Koumjian was asking you during your testimony, I think on
18 Monday, about various dismissals in Banja Luka of non-Serb people between
19 April and December of 1992. And one of the group that you informed us had
20 been dismissed from their positions were most non-Serb judges. Do you
21 recall saying that?
22 A. I said that dismissals also included people working in the
23 judiciary, and I said that non-Serbs were dismissed. But I also said that
24 in some cases, that Serbs were also affected by this because they may have
25 been from mixed marriages.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. The SDA party was a party that represented approximately 13 or 14
2 per cent of the population of the Banja Luka municipality; is that
4 A. It represented 13 to 14 per cent of the electorate.
5 Q. Yes. Do you know of a judge who was appointed in 1991 by the name
6 of Jankovic?
7 A. Yes, I do.
8 Q. What was Judge Jankovic's nationality?
9 A. I think that he was a Serb.
10 Q. And this candidacy for appointment to a judicial position was
11 supported by the SDA party, was it not?
12 A. I cannot claim that this was so. The only thing that I can
13 remember with regard to that election, that some members of the SDA
14 objected to him. But whether they voted or not, it is difficult for me to
15 say at this moment.
16 Q. Let me refer you to page 18 of your report. Not your book. Not
17 your book, your report, the first one we've been referring to, page 18.
18 A. The English version; is that right?
19 Q. That's the English version.
20 A. I have it.
21 Q. About halfway down, there is a paragraph which begins with the
22 name, Mr. Jankovic. Within that first sentence, you say, "Mr. Jankovic
23 asked for the support of the SDA. He received this support and was
24 appointed to the Basic Court."
25 A. I said this with some conviction, but not 100 per cent convinced.
1 Q. Well, when we started today, I asked you if everything contained
2 in your statements, that you would swear to as the truth, and you said,
3 "Absolutely, everything is the truth." So that must be the truth,
5 MR. KOUMJIAN: Your Honour, I object. That's argumentative to the
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman. Don't you think that the
8 objection ought to be sustained?
9 MR. ACKERMAN: I think it probably should be, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: So it is sustained.
11 MR. ACKERMAN: I think I would have sustained it in your position.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Exactly. So you don't need to answer that question,
13 Mr. Krzic. And Mr. Ackerman will put the next few questions before we
14 break again, unless he prefers to stop here and continue later.
15 MR. ACKERMAN: I think I'll maybe have one or two more, Your
16 Honour, to finish.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Go ahead.
18 MR. ACKERMAN:
19 Q. So this is a -- this is a fact that you have pointed out in your
20 statement that you are now saying you're not quite certain about?
21 A. Well, if you please, I gave this statement in reference to a
22 relevant event, and that is the massacre in Vlasic, so that when
23 describing the judge who attended the investigations in Vlasic, I was
24 asked what I knew about the Judge Jankovic, and I stated what I knew. I
25 didn't speak an untruth, a falsehood.
1 Q. Well, in fact, the point you were making, Mr. Krzic, was that
2 Mr. Jankovic, as the investigating judge, regarding what happened at Mount
3 Vlasic, even though he had the title of judge --
4 A. [No interpretation]
5 Q. I haven't finished the question. Even though he had the title of
6 judge, did not act independently because he was under the control, de
7 facto, of Mr. Zupljanin. That's the point you were trying to make, wasn't
9 A. Well, I wanted to say that according to my information. And you
10 know I'm not a lawyer. I never worked in state institution of that kind.
11 To my mind, the investigating judge, on the basis of the customs in
12 practice in the state services, he was supposed to have come out on the
13 site of the crime, but the situation in Banja Luka was such at the time
14 that he couldn't have done this without consulting the most responsible
15 police officers. There was a situation where one's own regulations were
16 not respected, and he could have been ordered not to go. That is my
17 opinion. And everyone would have obeyed because if he did not obey
18 orders, in those days, this was a very dangerous thing to do.
19 I believe, and as far as I can remember - I'm not an expert in
20 that matter - the public prosecutor was the one who issued orders under
21 the old communist system. If, in the meantime, state regulations changed,
22 regulations that had to do with subordination, I'm not aware of that. But
23 it is impossible that he would have gone to the site of a massacre against
24 the non-Serbs, unless he had the consent of superiors, unless of course he
25 was an exceptionally brave person, willing to risk his own life, but then
1 again the consequences would have been quite different.
2 MR. ACKERMAN: I think we can break now, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: We will have a break of 25 minutes. We will resume
4 at five to 1.00, please. Thank you.
5 --- Recess taken at 12.31 p.m.
6 --- On resuming at 12.58 p.m.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Please be seated.
8 Yes, Ms. Korner.
9 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'd like to raise two short
10 administrative matters at the end of the proceedings. So if Mr. Ackerman
11 perhaps could just give me five minutes, it really will be short. Thank
12 you very much.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Ms. Korner.
14 Please admit the witness again.
15 Yes, Mr. de Roux.
16 MR. DE ROUX: [Interpretation] Mr. President, before the witness
17 arrives, I would like to say that I have spoken with General Talic about
18 the defence, because I won't be here on the 13th, Wednesday the 13th, and
19 he would like Ms. Natasha Fauveau to be co-counsel and be present in his
20 place -- in his name. I'm talking about Wednesday.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Let's forget about the formality, whether she
22 can be co-counsel or not co-counsel, because she cannot be a co-counsel or
23 described or accepted as co-counsel, because she isn't according to the
24 records of this case. But if there is this declaration, which I would
25 like General Talic himself to make as well, to the effect that he has no
1 objection in being represented on Wednesday when we meet next by
2 Ms. Fauveau, then I will have it on record. But not to have her described
3 as co-counsel, because you -- unfortunately, you cannot. As I said, when
4 you were absent, Ms. Fauveau did a fantastic job. So it's definitely --
5 definitely General Talic was very ably represented.
6 Yes. Mr. Krzic, you may sit down, please.
7 Yes. General Talic, you have heard what Mr. de Roux, your chief
8 counsel, has just stated.
9 THE ACCUSED TALIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have no
10 objections to being represented by Ms. Natasha Fauveau, and I agree to
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you.
13 So Mr. Ackerman, please.
14 MR. ACKERMAN: Thank you, Your Honour.
15 Q. Mr. Krzic, before the break, we were near the bottom of page 18 of
16 your statement. You say there -- it's about one, two, three, four -- the
17 sixth line up from the bottom, with regard to this issue that you were
18 discussing about Judge Jankovic and how he couldn't actually perform the
19 duties that a judge constitutionally should perform in that situation.
20 You said that at the time, referring to this period of time:
21 "There was one constitutional system and one de facto system." And that
22 is the case, isn't it, that you couldn't always determine who was in
23 charge and who had power based upon the title they had or the position
24 they held? There was a de facto power system that had grown up during
25 this period of time.
1 A. Yes. But not in general terms.
2 Q. Specifically in certain situations, however, that was the case,
3 wasn't it?
4 A. In certain cases, yes, it was.
5 Q. Let me take you now to the next page. You have a section of your
6 report that is under the heading "Mr. Brdjanin." You say at the end of
7 the first paragraph, that, referring to Mr. Brdjanin: "His father was a
8 war criminal during World War II." What proof do you have of that?
9 A. That was a well-known fact.
10 Q. Well known among who?
11 A. It was well known among the citizens, even those of Celinac. It
12 was well known that his father had been punished as a Chetnik in the
13 course of the Second World War.
14 Q. If you go to the second page, at the top, first full paragraph --
15 first paragraph, you indicate that Mr. Brdjanin became a member of the
16 Banja Luka assembly. Do you see that?
17 MR. KOUMJIAN: Could we ask, Mr. Ackerman, are you referring to
18 page 20, first full paragraph?
19 MR. ACKERMAN: Page 20, English. It's not the first full
20 paragraph. It's the paragraph at the top of the page, about halfway
22 Q. Did you find that?
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Are you having difficulties, Mr. --
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, were you asking me? I
25 found it. I found the passage. I didn't realise that you had asked me
1 this question.
2 MR. ACKERMAN:
3 Q. And that's true, is it, that he was a member of the assembly of
4 the Banja Luka municipality?
5 A. Right now, I can't say this for sure, because in the Banja Luka
6 Dom Kultura, Centre of Culture, which is where municipal sessions were
7 held, sessions were held at the various levels. Assembly sessions were
8 held at various levels there. So there was a question concerning
9 Mr. Brdjanin, who was in Banja Luka. The question was whether he could be
10 a member of that assembly. And that was a period during which we no
11 longer participated in the work of the Banja Luka assembly. So our
12 information on certain appointments or elections was limited.
13 I was thinking of the fact that he was a member of the assembly of
14 Republika Srpska, and as far as I know, he was also a member of the
15 assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
16 Q. The question I asked you about was, you said that he was a member
17 of the assembly of Banja Luka. Have you learned since you gave that
18 statement that that's not true? Or do you still believe that to be true?
19 A. It is possible that Mr. Brdjanin moved to Banja Luka in that
20 period. It's possible that certain elections were held. So it's possible
21 that he was there. I would often see him there. I even saw him before,
22 before this period. So this is an impression I had, not only with regard
23 to him but also with regard to certain other people. I can't say this for
24 sure because I don't have any documents here. I can't say for sure
25 whether someone was or was not a member of the assembly.
1 Q. Well, you're looking at a statement that you signed, and you don't
2 say that he was possibly a member of the Banja Luka assembly. You say
3 that he was, don't you? You don't say, "It's possible that he was," or,
4 "I thought maybe he was," or, "He could have been." You say he was, as a
5 statement of fact, in a statement that you signed; right?
6 A. I agree with what you have just said.
7 Q. Thank you. If you go down to the next paragraph that starts with
8 the name "Mr. Brdjanin," you said in your statement, "He was always the
9 strongman, prepared to do everything Dr. Karadzic or others wanted him to
10 do." Right?
11 A. That's right.
12 MR. ACKERMAN: Could I ask the registry to provide the witness
13 with Prosecution Exhibit 34B and 34A?
14 Q. Mr. Krzic, I'm going to tell you what I have asked that you be
15 shown are shorthand notes of a meeting of the deputies club of the Serbian
16 Democratic Party of Bosnia-Herzegovina, held in Sarajevo on 28 February,
17 1992. I want to draw your attention to page 36 of the English version,
18 and I don't know where the same language would appear in the Serbo-Croat
19 version, the B/C/S version.
20 I will tell you that the person who is speaking is Dr. Radovan
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Hold on a second.
24 MR. KOUMJIAN: Your Honour, if I understand where the question is
25 going, I'm going to object on the basis of relevance. I believe
1 Mr. Ackerman would argue this goes to the witness's credibility, because I
2 presume he's going to show some split between Dr. Karadzic and
3 Mr. Brdjanin --
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, obviously. But I just can't see why your
5 objection ought to be sustained. It's definitely relevant.
6 MR. KOUMJIAN: Because Mr. Krzic was not present and would not
7 have had access to those documents at the time he made the statement.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: So what? He's making a blanket statement with
9 regard to Mr. Brdjanin in this particular statement, saying that
10 Mr. Brdjanin is the kind of political strong animal -- I'm using the term
11 "animal" not as -- we use it to describe a pure politician -- who as part
12 of his policy has taken to follow exactly and always everything that
13 Mr. Karadzic demands or expects from him. So if now we are coming to the
14 stage of having a witness confronted with statements, public statements,
15 made by Mr. Karadzic and others, I think of course there is a relevance.
16 MR. KOUMJIAN: That's the issue. It's not a public statement.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Of course it's relevant. He's going to be
18 asked -- I mean, he's on cross-examination, and he will definitely be
19 asked whether he will sustain or maintain the statement that he had made
20 in the first place with regard to Mr. Brdjanin. I mean, it's perfectly
22 MR. KOUMJIAN: I'm not going to argue the point further. I see
23 I'm losing it, so I'll sit down.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
25 Yes, Mr. Ackerman.
1 MR. ACKERMAN:
2 Q. Okay. I'm asking you to look at page 36 of the English version.
3 And I think you have found that page. Correct?
4 A. I have the English version. But once again, as these are
5 sensitive issues, I would like to find the same passage in Bosnian. But
6 if you tell me what you want, maybe I wouldn't have to look for the
7 Bosnian version.
8 Q. I want to draw your attention to the statement made by
9 Dr. Karadzic with regard to Radoslav Brdjanin at this time. The English
10 translation reads: "We can and we must renounce everyone who refuses to
11 work the way we have agreed, Brdjo and all the rest. When Brdjo appears
12 somewhere, he's like a bomb. He blows up everything. Then he winks at
13 him. And I won't allow it as a psychiatrist and as the party leader."
14 Skipping a paragraph: "He's crazy. He's not normal,"
15 Dr. Karadzic continues. "He doesn't know what he can do and what he can't
17 You see that language there, don't you?
18 A. [In English] Yeah, yeah.
19 Q. Dr. Karadzic as a psychiatrist is criticising Brdjanin, calling
20 him crazy, saying he's not normal; correct?
21 A. [Interpretation] According to what is stated here, yes.
22 Q. And you said after that, after he had called him all these things
23 and said all these things about him that, "Mr. Brdjanin was prepared to do
24 everything Dr. Karadzic or others wanted him to do."
25 Don't you think that's a bit unlikely?
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Now I can anticipate what your objection is. And
2 it's going to be sustained.
3 I think you ought to --
4 I dispense you from having to explain it, because I know exactly
5 what --
6 Mr. Ackerman, I would suggest to you to rephrase your question.
7 And I know -- and you ought to know exactly along which lines. I mean, he
8 made a statement way back in 1995, a statement that you read out to him.
9 Now you have read out to him what Mr. -- Dr. Karadzic had stated during
10 that meeting of the deputies club. The obvious question is whether he
11 would like to maintain the statement that he had made on that previous
12 occasion or whether he would prefer to revise it, but -- or something
13 along those lines. But not the way you've phrased it in the beginning,
14 anyway. Whether he still believes that --
15 MR. ACKERMAN: I'll do it.
16 Q. Do you stand by your statement, Mr. Krzic, that Brdjanin was ready
17 to do the will of Dr. Karadzic any time he was asked to?
18 A. Yes, for a certain time period.
19 Q. Well, you understand, do you not, that the statement that we just
20 read about Dr. Karadzic calling him crazy was in February of 1992,
21 preceding all of the events that are part of the allegations in this
22 indictment? You know that, don't you?
23 A. I know something else too. There are such turnarounds in
24 politics. Sometimes enemies become your best friend, and sometimes people
25 who spoke very ugly things about others turn around and say very positive
1 things. So your statement is quite relative, as is mine.
2 Q. A little further down in the same paragraph, the last sentence of
3 that paragraph on page 20 of your statement, referring to Brdjanin: "He
4 was the right person to organise ethnic cleansing, camps, and
5 deportation." Do you see that?
6 A. Yes, I do.
7 Q. Do you have any proof at all -- and when I say "proof," I mean
8 something more than what you think. Do you have any proof at all that
9 Mr. Brdjanin ever organised ethnic cleansing or organised any camps --
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ackerman, this, I will not allow you to put this
11 question, because this is obviously a personal judgement of another
12 person. It's not a question of whether he has proof or not proof. This
13 is what at the time Mr. Krzic was making a statement believed. It's not a
14 question of whether he has proof or not.
15 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, Your Honour, my only point is that he made
16 the statement --
17 JUDGE AGIUS: So --
18 MR. ACKERMAN: And my question is whether it's true or not. I
19 think it's not. I want to ask him if he can justify it.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: You can only ask the witness whether he believes
21 that statement to be true but not what evidence or what proof he has that
22 Mr. Brdjanin was the right person for -- to commit all these activities.
23 MR. ACKERMAN: May I ask him, Your Honour, if he has any
24 justification beyond personal animus for having made the statement?
25 JUDGE AGIUS: No, of course not. That's even worse. That's even
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 worse. I mean, I notice that you skipped the previous sentence. And I
2 can understand why you skipped it, too.
3 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, let me find it. Maybe I won't skip it.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Oh, yes.
5 MR. ACKERMAN: "He is a man of hatred, of so little knowledge and
6 narrow perspective that he had no possibility to create anything
7 constructive." Is that the one you're referring to?
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Exactly. I mean, he is telling the interviewers
9 what is his personal assessment of Mr. Brdjanin is, and that's it. You
10 definitely know, as an experienced lawyer, Mr. Ackerman, that we are not
11 going to condemn anyone because one witness believes that that person is
12 capable of organising camps, deportation and whatever. What we will need
13 is evidence, not opinions or judgements on other persons.
14 MR. ACKERMAN: Thank you, Your Honour.
15 Q. Let me just ask this question, then, Mr. Krzic, about that entire
16 paragraph which begins, "Mr. Brdjanin," and ends, "morbid type." What
17 you're expressing there to the investigators is your personal opinion of
18 Mr. Brdjanin; correct?
19 A. My personal opinion is based on certain facts, nevertheless.
20 Q. Okay. I'll move on.
21 A. May I ask you a question, please?
22 JUDGE AGIUS: I have come across this several times before,
23 Mr. Krzic, and my answer has always been no. You're here to answer
24 questions and not to put questions. I won't even --
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's just that I omitted to say that
1 Mr. Karadzic actually confirmed my views.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: If you want to explain further, but very concisely,
3 what you mean, yes, but that's about it, and you're not entitled to put
4 questions to Mr. Ackerman.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: It's no problem. I mean, I don't need apologies.
7 Just go ahead. If you have a further statement to make, please go ahead
8 and make it.
9 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, if he wants to ask me questions after
10 the close of our session today, I won't object.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: No possibility of a dispensation here.
12 MR. ACKERMAN: I didn't think so.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Exactly. So let's go ahead and not waste time,
14 because we are wasting precious time.
15 MR. ACKERMAN: I'm sorry. I'll move.
16 Q. Mr. Krzic, between April and December of 1992, you were making
17 efforts to inform the world about the things that were happening in Banja
18 Luka, weren't you?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And to be able to do that, you made efforts to keep yourself aware
21 of the things that were happening in Banja Luka?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. You paid close attention to television and the radio and the
25 A. [No interpretation]
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Again, one moment, because I am not receiving any
3 THE INTERPRETER: Can you hear me now, Your Honour?
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I can hear you now. Thank you.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When you say "close attention," yes,
6 but I must qualify the statement because it was not always possible for me
7 to follow the media, because of frequent power shortages and things like
9 MR. ACKERMAN:
10 Q. Yes. Watching TV and sometimes listening to the radio was
11 difficult because there was no electricity a lot of the time; isn't that
13 A. True.
14 Q. How often during 1992 was the electricity non-existent?
15 A. It is almost impossible to answer that question. The question can
16 only be answered by the person who was in charge of power distribution. I
17 don't know.
18 Q. I think you said, and I can find it by next week, but you said at
19 one point, I think, that you were -- it was very rare that you were able
20 to run your fax machine because the power was off so much. So it was off
21 more than it was on; isn't that a fair statement?
22 A. I can only speculate. Perhaps it was 50/50.
23 Q. Okay. And that wasn't just for non-Serb residences but it was for
24 the entire city of Banja Luka; wasn't it?
25 A. Not exclusively, because there were certain areas of the town
1 which were more frequently cut off than others. Whether that was on
2 purpose or by coincidence, I don't know, but it was not uniform. That's
3 what I'm trying to say. The centre of the town was better supplied with
4 electricity than the outskirts of the town.
5 Q. Before 1992, the -- these problems with electricity were not
6 occurring with anywhere near this kind of frequency; were they?
7 A. To a lesser extent, at any rate, yes.
8 Q. Why is it that there was suddenly a power -- big power shortage in
9 Banja Luka, do you know? Do you know what happened?
10 A. I assume it was because of either a total or a partial breakdown
11 of electricity supply system throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina, and as the
12 war went on, this breakdown was getting more severe and becoming more
13 obvious. This is all common knowledge.
14 Q. Yesterday, you -- during your testimony, you talked about seeing
15 Mr. Brdjanin on TV a lot, and hearing him on the radio a lot, and you told
16 us about some of the things that you had heard him say.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And your testimony yesterday was that that was during this period
19 between April and December, 1992, that you heard him say these things.
20 A. Both in 1991 and 1992.
21 Q. Yes?
22 A. But also in 1993.
23 Q. Yes. Could I refer you, then, to page 20 of your statement? The
24 paragraph that begins with, "I met Mr. Brdjanin." I think it's the second
25 sentence in that paragraph.
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Says, with regard to Mr. Brdjanin, "He was very frequently on the
3 radio, TV and in the newspapers, especially in 1993. Before that, he was
4 obviously not considered respectable as a spokesperson of the SDS. In
5 1991 and 1992, he was rarely interviewed." That's what you said in your
6 statement, wasn't it?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. With regard to his 1993 television interviews, you say in your
9 statement that he tried to get himself on TV for discussions on regular
10 administrative questions.
11 A. Yes. That is my impression.
12 Q. I assume that somebody from the television station had told you
13 that Mr. Brdjanin was always trying to get on TV.
14 A. I believe that someone who was close to the TV circles told me
16 Q. Then you say that, "He tried to give the impression that he was a
17 man of power. The way he spoke through these interviews gave the
18 impression that he had played a very important role in Bosanska Krajina,
19 but he never directly said that he was responsible or had given orders."
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And that was interviews in 1993; correct?
23 A. Correct, yes, according to the statement here.
24 Q. Then you go on to say that, "His signature can be found on several
25 documents about ethnic cleansing and discrimination of non-Serbs." Do you
1 have those documents?
2 A. At this point, I cannot precisely refer to any document bearing
3 his signature. However, I think that the document from Celinac concerning
4 discrimination against non-Serb residents, which you have seen, I believe,
5 should be consulted for that purpose.
6 Q. Well, Mr. Brdjanin's name doesn't appear anywhere in that
7 document, does it?
8 A. I really cannot --
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, if you are going to ask such a direct
10 question, I would want to have this document shown to the witness so that
11 he is in a position to answer it, because otherwise he's going to
12 speculate whether there is Mr. Brdjanin's name or signature on that
13 document. He has specifically made reference to that document. Now he's
14 being asked a very specific question, too.
15 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, if there's anyone in the courtroom
16 that knows what exhibit it is --
17 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't know.
18 MR. ACKERMAN: -- I'd appreciate being told. Otherwise I'll just
19 plod along and find it. It will take me just a moment.
20 It's Exhibit 450A and B.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: It's one of the documents that was introduced
23 MR. ACKERMAN: Yes.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: It's the second document, actually. The first one
25 was 449.
1 Mr. Krzic, please first confirm whether that -- the document that
2 you are seeing now is the Celinac document that you referred to earlier on
3 a few moments ago.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Now perhaps you can answer Mr. Ackerman's question.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wanted this document to be checked
7 for presence, if any, of Mr. Brdjanin's signature on this document. I
8 don't have any other documents here at hand.
9 MR. ACKERMAN:
10 Q. Well, you don't see a signature on that document or his name, do
12 A. No, I cannot see a signature or a name.
13 Q. Mr. Krzic, yesterday during your testimony -- and for purposes of
14 the Prosecution and the record, I'm referring to the LiveNote transcript
15 at 13.11.04. That would be 13.11.04 through 13.11.17. I don't know how
16 else to refer to it other than the time of the -- in the transcript.
17 You said, Mr. Krzic, did you not, that -- with respect to things
18 that you heard Mr. Brdjanin say, that he had made some very dangerous
19 remarks to the effect that "the non-Serbian population were worms, lice,
20 insects that had to be trodden on." That's what you told the Trial
21 Chamber yesterday; correct?
22 A. Yes, I did.
23 Q. Did you personally hear Mr. Brdjanin make such statements?
24 A. Yes, I did.
25 Q. Now, if you personally heard Mr. Brdjanin make such statements,
1 then I must ask you why you would say in your statement at the bottom of
2 page 20: "It is known that he used such expressions," rather than, "I
3 personally heard Mr. Brdjanin say these things."
4 A. I did hear similar things, such as subversive elements. I had
5 even read such terms. I had heard him speak over the radio to the effect
6 that Bosniaks and Croats should be prevented from doing any political
7 work. He made similar statements for the press. And these statements
8 were generally known and reported by numerous people in Banja Luka.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman. When it's convenient for you to
10 stop your cross-examination for the day, please do, remembering that we
11 still require about five minutes for Ms. Korner to deal with some
12 organisational matters.
13 MR. ACKERMAN: It's convenient now, Your Honour. I've lost track
14 of time.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I think the witness can -- but we need to
16 explain to the witness that he needs to be here again --
17 MS. KORNER: Your Honours --
18 JUDGE AGIUS: That has been taken care of?
19 MS. KORNER: He knows that.
20 Perhaps Your Honour will be kind enough to explain something which
21 I don't think would have arisen before. It may be in the intervening
22 period that Mr. Krzic will meet potentially other witnesses. And if Your
23 Honour were to explain to him that he mustn't discuss the testimony he's
24 giving. Clearly, we can't speak to him because he's being cross-examined
25 at the moment.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: As I understood yesterday from what Mr. Cayley said,
2 that there won't be any other witnesses next week.
3 MS. KORNER: No, Your Honour. I mean in the future, not next
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Oh, I see. All right.
6 Mr. Krzic, have you heard what Prosecutor Ms. Korner has just
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: That is one of the most important principles that
10 you have to adhere to as a witness.
11 Do you understand me?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I understand you, Your Honour,
13 and I will adhere to that principle.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: You have not finished your evidence yet. There are
15 some further questions that you will be asked by the Defence counsel for
16 Mr. Brdjanin, following which there can be a re-examination from the
17 Prosecution, possibly one or two further questions, but also this Trial
18 Chamber may put questions to you. So it is important that between now and
19 whenever you will be asked to come again, to return here for the next
20 session of your evidence, you will not discuss these matters with anyone.
21 I have your word?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You do, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. I think you may withdraw now so that we
24 can discuss what we need to discuss. I thank you, Mr. Krzic. I thank
1 [The witness withdrew]
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Ms. Korner?
3 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, two very short matters. The first is
4 this: We applied to Your Honours for a reconsideration of the decision in
5 relation to protective measures, and I wonder whether Your Honours would
6 be able to give us a decision on that, perhaps by next Wednesday. I know
7 that people are disappearing, but clearly, we have to be in a position to
8 deal with the potential witnesses.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: What I can tell you is that it is being taken care
10 of. It presents more than one problem, not just the merits of it but also
11 organisational problem. That is being considered anyway. But
12 fortunately, between now and next Wednesday, there is ample time to go
13 deeper into the merit and to the problem, and -- the merits of the problem
14 and hopefully we will come down with a decision at our earliest. That's
15 number one.
16 MS. KORNER: Thank you very much. Your Honour, the second matter
17 relates to your colleagues in this case. I understand that Vasiljevic has
18 got various hearings still outstanding. I wonder whether that, for the
19 purposes of warning our witnesses, whether that would affect our trial at
20 all? It won't.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: No. I have made sure that that won't be the case.
22 So you can put your mind at rest. At least it's not anticipated, it's not
23 envisaged, and precautionary measures have been taken in that regard.
24 Anything else?
25 MS. KORNER: And the third matter is this, Your Honour: The
1 question of hearsay evidence arose yesterday. We intend, as Your Honour
2 knows, to deal with the question of admissibility, again, of disputed
3 documents. I'm hoping perhaps it may be resolved this afternoon in the
4 Status Conference, but if it isn't, we will be dealing with it.
5 In addition to that, I wonder if I may deal with the question of
6 hearsay, which was something that Your Honour did, in fact, make a ruling
7 about. But it seems to me that we perhaps need a little more
8 clarification, and I could deal with that at the same time.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, that chapter is closed and is not going to be
10 reopened, neither the chapter on admissibility in general nor the chapter
11 on hearsay. I don't agree with you that we have not been clear enough.
12 We have been abundantly clear. With regard to hearsay evidence, we made
13 it abundantly clear that that is not one of the established principles of
14 this Tribunal. It is a characteristic that belongs more or derives more
15 from the common law system than from other systems. This is a mixed
16 system. And that this Tribunal, following previous decisions in regard,
17 will adhere to what has been decided on previous occasions, that it is
18 certainly not an absolute rule in the common law and it is certainly less
19 absolute in this jurisdiction or in this Tribunal.
20 MS. KORNER: Your Honour is absolutely right. Your Honour made it
21 absolutely clear. All I wish to revisit is the way that Your Honour dealt
22 with yesterday the question of some of the documentation that was
23 submitted and how it applies, how the rule applies.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Which documentation?
25 MS. KORNER: Yesterday, Your Honour -- I only have the LiveNote
1 here. When Mr. Koumjian put in documents, I think the very first two
2 documents, from -- through Mr. Krzic, Your Honour raised the question --
3 in fact, this is the LiveNote version -- I'm conscious of the time.
4 Perhaps it would be better dealt with next week.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: It can be dealt with later but please be advised
6 that we don't agree with you that the matter on hearsay or the position of
7 this Trial Chamber on hearsay has not been clear enough. It has been
8 clear enough.
9 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, the position, Your Honour made
10 absolutely clear. It is what Your Honour said yesterday that I wanted to
12 JUDGE AGIUS: I still can't place what you are referring to
13 because the first two documents were not controversial.
14 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, it was a document looking at the --
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Reports of the -- internal reports by the party of
16 -- by the SDA, submitted to the -- Mr. Sacirbey in New York. And the
17 second one --
18 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, it was a document that was labelled,
19 "Personal testimony."
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Oh, yes. That's not 449.
21 MS. KORNER: No, no. It was an early document, as I say.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: The position was not exactly on whether it's hearsay
23 or not. What Mr. Koumjian was trying to introduce in this -- in the
24 records of this case was a statement made by unidentified people who
25 preferred to remain anonymous, depriving eventually the Defence from being
1 able to cross-examine those persons on the statements that they were
2 making, and that statement was being presented by a witness purportedly as
3 proving the contents thereof. It could never be accepted as a document
4 trying to prove the contents thereof.
5 MS. KORNER: That's just the problem, Your Honour, because that's
6 not quite what the authority says. Of course there are degrees. But
7 there are cases, and in the case where it's an unidentified witness,
8 obviously, but if it's a blanket rule that Your Honour is making that it
9 is -- that hearsay evidence can never be admitted --
10 JUDGE AGIUS: That specifically referred to that, directed to that
12 MS. KORNER: Very well.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: I think I made it clear that I would -- I wouldn't
14 have tolerate -- I couldn't tolerate a situation whereby the witness would
15 present that statement, say, "I had this statement made by a group of
16 persons who described themselves at the bottom of the page as a group of,"
17 without identifying their -- themselves, and then have it presented as a
18 document alleging this fact and that fact and that other fact, which form
19 actually the substance of some of the charges that are being brought
20 against the accused, and then have a situation obtain whereby Mr. Ackerman
21 and Maitre de Roux cannot cross-examine anyone upon those facts because
22 the authors of those -- of that document cannot be produced.
23 MS. KORNER: Yes, Your Honour, that is something that is going to
24 arise on a number of occasions.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: We will deal with it as it arises, and we will deal
1 with it in accordance with the importance of the document and whether
2 there is a substitute for that kind of evidence or proof.
3 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, perhaps the best thing to do, as
4 far as we are concerned, rather than take up more time, is to see what the
5 situation is next time it arises.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: In the meantime, also, if you are going to mention
7 anything about this particular subject, I would suggest you don't.
8 Okay, Mr. Ackerman, then, please.
9 MR. ACKERMAN: There is two things. One is just very tangentially
10 related to that subject, and that is, I wish we could have a rule that
11 when Your Honours make a ruling, that that be a ruling and --
12 JUDGE AGIUS: You don't need a ruling that a ruling is a ruling.
13 A ruling is always a ruling.
14 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, it seems like every day the Prosecutor wants
15 to --
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. But I have already stated that that chapter is
17 closed. It will not be reopened.
18 MR. ACKERMAN: Thank you.
19 Someone needs to inform Mr. Von Heble or some of your staff that
20 they should come collect us from the Defence room when they are ready
21 because we are second-class citizens here, and we're not allowed access to
22 most of this Tribunal. We just have --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Your client is in good company.
24 Ms. Jarvis will deal with that. Okay?
25 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
1 JUDGE AGIUS: I am being informed, Mr. Ackerman, that you do have
2 access to this room. It's one which is adjacent to Courtroom I, the
3 corridor, where there is the coffee machine and the toilet. No? It's
4 177, no?
5 MR. ACKERMAN: It's the room that's right next door to the Defence
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. The information that I received earlier is
8 obviously not the correct one upon cross-examination.
9 MS. KORNER: I don't think the Defence do have access. It's our
10 side of the hallway --
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Anyway, that will be looked into.
12 Yesterday, Ms. Korner, we discussed very shortly with Mr. Cayley
13 what will happen next week. Obviously, Mr. Krzic is going to be with us
14 again, so that the cross-examination will -- of Mr. Ackerman will be
15 terminated. Then there will be possibilities, as I said, for
16 re-examination, if it's the case, and for some questions on our side, if
17 it's the case, following which we discussed first whether it was wise or
18 practical to have another witness come over. And we agreed that it's not
19 a practical thing to do.
20 I would invite you -- like to invite you that you try to find time
21 in the two days we have next week to make some submissions, oral
22 submissions, on the -- on your request to have the statement of the dead
23 witness - I forgot his name now - be admitted into evidence. The reason
24 is that I -- if -- perhaps you could discuss it very briefly in the
25 presence of Mr. Von Hebel later on today. If there is agreement on the
1 part of the Defence that there's no objection to such an admission, then
2 you don't need to discuss. But already I have had an indication from
3 Mr. de Roux that there is an objection.
4 MS. KORNER: Yes.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: So we will need to go into that.
6 MS. KORNER: Yes. Your Honour may recall that I said that Your
7 Honours might feel that it was better left until we've heard in fact the
8 last witness, because he's going to be dealing with the military --
9 JUDGE AGIUS: I do recall that.
10 MS. KORNER: I'm perfectly prepared to argue it on the merits
11 without that, but the relevance or otherwise will become apparent when
12 that witness testifies.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: I --
14 MS. KORNER: But I'm prepared to do it next week if Your Honour
15 wants me to.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: The important thing is that if we eventually have to
17 come to that, that it will not stop us from -- in other words, at least if
18 we have the submissions, then if we have to cross that juncture, we will
19 be prepared for it and we would be able to do it straight away.
20 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm perfectly prepared if there's time
21 next week, which there probably will be, to deal with the matter then.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. If you could find time, I think that would be
24 MS. KORNER: Yes.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay? Thank you.
1 So we will continue on the 13th. That's Wednesday, Wednesday.
2 That's Wednesday. And we will continue with the cross-examination or
3 what's left of the cross-examination of -- yes, at 9.00 -- the
4 cross-examination of Mr. Krzic.
5 I thank you.
6 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned
7 at 1.57 p.m., to be reconvened on Wednesday,
8 the 13th day of February, 2002, at 9.00.