1 Wednesday, 29 May 2002
2 [Open session]
3 --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.
4 [The accused entered court]
5 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] Can you call the case,
7 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. This is the case number,
8 IT-99-36-T, the Prosecutor versus Radoslav Brdjanin and Momir Talic.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Brdjanin, good morning to you. Can you hear me
10 in a language that you can understand?
11 THE ACCUSED BRDJANIN: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honour.
12 I can hear you and understand you.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you. You may sit down.
14 General Talic, good morning to you. Can you hear me in a language
15 that you can understand?
16 THE ACCUSED TALIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. I
17 can hear you in a language I understand.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: In the meantime, while you are standing up, I have
19 checked with the office -- the Registry about progress that there is or
20 there may not be regarding the appointment of a new lead counsel. And
21 it's being attended to and there should be a reply very soon --
22 confirmation, in fact, very soon.
23 THE ACCUSED TALIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you. You may sit down.
25 Appearances for the Prosecution.
1 MS. KORNER: This morning very briefly, Joanna Korner, Andrew
2 Cayley -- not briefly Andrew Cayley but briefly me -- and assisted by
3 Denise Gustin, case manager.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Ms. Korner. Good morning to you.
5 Appearances for Radoslav Brdjanin.
6 MR. ACKERMAN: Good morning, Your Honours. I'm John Ackerman. I
7 appear this morning with Marela Jevtovic and Milan Trbojevic on behalf of
8 Mr. Brdjanin.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, and good morning to you, Mr. Ackerman.
10 Appearances for General Talic.
11 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Good morning,
12 Mr. President, Your Honours. I am Natasha Ivanovic-Fauveau and with
13 Fabien Masson I represent General Talic. I should like to inform you that
14 the registrar received yesterday all the necessary documents, and I think
15 that the designation of Mr. Zecevic will be completed very soon.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: I know. I checked with Mr. Rohde myself yesterday.
17 I understand Mr. Ackerman wants to raise some issue this morning
18 in private session. Is that correct, Mr. Ackerman?
19 MR. ACKERMAN: Yes, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Please let's go into private session and see
21 what it is about and then decide whether we stay in private session or
23 [Private session]
13 Page 6195 – redacted – private session
13 Page 6196 – redacted – private session
13 Page 6197 – redacted – private session
13 Page 6198 – redacted – private session
13 [Open session]
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Korner.
15 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm here to, as the expression is
16 sometimes put, grovel, both to the Court and --
17 JUDGE AGIUS: It's not unusual in this -- in this case.
18 MS. KORNER: Yes. Well, and really to the Defence. Your Honour,
19 it goes back to the question of Rasula's diary.
20 Your Honour, yesterday --
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
22 MS. KORNER: -- A matter arose about the adequacy of the
23 translation. And so as a result, we decided to resubmit and in particular
24 the disputed portion that relates to the meeting with General Talic on the
25 20th of April to be checked for the translation. In order to do that --
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Sorry about that, Ms. Korner.
2 MS. KORNER: That's all right. In order to do that, we went back
3 to the original scanned version to get -- to take it out for translation,
4 and what we then discovered -- I think I'd better show Your Honour
5 physically. We have copied the --
6 JUDGE AGIUS: This is document 759, if I remember well. No?
7 MS. KORNER: Yes, it is. And Your Honour the reason I'm here is
8 because I introduced it into evidence.
9 We've copied the page -- the part of the page that's been the
10 subject of such dispute that we provided to Your Honours and to Defence
11 counsel and the page as it appears on the system. Can I ask that that be
12 handed to Your Honours. And there's a copy for the registrar.
13 I think Your Honours will be able to see straight away that the
14 top part is the original scanned version. The bottom part is what we
15 provided. The words in Latin script do not appear on the original scanned
16 version. We've sent someone to the evidence unit to obtain the original
17 photocopy which has been stamped by the person who obtained the document
18 to show that that's a copy -- an accurate copy of the original diary. And
19 we haven't been able -- oh, I see somebody coming into court at this
20 moment, so that may be it. And I'll ask Mr. Cayley if he can -- yes, I
21 think it is -- just to check.
22 We don't know how it happened. We're just effectively surmising
23 that whoever first had a go at reading it -- who could read the
24 language -- had difficulty in reading those particular Cyrillic words and
25 so wrote it over the top in Latin script. And the words are in fact the
1 same as they appear in Cyrillic, but just -- the actual original words are
2 there but somebody has just written over the top in Latin script.
3 And Your Honour, I have here from the evidence unit where it's
4 been lodged since it was marked. And it's a certified copy of the
5 original diary. And I can hand it to Your Honour, but it's the same as --
6 those words in Latin script do not appear.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: The document that -- the document that you've just
8 handed us, Ms. Korner, seems or -- that these words in Latin script are
10 MS. KORNER: We've just highlighted them to pick them out.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
12 MS. KORNER: They're not highlighted on the copies that you had
13 earlier or my learned friend -- counsel for the Defence. But we thought
14 it was just easier to highlight it just to show Your Honour.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't think from my experience that this matter is
16 going to end here.
17 MS. KORNER: No.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: So I would imagine that for the time being, we can
19 leave it at that, and you prepare yourselves to bring forward whatever
20 evidence is necessary, first to explain --
21 MS. KORNER: Well, I think --
22 JUDGE AGIUS: What has happened.
23 MS. KORNER: We're going to make inquiries, clearly. But as I
24 say, this has been in the system -- or rather, in the Tribunal since
25 1996. We're going to see if we can find out how this happened. But I
1 have to say realistically I think it's going to be difficult unless we can
2 find out from records who first read the diary. The investigator or the
3 analyst who originally acquired it has left the Tribunal but is, I know,
4 contactable, so we'll start making inquiries to that.
5 The other thing we're going to do, clearly, Your Honour, because
6 of all the -- the cross-examination and the suggestions that have been
7 made about this diary is that we are going to obtain, we hope, the actual
8 original diary itself from Sanski Most. But Your Honour, I'm sorry. I'm
9 afraid everybody, including us -- I mean, because we hadn't really looked
10 at the B/C/S -- was misled by that.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, usually when you copy -- if you feel you
12 shouldn't answer the question now, then don't answer it. But what puzzles
13 me a little bit at this point in time is not exactly what happened. There
14 may or may not be an explanation forthcoming for that. But what puzzles
15 me for the time being is when you prepare the document for the Defence and
16 for us and for the rest of the team, that is, when you photocopy the
17 document that you have, which document do you use? Because it seems that
18 from Sanski Most, you had a photocopy of the original. The original, I
19 think, if I understood Judge Draganovic well, is still in Sanski Most.
20 MS. KORNER: That's absolutely right. And this is the original
21 photocopy with a stamp on the back.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: That photocopy does not contain the script in Latin
24 MS. KORNER: That's correct.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: So when you photocopied to us our copy, you must
1 have used a copy which was not a photocopy of the original but a photocopy
2 of a photocopy on which notes had been put or additions made. I mean, I
3 am asking this because if you look -- and I have looked. Even I don't --
4 I don't understand a single word of this language, but I have gone through
5 just out of curiosity what appears on the face of this document. And
6 there are cancellations. There are words that are underlined. There are
7 words that are cancelled, struck off. There are arrows. There are sort
8 of additional notes. There are circles round certain numbers. I want to
9 make sure that --
10 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I -- first of all can I explain. It
11 happened once before, Your Honour may recall. I think when I was dealing
12 with some of the Banja Luka documents, I noted that we had photocopied a
13 particular document with one of the team's handwriting on it.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
15 MS. KORNER: And immediately I said we'll replace it.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: There were others. There were others apart from
17 that too.
18 MS. KORNER: I'm afraid -- I have no objection at all of telling
19 Your Honour what's actually happened. A photocopy of -- because the
20 original has to be placed in the evidence unit and only brought out by
21 signing various documents, a photocopy was kept within the Office of the
22 Prosecutor itself, and that photocopy was used for the purposes of
23 providing the translation. And what must have happened -- and I can only
24 surmise -- is that when we copied for the purposes of handing it to Your
25 Honours and the Defence -- and the Defence have had this document -- it
1 was disclosed to them some considerable time ago in B/C/S even before the
2 translation was obtained -- we copied in error -- we should have gone back
3 to the original. And that's something we'll have to remember from now
4 on -- the copy that remained in a folder within the Office of the
5 Prosecutor itself. And unbeknownst to us, somebody had written -- as Your
6 Honours will see, none of that underlining appears on the original. What
7 we're going to do now is we're going to re-photocopy from the original
8 stamped confirmed copy the whole diary, because it seems to me that's the
9 only way we can be sure that what Your Honours and the Defence have is
10 what we have. And we're going to resubmit -- Mr. Cayley helpfully reminds
11 me -- all the relevant parts that are in dispute for translation.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Mr. Ackerman and Madam Fauveau, do you have
13 anything to say at this junction about this or not, or do you reserve your
14 position until later when we have more information?
15 MR. ACKERMAN: Some I will reserve, Your Honour. I just -- there
16 are a number of documents that are in evidence in this case that have
17 underlining and -- and marks and things like that. And one begins to
18 wonder if those are part of the original document the Prosecution has or
20 I also seem to recall, and I would want to check the transcript
21 before I go much further with this -- but I seem to recall that the
22 witness Draganovic testified that on the original which he has in Sanski
23 Most, this Latin script appears. I think he gave -- I think he gave that
24 testimony. But I'm not positive.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't remember, Mr. -- I don't think so, but he
1 was asked to explain how there is Latin script in a document which is
2 otherwise entirely written in Cyrillic script, and he said "I don't have
3 an explanation." But he -- I don't recall him saying that he was aware of
4 the Latin script as -- having gone through the original himself. I don't
5 recall that, anyway.
6 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, your recollection is usually better than
7 mine, Your Honour, so you're probably correct.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, it's not a question of comparison, but -- I
9 don't recall. I mean, I'm not excluding that he may have said so, but I
10 don't think he did.
11 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I can't recall. But as Your Honour --
12 as I said to Your Honour, I have a number of matters I have to see to
13 today, so I'm going to check the transcript myself.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I very much appreciate that, Ms. Korner. What
15 I certainly would encourage you to do is to make sure that not where there
16 is underlining, because this Tribunal is not going to be impressed by the
17 fact that a certain name appears to be underlined or a certain phrase
18 appears to be underlined. I think we are above that. However, in the
19 document itself, there are entire lines that are cancelled.
20 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I say -- we're going to re-photocopy
21 from the originals --
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, please.
23 MS. KORNER: -- In the evidence unit and provide it.
24 And Your Honour, there's no doubt at all and I take on board
25 entirely what Mr. Ackerman says -- we're going to have to double-check now
1 particularly for future documents that any underlining or things that
2 appear on it appear on the original that we have. I mean, it's a major
3 job. But Mr. Ackerman is absolutely right.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: I know. And that's the last thing we needed.
5 MS. KORNER: We need to do a double-check, and I'll start that
6 process going immediately.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Madam Fauveau, would you like to put in your
8 contribution on this or reserve your position?
9 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I should like to say that
10 clearly the document that we received is a document that is not authentic.
11 The suggestion of Madam Korner to give us a copy of an original copy will
12 not assist the Defence of General Talic. I think we need to have the
13 original, which is in Sanski Most, and that the Prosecutor should allow us
14 to examine that real original --
15 MS. KORNER: [Previous translation continues] ... we're going to
16 attempt -- I can't promise that we can, because it's not ours to take.
17 But we are going to attempt to get the actual original diary brought up
18 here so that it can be examined by whoever wants to.
19 Your Honour, all I can say is I'm sorry. I --
20 JUDGE AGIUS: If you have difficulties, I think I can offer you a
21 solution that I think under the Statute itself and under the Rules we are
22 authorised if needs be to ask the particular State who has the overall
23 responsibility of the custody of the document by way of cooperation to
24 furnish the document with the undertaking of this Tribunal to have it
25 returned through diplomatic channels as soon as it has served its
1 purpose. So that can be done.
2 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I don't anticipate there'll be any real
4 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't know. I don't know, Ms. Korner.
5 MS. KORNER: And if we do need to get an order from Your Honour,
6 then we'll apply from it.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, thank you.
8 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, unless there are any other questions on
9 this matter, can I take it that however Defence counsel would like -- I
10 heard what Madam Fauveau said -- but would like a new photocopy of the
11 original photocopy. Yes, she's nodding.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: I think so. Yes. It's not only fair but it's
13 important. She based part of her defence of General Talic precisely on
14 the fact that there seem to be an -- an addition to -- so --
15 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, I think it's perhaps also salutary
16 to remember that before one shouts fraud or forgery, to wait and see. But
17 Your Honour, there's no doubt about it, it's our fault, and we do
19 JUDGE AGIUS: No problem, Ms. Korner. This Chamber does not doubt
20 the -- the good faith of yourself.
21 MS. KORNER: Thank you very much.
22 Your Honour, in that case, I wonder if Your Honour would be --
23 Your Honours would be kind enough to excuse me and Mr. Cayley will
24 continue with --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, of course. I thank you, Ms. Korner. And
1 Mr. Cayley is ready, and Madam Fauveau, we can call the witness. And
2 Madam Fauveau can start with her cross-examination.
3 I forgot to ask Ms. Korner whether this was just shown to the
4 Trial Chamber or whether it's going to be tendered in -- as an exhibit.
5 MR. CAYLEY: I -- I don't think the intention is to submit it as
6 an exhibit, because what we will do is re-submit the version which doesn't
7 have these annotations as an exhibit.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. But she has a right to if she wants to. I
9 think we can leave it at that for the time being. We know that there will
10 be developments on this issue later on.
11 [The witness entered court]
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning to you, Mr. Karabeg.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Can I -- may I kindly ask you to repeat the solemn
15 declaration once more, please, before you start -- recommence your
16 evidence. 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: MIRZET KARABEG [Resumed]
20 [Witness answered through interpreter]
21 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, sir. You may sit down.
22 As I explained to you yesterday, you're now going to be
23 cross-examined by the Defence teams. First go is by the Defence team of
24 General Momir Talic.
25 Madam Fauveau, when you're ready, you may proceed. Thank you.
1 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
2 Cross-examined by Ms. Fauveau-Ivanovic:
3 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, sir. In the hearing of 27 May
4 2002, page 34 of the LiveNote, you spoke about a meeting that took place
5 in Banja Luka in March 1991. Do you have a recollection of this?
6 A. Yes, I do.
7 Q. You stated that the representatives of 17 municipalities attended
8 that meeting. Can you tell us which municipalities were represented at
9 that meeting.
10 A. I can. Sanski Most, Kljuc, Prijedor, Banja Luka, Kotor Varos,
11 Bosanska Dubica, Bosanska Gradiska, Celinac, Laktasi, Kotor Varos,
12 Bosanska Gradiska, Bosanska Dubica, Bosanski Novi. I don't know whether
13 they are all these 17 which belonged to the Banja Luka area, belonging --
14 the Banja Luka region belonging to Bosanska Krajina.
15 Q. You said that you received an invitation to that meeting. Was
16 that invitation made out in your name?
17 A. No. I found it on my table, on my desk.
18 Q. Then how do you know that that invitation was meant for you?
19 A. Well, that was my assumption. I didn't know. I was the member of
20 the executive board. And in such a situation, if the president of the
21 municipality couldn't attend, it would be then his second person, namely,
22 the president of the executive council, to go. Rasula was not -- was not
23 in Sanski Most at the time, and that is why this invitation came --
24 arrived to my office. And let me also add that I also asked the president
25 of the municipality of -- Muhamed Cehajic why didn't he attend, and he
1 said he did not receive the invitation. And the president of that
2 municipality, Muhamed Cehajic is a Bosniak. Then I leave it to you
3 to conclude what was happening at the time.
4 Q. Prior to the elections of 1990, Sanski Most municipality was
5 indeed part of the association of Banja Luka municipalities; is this
7 A. Yes, indeed. Bosanska Krajina -- of Bosanska Krajina.
8 Q. And the municipalities which you have just named, Kljuc, Prijedor,
9 Bosanska Dubica, Bosanska Gradiska, Celinac, Laktasi -- were also
10 municipalities that were part of the association of Banja Luka
11 municipalities, or as you say -- as you call it, Bosanska Krajina; is that
12 the case?
13 A. Yes, that's the way it was. Bosnia and Herzegovina was divided
14 into these regions. That was within the framework of Yugoslavia.
15 Q. Did you discuss this meeting with Rasula when you returned from
16 Banja Luka?
17 A. No, I did not, because at that time I knew that he was attending
18 similar such meetings.
19 Q. And yet you said here in the hearing of 27 May that you enjoyed
20 very good relations with Rasula, that you had coffee together every
22 A. Well, also after that I would -- I was drinking coffee with him
23 every morning, and I had very good relations with him.
24 Q. Did you tell him that you had attended that meeting?
25 A. Yes, I did.
1 Q. You made a written statement to the Prosecutor's office in 1999;
2 is this true?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And you also made a statement in Bosnia in 1995; is this accurate?
5 A. Yes. I gave quite a number of statements.
6 Q. Did you make any other statements apart from the two that I have
8 A. Let me tell you. Yes, I did. Yes. While I was living -- I was
9 evicted to the court in Zenica. Then I made many statements to the
10 media. I made a statement for the TV of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a
11 witness of the programme "Witness to genocide." And I will be giving
12 statements also in the future, because this is something which should not
13 be forgotten.
14 Q. In those statements, in the official statements that you made in
15 Bosnia before the courts and the statement that you gave to the
16 Prosecutor's office, you never mentioned the meeting -- this meeting which
17 took place in March 1991. Why is that?
18 A. Well, look, there are many -- many things that at present I
19 haven't even touched upon. Yesterday and the day before yesterday -- this
20 is just one small part of what I have brought forward.
21 Q. You also mentioned in the hearing of 27 May, page 39 of the
22 LiveNote, about military manoeuvres which took place in Bosanski Kljuc and
23 you said that these manoeuvres were unusual, given the war in Croatia. Do
24 you recall this?
25 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter corrects. Sanski Most and Kljuc.
1 A. Yes. Yes, because I cannot remember even today whether this was
2 before, prior to the war in Croatia or after the war began in Croatia.
3 But I do recollect that it began in 1991, these exercises. And I knew
4 they were unusual.
5 Q. Why do you consider that this was unusual?
6 A. Well, they were unusual due to the fact that we said that these
7 were exercises of TO of Sanski Most, Kljuc, Bosanska Krupa and Petrovac
8 and that the mayors of all these four municipalities gave their approval
9 for the participation of the TO units. And when I spoke with the
10 president of the municipality of Bosanska Krupa, he told me that -- he
11 disclosed to me that he gave no approval whatsoever concerning the
12 organisation and the implementation of these exercises. Yes, and now I
13 remember that also Bosanski Petrovac was included, because I remember that
14 also the mayor of Bosanski Petrovac and the member -- president of the
15 executive committee came both to Kljuc and to Sanski Most. And --
16 however, yesterday I would have stated in no uncertain terms that they did
17 not participate. But 11 years have passed, and one cannot recollect
18 everything immediately.
19 Q. Concerning Bosanska Krupa, could you specify what occurred there,
20 if you are aware of it. Do you mean to say that the representative of
21 Bosanska Krupa refused that the Bosanska Krupa people take part in this
22 exercise and that -- and that the residents of Bosanska Krupa nevertheless
23 did participate, or are you saying that the representatives of Bosanska
24 Krupa did not agree and that they therefore did not participate?
25 A. Well, he was not for it, and they did not participate in these
2 Q. Is it not true that in effect this fact that the residents of
3 Bosanska Krupa did not take part in the exercises an unusual act and not
4 the exercise in and of itself?
5 A. They were not held on the territory of Bosanska Krupa, and neither
6 did the inhabitants of Bosanska Krupa participate in them. You see, the
7 decision whether to participate or not is taken by the competent
9 Q. And this fact, the fact that the residents of Bosanska Krupa did
10 not participate, is an unusual event; is this accurate?
11 A. Yes, it is. Yes, it was unusual for me because I received
12 information that they had approved it and that they would be
14 Q. The military exercise in itself was a perfectly habitual event.
15 Is this accurate?
16 A. Well, as I already stated yesterday, I've seen these similar
17 exercises in 1981, 1982, while I was still employed in the local authority
18 bodies of Sanski Most, and I participated.
19 Q. Thus the military exercise in itself was not unusual.
20 A. They were not unusual -- they would not have been unusual if it
21 was a usual, normal time. But this wasn't the normal time for such
23 Q. Why?
24 A. Well, the situation in Yugoslavia, the war breaking out in
25 Yugoslavia, and the disintegration of Yugoslavia.
1 Q. And in what way? Is it the case that the dangerous situation
2 should prevent military exercises?
3 A. Well, it had then later shown itself how. Everything happened, as
4 was foreseen in these military exercises. The red and the blue. And
5 they -- also the attacks were carried out on the basis of the scenarios
6 played out during the exercises.
7 Q. The Muslim population had been convened -- took part in this
9 A. Yes, it was. And it also responded. Not only the Muslim
10 population but also the Croat population.
11 Q. So this exercise was not the exercise which had been foreseen for
12 the Serbian population.
13 A. Absolutely. Yes. That was the population of Sanski Most.
14 Q. The entire population without any regard to nationality?
15 A. That's right. That's right.
16 Q. On 27 May, page 40 of the LiveNote, you mentioned explosions in
17 Sanski Most. You stated that 42 buildings had been hit by explosions on
18 one or several occasions. Do you maintain that assertion?
19 A. Yes, I do.
20 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Can the Prosecutor submit
21 to the witness the written statement of July 1999 in Serbo-Croatian.
22 Well, I believe that I will have a bit of a problem explaining
23 where to find the paragraph I'm interested in, because the declaration --
24 the statement that I have does not have numbered paragraphs. I can only
25 indicate that in English you have the Prosecutor's number 00838026 on top
1 of the page.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] Tell me --
3 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: The Serbo-Croat version of the statement which is --
5 what is the reference number at the top of the page? And I can direct the
6 witness to it.
7 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Well, I don't have the
8 version in Serbo-Croatian. I only have the English version.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: [Previous translation continues] ...
10 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] And on the English version,
11 it's 00838026.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
13 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I believe that Mr. Cayley
14 will save me from the situation.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: [Previous translation continues] ...
16 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] In English, it's the first
17 paragraph, the penultimate sentence.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: So I think you have to refer the witness to page 8
19 first of the Serbo-Croat statement, starting with the last two lines,
20 [B/C/S spoken], and then continue over the first two lines on the next
22 Have you found that paragraph, Mr. Karabeg?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I have, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Madam Fauveau, you may ask the question now,
1 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Well, if you look on the top of page 9 in the Serbo-Croatian
3 version, you said: [In English] "28 shops, cafes, and restaurants were
4 destroyed in Sanski Most area."
5 A. That was -- up till that executive board meeting when I requested
6 that the perpetrators were to be found and determined. And I said that
7 from then on, that the explosions increased and that in the period from
8 the 20th to the 25th of May, even up to two explosions per day occurred,
9 because here I state that I said twice at the meeting of the executive
10 board. And that was up till then.
11 Q. [Interpretation] Can you tell us at what time this was.
12 A. That was the beginning of April. It means after the assembly
13 stopped meeting, it was the 6th of -- 7th of April. And the work which
14 was carried out by the legal authorities, the legal bodies of Sanski
15 Most. After the assembly, it stopped meeting. The executive board never
16 met again.
17 Q. So until the beginning of April -- by the beginning of April, 28
18 buildings had been destroyed or damaged in Sanski Most by explosions.
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. You also mentioned grenades that had been launched on the mosque
21 of Kamengrad. What is the distance between Sanski Most and the mosque?
22 A. I wasn't speaking about bombs. I spoke of two grenades which were
23 launched. And the distance between Donji Kamengrad and Sanski Most is 7
24 kilometres between the two, and I'm speaking about Donji Kamengrad,
25 because there's also Gornji or upper Kamengrad.
1 Q. And then you went on the spot to where these explosions had taken
3 A. Yes. Yes, I did.
4 Q. Did you notice any damage?
5 A. No, I did not. They were -- they fell into the courtyard of the
7 Q. And in the courtyard, did you see traces of the explosions?
8 A. Let me tell you. I did. I did, and the representatives of the
9 official organs were here. The investigator, the police force were
10 there. And in the next few days, the -- an investigation was carried out
11 by the lawful authorities, the lawful law and order authorities.
12 Q. On 27 May, page 45 of the LiveNote, you explained the procedure
13 for documents, and you stated that the documents that remained in the file
14 did not carry a stamp. In other words, those sent to the recipient did
15 carry a stamp. Do you recall this?
16 A. Yes, I do. Yes.
17 Q. Is it not true to say that the copies sent to the recipient are in
18 fact copies?
19 A. Well, let me put it -- according to our provisions, when a
20 document is drafted, you first draft it, and it's clear that it has to be
21 placed in the files. One copy is then registered in the protocol with the
22 date, with the registration number, the signature, because the authorised
23 person today can take out this document, then place a stamp -- stamp it,
24 and then send it to the addressees. And I don't know whether you're
25 informed -- to what extent you're informed. Here in the west the
1 signature is the most important factor. While in our country, it was
2 important to have also the stamp next to the signature, because such
3 document -- if a stamp was placed immediately, it could be abused or
4 misused. And that is why the file -- in the file we place a document
5 without a stamp, with the signature but without a stamp.
6 Q. Well, you do agree that all the copies sent to the recipient must
7 carry the stamp.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. You spoke also of inspectors who carried money to the army in
10 Titova Korenica, page 47 of the LiveNote. And you said that one of them
11 lost a piece of paper that was later published by a journal in Sarajevo.
12 Do you remember that?
13 A. Yes, I do.
14 Q. Did you personally see this lost original document? I'm not
15 talking about what was published in the newspaper but the actual document
17 A. I did not.
18 Q. Could you tell us the name of this inspector that was involved in
19 this case.
20 A. The head of the crime service of the police administration in
21 Sanski Most, Dobrijevic. I think his first name is Mirko. The surname
22 is right. No. No. I'm sorry. Dosenovic, Dosenovic. And I think his
23 first name is Milan. Anyway, the head of the crime department in Sanski
24 Most at the time.
25 Q. You spoke of helicopters that went to Serb villages, and you said
1 that those helicopters were military helicopters because there were no
2 other helicopters flying in the area at the time; is that right?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Is it right to say that in fact you suppose that they were
5 military helicopters because you assumed that there were no other
6 helicopters in the area?
7 A. Yes. I didn't say that I saw any insignia on the helicopters
8 close up. That was my assumption, my assertion, and that is true, and it
9 proved to be true.
10 Q. But as far as you are concerned, it is your supposition, is it
12 A. Yes. I didn't see any symbols on them, because after all, the
13 distance was some 2 kilometres, and they were flying in the opposite
14 direction and not over my head.
15 Q. Is it not correct to say that at the time, that is, March, April
16 1992, in that area members of certain international organisations and
17 international missions deployed there did move around in helicopters?
18 A. Not at that time. There were no missions. I would have liked to
19 have seen that helicopter land in Kamengrad, Donji, Gornji, at least in
20 the villages with mixed populations but not villages with 90 per cent Serb
22 Q. But the mission of the European observers was present in the
23 region, wasn't it?
24 A. You know when the European observers arrived. And when you ask me
25 about them and contacting with them before the war and after the war, I
1 had joked with them and I said, "Your white uniforms were a symbol from
2 Japan, because in Japan too that was a sign of something bad." And your
3 arrival heralded the worst thing that happened to us and our people." And
4 as for when the European observers arrived, you know that. Towards the
5 end of 1991.
6 Q. But they were still in the area at the beginning of 1992, weren't
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And they travelled in helicopters.
10 A. But that was before their arrival, not as early as you perhaps
11 think, April and May 1992. And especially when a helicopter flies to a
12 village called Dabar, with 100 per cent Serb population, and within a
13 range of some 20 kilometres -- I mean, the diameter of the village is
14 about 20 kilometres. It's a big village. I mean area-wise. It covers a
15 large area. Then it is quite easy to arrive there without anyone noticing
16 it, using the hills and mountains of Grmec as concealment.
17 Q. You are saying that this was before the European observers
18 arrived. Could you specify when this was?
19 A. In 1991. I have not remembered the exact day or month.
20 Q. But in 1991, there was no prohibition on flights in Bosnia, was
22 A. I think there's no point in that question. I don't know whether
23 there was any prohibition. I was not aware of it. There were over
24 flights in June and July of 1992 as well.
25 Q. So in fact, there were other helicopters in addition to JNA
1 helicopters flying in the area in 1991 and 1992.
2 A. I did not see them, but I'm still claiming that they were army
3 helicopters delivering weapons to the Serb people, which we established
4 later. Because in the evening, the lights would go on in a house
5 inhabited by a Serb, and in front of his door weapons would be left, and
6 there were a couple of Bosniaks who just happened to have their lights on,
7 so they too had weapons left at their doorstep.
8 Q. My question was whether at the time there were other helicopters
9 flying there apart from JNA helicopters.
10 A. Let me tell you. I cannot claim 100 per cent that there were no
11 other helicopters.
12 Q. So you allow for the possibility that there were others.
13 A. I don't know.
14 Q. Very well.
15 You spoke of your arrest at a checkpoint in March 1992 when you
16 were returning from Sarajevo, and you said that you were arrested by a
17 joint patrol from the police station of Mrkonjic Grad and -- consisting of
18 police and JNA members; is that right?
19 A. Yes.
20 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the registrar give
21 the witness P604, 604, Exhibit 604.
22 Q. On that occasion, you were together with Mr. Redzo Kurbegovic; is
23 that right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And the exhibit you have before you is a statement by Redzo
1 Kurbegovic immediately after that arrest; is that right?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. In that statement -- and we find it in the first paragraph --
4 Mr. Kurbegovic said that you were arrested by joint patrol of the Mrkonjic
5 Grad police station, in brackets, the public security station, and by
6 members of the JNA, in brackets, Red Berets. Is it not true that members
7 of the JNA did not wear red berets?
8 A. I didn't understand your question.
9 Q. Do you know that members of the JNA did not wear red berets?
10 A. I saw them in those barracks.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. One moment, Madam Fauveau, because the
12 witness is in my opinion trying to avoid answering the question.
13 The question is not whether you saw the soldiers wearing red
14 berets on that occasion. The question is whether you are aware that JNA
15 soldiers never wore red berets; in other words, that the soldiers wearing
16 red berets on that occasion couldn't have been soldiers of the JNA but
17 other kinds of soldiers. This is the question.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I did understand the lady very
19 well. That was the first time that I saw members of the army wearing red
20 berets, members of the Yugoslav army.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I think that should satisfy you,
22 Madam Fauveau, and you may proceed with the next question. Thank you.
23 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. How did you know that they were members of the army?
25 A. By their uniforms in the barracks. Doesn't that speak for
2 Q. Did you understand straight away that these were members of the
4 A. I did. And I can't remember now. I had the telephone number of a
5 colonel in Banja Luka that I wanted to call up, but they wouldn't let me
6 do that.
7 Q. Could you look at page 5 of your statement in the Serbo-Croatian
8 language and the page ending 022 of the English version, last paragraph --
9 ERN number 022, last paragraph.
10 Regarding the Serbo-Croatian version, it is the last paragraph on
11 page 5, which goes on to page 6. And you stated: [In English] "I later
12 learned those with red berets were from Knin. They were Kninjas. They
13 were a special police group within the regular army."
14 A. That is the JNA in those days. In those days, there was the
15 territory of Yugoslavia. Whether it was Knin or Banja Luka or Zagreb or
16 Belgrade, it didn't matter. The only thing that matters was the military
17 district that they belonged to. I mentioned this because it was strange
18 for me to see for the first time these people wearing red berets.
19 Q. [Interpretation] But what I'm interested in is that in this
20 statement, you said, "I later learned." I would like to know when did you
21 learn that these people belonged to the JNA, later or straight away?
22 A. I knew it straight away. But here I said that I learnt later who
23 those people with red berets were, that they were special units from Knin
24 who were dispatched to the area of Bosnia-Herzegovina, specifically to
25 Krajina, to conduct exercises, training for misdeeds.
1 Q. So these people were from Knin, were they not? So you maintain
2 what you said in your statement.
3 A. Yes. I'm not claiming that they were from Knin. I'm claiming who
4 else these people wearing JNA uniforms and red berets could have been.
5 Q. And all this happened in March 1992.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. A moment ago you told me that it was Yugoslavia in those days. In
8 March 1992 Croatia was independent, was it not?
9 A. You say that.
10 Q. The recognition of the independence of Croatia, did it not happen
11 on the 15th of January, 1992?
12 A. I don't know. You say that, again.
13 Q. You said that you were taken to the barracks. Where was the
14 barracks? Where is it?
15 A. The barracks is situated about 4 to 5 kilometres from that road.
16 And if you were to take me there now to show you where the barracks is, I
17 would not be able to show it to you. I would not be able to find it.
18 Q. Would you accept that there was no military JNA barracks within
19 that area, that is, the area of Mrkonjic Grad?
20 A. At the time, there was. These were huts, prefabricated huts.
21 Q. How did you know that they belonged to the JNA?
22 A. Well, who was in them? I'm not talking about ownership. We are
23 talking about who was in those premises and who was in possession of them
24 at the time.
25 Q. That is exactly what I'm asking you. How did you know that the
1 people who were there belonged to the JNA?
2 A. They were dressed in uniform. They were not naked, if you -- as
3 you're forcing me to be rude. They were wearing uniforms with insignia.
4 And I mentioned that I found it strange that most of them - not all of
5 them - most of them were wearing red berets.
6 Q. There were no paramilitary groups in Bosnia at the time?
7 A. What do you mean?
8 Q. You never heard mention of the SOS group or, I don't know, the
9 White Eagles, for instance, or Red Berets for that matter?
10 A. Let me see. If you're talking about me and the region I come
11 from, that was at the beginning when these started appearing.
12 Q. Would you allow for the possibility that the person you saw and
13 who arrested you on your way back from Sarajevo belonged to a paramilitary
15 A. No, because one member of the army was from Tuzla, of Croat
16 ethnicity, Vinko, who helped us at that point in time. And things would
17 have been much worse if it hadn't have been for him.
18 Q. So this Croat had authority over the others; is that what you're
20 A. No. No, that was not what I said. I said that he helped me.
21 Q. How could he have helped you if he had no authority?
22 A. You see, you want to beat me, and he dissuades you from doing that
23 and manages to do so. That's what I meant. Also during the
24 interrogation, he stops it. He says, "Stop it. That's enough. Can't you
25 say that they're all right?" Otherwise, it could have gone on for much
1 longer than four and a half hours if it hadn't have been for him.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Madam Fauveau, we approximately have another two,
3 three minutes. If it's convenient for you to stop here. We'll stop here.
4 Otherwise we'll continue for the next --
5 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Microphone not activated]
6 THE INTERPRETER: No microphone. Sorry.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: It's okay. I understood her.
8 Go ahead.
9 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. In any event, can we agree that the others were listening to what
11 this Croat was saying even though he had no official authority?
12 A. No, we can't.
13 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I think I'll leave it at
14 that, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you, Madam Fauveau.
16 The witness can be escorted out. We are going to have a short
17 break of 30 minutes, and we will resume at 11.00 sharp. Thank you.
18 --- Recess taken at 10.29 a.m.
19 --- On resuming at 11.00 a.m.
20 MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, while the -- excuse me, Ms. Fauveau.
21 While the witness is coming in, just one matter that
22 Mr. Ackerman --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: The accused are not here.
24 MR. CAYLEY: On what Judge Draganovic said about Rasula's diary,
25 your recollection.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah. But let's wait -- wait for the accused to
2 come in -- to be brought in.
3 Yes, Mr. Cayley.
4 MR. CAYLEY: Very quickly, your recollection was correct, Your
5 Honour, of what Mr. Draganovic said. I won't read it out. It can be
6 found at pages 5805 and 5807 of the official transcript.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you, Mr. Cayley.
8 Yes, Mr. Ackerman.
9 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I gave you a list this morning of
10 documents I would be using --
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Actually, yes. I was going to query
12 whether -- which is yours and which is Madam Fauveau's, but I suppose that
13 the one which is yours starts with P604; correct?
14 MR. ACKERMAN: No. It says "counsel for Brdjanin" on it.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Oh, I see. P69. All right. Okay.
16 MR. ACKERMAN: I have three documents that I want to that,
17 as a result of what has gone on so far this morning.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
19 MR. ACKERMAN: P626.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: P626.
21 MR. ACKERMAN: P630.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: 630.
23 MR. ACKERMAN: P694.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: 694. And you have increased your list or made some
25 changes to your list this morning. Yes.
1 Yes. Mr. Ackerman, just to confirm with you, we also have -- been
2 given what purports to be documents later to be introduced by you, which
3 is DB84; is that correct?
4 MR. ACKERMAN: Yes, Your Honour. It's a document that was
5 included as an attachment to the materials provided by the Prosecutor with
6 regard to this witness, and I think we were not supplied a B/C/S
7 translation of that document or any explanation that I could find of what
8 it is. But I think on the face of it it's fairly clear what it is.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you.
10 Madam Fauveau, you may proceed. Thank you.
11 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Prior to the pause, we mentioned your arrest at the checkpoint
13 upon your return from Sarajevo to Banja Luka. You stated on 27 May, page
14 52 of the record, that you went to Sarajevo on official business on behalf
15 of the municipality. Is this accurate? And you were with Redzo
17 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Whose, mine?
19 THE INTERPRETER: The witness's microphone.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Sorry about that. Please. Thank you.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] No. It's not your
23 fault. Don't worry.
24 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Mr. Redzo Kurbegovic is the chairman or the president of the SDA
1 in Sanski Most; is that accurate?
2 A. Yes, it is.
3 Q. Is it the case that Mr. Kurbegovic went to the same meeting that
4 you attended in Sarajevo?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Can you tell us why you went to Sarajevo.
7 A. I went to Sarajevo to the republican road administration, in
8 order to complete the financing of works on the road Sanski Most-Banja
9 Luka via Majdan and Sasine, and Redzo Kurbegovic went for other
10 business -- party business. And since he didn't have a specific date to
11 attend to that business, he joined me.
12 Q. You stated that the last meeting of the Municipal Assembly of
13 Sanski Most took place on the 6th and 7th of April, 1992. Is this
15 A. Not and, but or. Either the 6th or the 7th of April, because the
16 session did not last for two days.
17 Q. Is it the case that the 6th of April is the day that the
18 independence of Bosnia was recognised?
19 A. I believe it was so.
20 Q. At the hearing of 27 May, page 62 of the LiveNote, you stated that
21 the 6th Brigade arrived in Sanski Most at the beginning of April 1992; is
22 that the case?
23 A. Yes, I believe it was so. But I believe it was at the beginning
24 of that month, but I cannot tell you the precise date.
25 Q. Could you turn to your written statement. It's in the page ending
1 in number 022 in the English version, page 5 of the Serbo-Croatian
2 version. It's the paragraph at the middle of the page. And you said, and
3 I quote: [In English] "When the 6th Krajina Brigade was deployed in
4 Sanski Most, the second half of March 1992." [Interpretation] Can you
5 tell us when the 6th Brigade came, in March or in April?
6 A. In April.
7 Q. In other words, this written statement does not reflect the truth.
8 A. Yes. Yes. I told you I am not sure about a few days -- the
9 dates -- the exact dates because it -- these are events of some ten years
11 Q. On 23 May of this year, you made corrections to this written
12 statement. Why did you not correct that part of it?
13 A. Let me tell you. I didn't consider this to be an essential
14 matter. Now, at this point, I would add certain corrections to the
15 statement. I would make some addenda.
16 Q. At the hearing of 27 May 2002, you stated that the checkpoints in
17 Sanski Most were established with the arrival of the brigade at the
18 beginning of April 1992. Is this accurate?
19 A. Yes, it is.
20 Q. In the statement that you have before you, in the paragraph
21 following, you stated: [In English] "Many checkpoints had been set up in
22 March 1992."
23 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Can the Prosecution give
24 the 1995 statement of the witness to the witness.
25 MR. CAYLEY: If I have it.
1 MR. ACKERMAN: If Mr. Cayley doesn't have it, I can supply it,
2 Your Honour.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Cayley, this was not a statement made to the to
4 the OTP. It's a statement made -- or released to the Ministry of the
5 Interior security service centre in Banja Luka.
6 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, there are two 1995 statements.
7 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] It's the statement of 13
8 September 1995.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, exactly. This is the one we're talking about.
10 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Perhaps you could turn to page 3 of the English version. And you
12 mentioned there the meeting taking place on 20 April 1992. And then you
13 state: [In English] "On that day, members of the 6th Krajina Brigade and
14 paramilitary units of the Sanski Most SDS blocked the town, captured all
15 its vital facilities, set up checkpoints, and limited the movement of the
16 non-Serbian population." [Interpretation] Which of these three statements
17 reflects the truth concerning the creation of the checkpoints?
18 A. I didn't understand your question exactly. Which statements are
19 you referring to now, the first, the second, or the third?
20 Q. On 27 May you stated that the checkpoints were created at the time
21 of the arrival of the 6th Brigade beginning of April. In the second,
22 which is in fact the first statement -- because it was made earlier, in
23 1999 -- you stated that the checkpoints were created immediately after the
24 arrival of the 6th Brigade; in other words, in March 1992. And in the
25 third statement, which is in fact the very first statement, because it
1 dates back to 1995, you stated that the checkpoints were created on the
2 20th of April.
3 MR. CAYLEY: Your Honour, I'm objecting at this point because
4 evidence is being mischaracterised by Ms. Fauveau. She knows very well
5 these are actually referring to separate events. And the witness actually
6 made that clear in his evidence yesterday. Whether or not the checkpoints
7 were set up in the second half of March or early April of 1992 -- and
8 we're talking about matters ten years ago -- frankly is not something in
9 my view that you can put to a witness that he's lying about that, kind of
10 fact. Moreover, what the witness said yesterday was when they arrived,
11 checkpoints were set up. And then on the 20th of April, he said
12 essentially that matters escalated --
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Let him tell us what he said.
14 MR. CAYLEY: It's important, Your Honour, the evidence is
15 characterised properly and that it's not put to a witness that he's
16 actually lying when he's talk about separate events.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't think it has -- it's being suggested that he
18 is lying.
19 MR. CAYLEY: That's what it said a moment ago.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: I think it's suggested to him that he's given three
21 different explanations or versions as to the arrival of the 6th Brigade --
22 MR. CAYLEY: Referring to different events, Your Honour.
23 Referring to different events.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: But he is the witness --
25 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour. Your Honour.
1 Perhaps I can specify prior to the witness answering. In the 1995
2 statement, it's the only place where he mentioned the checkpoints, and
3 that's why I mentioned it.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Sir, you have heard more or less what the question
5 is. As a lawyer you should now have formed your mind what exactly is
6 being required from you to answer. And you have also heard the exchange
7 of debate between the Prosecution and the Defence. Perhaps you could now
8 clarify the issue for us.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] First of all --
10 JUDGE AGIUS: [Previous translation continues] ... so while -- I'm
11 making this clear. I mean, I did not at any time understand Madam Fauveau
12 as implying or suggesting to you that you are not telling us the truth.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I didn't read the statement,
14 but I could never -- never anywhere state that the checkpoints were set up
15 on the 20th of April. I'd like to see this statement where I assert that.
16 In concrete terms, it was the beginning of April -- the 4th of April when
17 the 6th Krajina Brigade arrived to Sanski Most. And I also told you not
18 to hold against me a few days earlier or a few days later.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: You can rest assured that the Court will protect you
20 there -- in that matter, because we can't expect -- I mean, if you ask me
21 what happened ten years ago, I'm going to -- I'll be quite lost, even
22 though -- though these were events which you lived and about which I would
23 imagine you still have a very vivid memory.
24 But anyway, Madam Fauveau, you can move to your next question,
1 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Could the --
3 A. Please. Please. I would kindly ask Madam Fauveau to show me this
4 statement which I allegedly made on the establishment of checkpoints on
5 the 20th of April.
6 Q. It's on page 3 of the statement of 13 September 1995, the sentence
7 beginning with: [In English] "On that day."
8 A. I don't see it here in front of me.
9 Q. [Interpretation] Can I ask the usher to give me the statement?
10 JUDGE AGIUS: [Previous translation continues] ...
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have it in Serbo-Croat.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: So I don't have a copy in Serbo-Croat, so I can't
13 help you much. But it is starting -- from the beginning, it should be in
14 the third page. And just to indicate to you where you should be heading,
15 there should be a part on the third page which indicates the date of the
16 25th of May. And then the names Redzo Kurbegovic, Suad Sabic, Nihad
17 Kljucinic, Rifa Bahtic [phoen]. Right before that part where you see all
18 these names, two sentences before, you should find the paragraph that
19 Madam Fauveau is attributing to you as having stated to the Banja Luka
21 And if you go further up, it is being suggested to you that we are
22 definitely talking of the 20th of April of 1992. Have you found it now,
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I haven't, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Has he been given the right statement? Because
1 there are two statements, one very short that has got nothing to do with
2 the question.
3 If you have a copy -- a spare copy in Serbo-Croat, I will probably
4 find it -- has he found it?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Page 3.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Give it to me. Give it to me.
7 MR. ACKERMAN: [Microphone not activated]
8 JUDGE AGIUS: I'll find it.
9 MR. ACKERMAN: [Microphone not activated]
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Yes, here. Here. Show it to the witness,
11 please. This part that I have underlined, continuing to the end of the
12 sentence. And show him also the previous page where there is the
13 reference to the date, the 20th of April, the meeting, Talic, Rasula, and
14 Savanovic and the rest. So he must be shown this part but also the
15 previous page. Thank you.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Please excuse me. I only refute
17 Madam Fauveau stating that I had asserted that the checkpoints were set up
18 on the 20th of April by the 6th Brigade. I would like her to find that,
19 where I've stated that. And I do not question the date, 20th of April,
20 and the meeting.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
22 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour -- the
23 President --
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Sir, you have the statement in Serbo-Croat. I have
25 marked on that page with pencil the beginning of the sentence that I would
1 like you to read. And then tell us what it says. That is the part of the
2 statement which you gave in Banja Luka way back on the 13th of September,
3 1995, at least according to the document that we have, and that's where
4 Madam Fauveau is alleging that you stated that checkpoints were set up on
5 the 20th of April of 1992.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am just asking that Madam Fauveau
7 shows it to me and that she reads it out.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Sir, I have indicated on that page the sentence that
9 you are required -- requested to read. I'm not going to ask
10 Madam Fauveau, because Madam Fauveau has already indicated the paragraph
11 to the Chamber. And that's on the basis of what she indicated that I am
12 indicating the sentence to you.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've seen this.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: And what does it say?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That they blocked and encircled the
16 town. And there's a difference between blocking the town and it's
17 something else to set up checkpoints in the town. Well, you know, the
18 establishment of checkpoints means that you're cutting off the traffic
19 routes. It means that you're stopping the traffic, that you're searching
20 the vehicles. And this was encircling and -- the encircling and the
21 blocking of the town.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: This happened when?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That happened on the 20th of April.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: And before --
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Rather, it happened earlier. It
1 happened already on the 17th of April, when we were in the municipal
2 building. And on the 19th of April --
3 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I don't know what's written
4 in the Serbo-Croat version. Can I see the version that the witness has
5 before his eyes. Can the usher give me the version that the witness has
6 before him.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: It's the mark which -- the part which I have marked
8 in pencil, Madam Fauveau.
9 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] "On that day, the members
10 of the 6th Krajina Brigade together with SDS Sanski Most paramilitary
11 formations blocked the town. They occupied all the vital facilities in
12 the town, set up checkpoints, and limited the movement of non-Serb
14 Q. Sir, you did indeed state that on that day, the members of the 6th
15 Brigade established checkpoints.
16 A. Yes, together with what I stated beforehand, namely, blocking.
17 And in the --
18 JUDGE AGIUS: There were several occasions when checkpoints were
19 set up. And I think we can leave it at that and move to the next topic or
20 subject or question or whatever, because this is getting us nowhere. You
21 know, I mean, it's -- it more or less confirms what Mr. Cayley has
23 But Mr. Cayley, you have to understand that as much as possible, I
24 mean, we try to avoid -- because now the explanation has come forward.
25 MR. CAYLEY: Of course --
1 JUDGE AGIUS: You were suggesting -- you were opposing objecting
2 on the basis that he was being called a liar. He was not being call add
4 MR. CAYLEY: When somebody is asking if they're telling the truth
5 or not, I think that's a suggestion they may be lying.
6 The only thing I'd add, Your Honour, is this, these statements are
7 not transcripts -- verbatim transcripts of conversations. I know that,
8 the Defence knows that. They are a summary of what a witness can say.
9 That's all it is. And to put these sort of captured lines to a witness in
10 this fashion is in my view not an entirely fair process.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Anyway --
12 MR. CAYLEY: He hasn't been lying about these events.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: No one is saying --
14 MR. CAYLEY: It's clear.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: -- He's been lying, and in fact I'm sure he hasn't.
16 But it's a question of he was explaining there were different days on
17 which checkpoints were set up, and on this particular occasion you have
18 what according to him is a complete blockade of the town.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would like to explain it a bit
22 further. The establishment of checkpoints is the establishment of
23 checkpoints, while the blockade implies a blockade plus checkpoints in
24 some other places, additional checkpoints. And that was the worst --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: You have explained it already. At least the Chamber
1 has understood what you mean, in any case, and that's why I'm suggesting
2 to Madam Fauveau to move ahead.
3 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Can the usher show the
4 witness Exhibit P608.
5 Q. Is this an order of the command of the 5th Corps, dated the 1st of
6 April, 1992?
7 A. You're asking me a lot, but I assume it is, yes, because this
8 document bears everything that is necessary, confidentiality, who it has
9 been drafted by, to whom it is addressed. It is signed by the competent
11 Q. Is it not true that in paragraph 2, in the second paragraph on
12 page 1, which is below the paragraph marked number "1," General Talic
13 ordered that the establishment of barricades should be prevented?
14 A. That was not prevented. It was intensified, in fact.
15 Q. I'm asking you what the order says, preventing setting up
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. So he did request the prevention of the setting up of roadblocks,
19 didn't he?
20 A. We demanded that on the 20th of April as well, when we all had a
21 meeting together.
22 Q. I'm asking you whether in this order dated the 1st of April he
23 already ordered that setting up roadblocks be prevented.
24 A. You can say that; I cannot. Because we made the same demand on
25 the 20th of April, identical to what he ordered here.
1 Q. Could you read out that paragraph, please.
2 A. Do you mean paragraph 2 of point 1?
3 Q. Precisely, yes.
4 A. I've read it.
5 Q. Aloud, please.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: No, no, no. I tell him whether he should read it
7 aloud or not. Everyone has it.
8 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I think that it's not a
9 good translation.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Point it out.
11 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] He doesn't wish to answer
12 my question.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: No. Point out where the discrepancy in the
14 translation is and we'll put a direct question to him, after all you
15 are --
16 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] In the English version it
17 appears as if this establishment of roadblocks was ordered, whereas in
18 fact it was the opposite. It's not clear, in any event.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: It is clear to the Trial Chamber, Madam Fauveau it
20 says what it says.
21 MR. CAYLEY: I think there's a comma that may make it unclear.
22 But I don't think --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah. "Achieving" only refers to the first part.
24 "Achieving control of the territory." And then "preventing inter-ethnic
25 conflict, setting up roadblocks and securing features of special
1 importance." So ...
2 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I think it's not quite
3 clear whether the word "preventing" relates also to the second part of the
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Put the question. Put the question.
6 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Could you please confirm that General Talic ordered that the
8 setting up of roadblocks should be prevented.
9 A. Yes. But to whom?
10 Q. Is it an order addressed to the command of the 6th Partisan
11 Division, is it not -- to the 10th Partisan Division. I correct myself.
13 A. I've said what I have to say.
14 Q. Is it an order addressed to the 10th Partisan Division?
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Answer that question, please, sir. Otherwise
16 you're going to end up being --
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It should be.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: You have a document in front of you. You are a
19 lawyer. You are being asked a simple question. You are being asked
20 whether this order is addressed according to the document, on the face of
21 the document to the 10th Partisan Division. Answer yes or no.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It should be.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. That's it.
24 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. You spoke of a meeting that held -- was held on the 20th of April,
1 1992. Is it correct to say that the meeting was organised upon the
2 initiative of the Serbs?
3 A. Yes. And the invitation was sent by the Serb side.
4 Q. So the meeting was not organised in response to your demands.
5 A. No.
6 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the registrar give
7 the witness Exhibit P759.
8 Q. You said that you did not recognise Rasula's handwriting; is that
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. So you personally cannot say whether this diary is indeed Rasula's
12 diary or not.
13 A. Well, let me tell you. I do not have a talent for recognising
14 people's signatures. I've never done it in my life.
15 Q. You personally cannot confirm that this diary does indeed belong
16 to Rasula.
17 A. I can't deny it either.
18 Q. Could you find page with the number of the 5th of November and
19 refers to the 20th of April.
20 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I think it is the -- page
21 15 of the English version.
22 A. I'm unable to find it here, that particular page.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: It's the page which has --
24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: It's the page which at the top has got the following
1 number, 00379442. Next to it there is the entry 5th November. All
2 right? Did he find it now? I thank you, usher.
3 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. At the very bottom of this page, you find the name that was
5 pronounced by General Talic, Kupres, Bosanski Brod, and Vukovar. You said
6 yesterday that certain Muslims took this to be a threat; is that right?
7 A. Yes. And I was one of them.
8 Q. Is it not true that in Kupres in April 1992 the Serb population
9 was massacred by the Croats?
10 A. I'm not aware of that.
11 Q. Is it not true that on the 26th of March, 1992 at Sijekovac,
12 Bosanski Brod municipality, the Serb population was massacred and expelled
13 by the Croats?
14 A. I'm not aware of that.
15 Q. Yesterday you said that at the end of this meeting, you requested
16 that the conclusions be announced over the radio and that the director of
17 the radio, Orlovic, said that that was not possible.
18 A. Yes, that it was technically unfeasible.
19 Q. On page 3 of your statement from 1995, you said that Orlovic
20 actually said that it was impossible and that he didn't want to do it
21 because this did not suit the leaders of the SDS. This second part of
22 your statement, that is, that it did not suit the leaders of the SDS, was
23 that -- is that part correct?
24 A. I don't remember ever saying that. I said that we asked that he
25 make this public and that he said it was technically impossible to do
1 that, and we said that it was possible for a telephone to be used in the
2 office and for the statement to be made directly -- broadcast live on the
3 radio. But the general said that he was in a hurry to get back. And you
4 resolve your problems and questions this evening at 6.00 p.m. when you can
5 have a meeting here to deal with those problems.
6 Q. In 1995 you said: [In English] "Mihajlo Orlovic was one of those
7 responsible at the Sanski Most radio said that it was impossible to do
8 that then, and he did not want to announce that later either because it
9 did not suit SDS leaders and representatives of the military structures."
10 [Interpretation] I know that until the 25th of May that was never
11 broadcast. Whether it was later, I don't know.
12 Q. Yesterday you said that you saw General Talic on television
13 cordially greeting leaders of the SDS; is that correct?
14 A. Yes. And he was in the first row. The camera shot a close-up of
15 these people.
16 Q. The occasion at which General Talic was with the SDS leaders was
17 this celebration of the liberation of Banja Luka at the end of the Second
18 World War, was it not?
19 A. I think it was. I think it was.
20 Q. And that celebration was held every year, was it not? Even before
21 1990 these celebrations were a regular event; isn't that so?
22 A. I think so. Yes. We had similar celebrations in Sanski Most.
23 The 20th of October, which was celebrated every year. So I assume that
24 was what happened in Banja Luka. I can't claim that because I didn't go
1 Q. As regards Banja Luka, like other towns, would you agree that it
2 was quite normal for representatives of the army should be present during
3 a ceremony of that kind?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. You said yesterday that after this meeting of the 20th of April,
6 the situation in Sanski Most did not improve. Is that correct?
7 A. It is.
8 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the registrar show
9 the witness Prosecution Exhibit P622.
10 Q. Can you confirm that this is a regular report of the command of
11 the 5th Corps dated the 23rd of April, 1992? Regular combat report.
12 A. It should be, yes.
13 Q. And the paragraphs after number 3, it says: [In English]
14 "According to reports received, there have been no significant changes in
15 the situation on the ground. Destruction of individual buildings,
16 threats, and blackmail and conflicts between individuals are still
17 occurring." [Interpretation] Does this description correspond to the
18 actual situation in Sanski Most?
19 A. No. It would if it said that on the -- it should have said that
20 on the ground, the situation has deteriorated, rather than "no significant
21 changes have occurred." And the mention of conflicts between individuals,
22 it is not indicated between which individuals.
23 Q. Can you look at your written statement from 1999 that you gave to
24 the OTP. In the English version, it is the page with the number ending
25 with the number 025.
1 A. And what page is it in my version?
2 Q. I'll tell you in a moment.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: It's page 8, Madam Fauveau.
4 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: Page 8.
5 Q. [Interpretation] It is the paragraph relating to the Territorial
6 Defence, the paragraph beginning with the words [In English] "The Serbs
7 did not establish any official Serbian TO."
8 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] It's in the middle of the
9 page, sir, the paragraph "Srbi nisu osnovaci," whatever.
10 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. In the middle of that paragraph, you said: [In English] "The
12 Sanski Most TO weapons were kept in the military barracks in Prijedor
13 pursuant to the 1990 order." [Interpretation] Is that correct?
14 A. It is. Up to a point.
15 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the registrar show
16 the witness Prosecution Exhibit P19.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: And if you have the English version of it, please
18 put it on the ELMO. Thank you.
19 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Is this indeed the 1990 order that you referred to in your written
22 Let me rephrase my question. Paragraph 1 of this document, does
23 it refer to the same order that you are referring to in your written
25 A. I think so, but it's difficult for me to say looking through such
1 a lengthy document. But tell me specifically what you want from me
2 regarding this document.
3 Q. Paragraph 1 of this document, does it refer -- [In English]
4 "Pursuant to the order of the head of the Chief of Staff."
5 A. Oh, oh, I see. SFRY, et cetera.
6 Q. [Interpretation] The order mentioned in this paragraph, is that
7 the same order that you referred to in your written statement?
8 A. I think it is.
9 Q. Do you know when the weapons of the Sanski Most Territorial
10 Defence were transferred to Prijedor?
11 A. I don't know.
12 Q. You spoke of a meeting that took place on the 24th of May with a
13 certain Nedjeljko Anicic. And you said yesterday on page 23 of the
14 LiveNote, "At the time Nedjeljko Anicic was not a member of the
15 Territorial Defence." Is that right?
16 A. What year? The 24th of May, but what year?
17 Q. 1992.
18 A. I don't remember any meeting being held on the 24th of May, 1992.
19 Q. I'm not interested so much in the meeting but in the fact that you
20 said that Mr. Nedjeljko Anicic was not a member of the Territorial Defence
21 in those days.
22 A. What happened after the 17th of April, I don't know. I don't know
23 what the SDS did in the area, because nothing was legal. All I can assert
24 is that up until the 17th of April, Anicic did not head the Territorial
25 Defence and the Crisis Staff.
1 Q. So you do allow for the possibility that in May, Anicic was a
2 member of the Territorial Defence.
3 A. Well, let me say I can only speak for the period up to the 17th of
4 April and not later, because later I don't know. It was all illegal and
6 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Can the registrar show the
7 witness Prosecution Exhibit P338. [In English] 638.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: The witness has already seen this document, because
9 actually the same question that you have put was put to him by Mr. Cayley
10 or whoever, whether he knew Mr. Anicic was head of the territory --
11 anyway, please proceed with your question.
12 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. This is the document of the Territorial Defence; is this
15 A. Yes, it should be.
16 Q. At the very top of the first page, it is apparently signed by the
17 commander, Colonel Anicic; is this accurate?
18 A. Yes, that's the way it should be.
19 Q. Can you turn to the last page of the document. The date of 26 May
20 is mentioned twice; right?
21 A. Yes, on the last page.
22 Q. Yes, on the last page.
23 A. Here I can see the 26th of May mentioned once, at 50500. And then
24 I see the second time, the mention made of 26 of May, 0400.
25 Q. At the very bottom of the page, you see recipients for this
1 document. Is that exact?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Amongst the recipients, do you find the 6th Brigade?
4 A. I do not see it. If it's not the 1st Serbian Battalion.
5 Q. But the Territorial Defence was clearly made up of these
6 battalions; is this accurate?
7 A. I really don't know, particularly if you consider a Territorial
8 Defence unit of a local commune, that would be a smaller unit. It
9 wouldn't be a battalion of men.
10 Q. But since we see here that it is a Serbian Territorial Defence,
11 which you were not very much aware of or familiar with, rather, can you
12 accept the possibility that this battalion is a battalion of the
13 Territorial Defence?
14 A. It says "1st Serbian Battalion." I cannot tell you to whom it
16 Q. Thank you. You were arrested on 25 May 1992; is this correct?
17 A. No. Yes, on the 25th.
18 Q. It was on the 25th of May, 1992; yes?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Is it the case that at the time of your arrest, there was fighting
21 going on in Mahala?
22 A. There was never any fighting going on in Mahala. And in -- on May
23 25th, it wasn't the case either.
24 Q. Is it the case that prior to the 25th of May, prior to your
25 arrest, you saw an attack of any kind in Mahala?
1 A. No, I did not.
2 Q. After the 25th of May, did you personally witness any kind of
3 attack on Mahala?
4 A. No, I did not.
5 Q. You were detained -- after your arrest on 25 May, you were
6 detained at the police station of Sanski Most; is this accurate?
7 A. No. In the prison.
8 Q. Did this prison belong to the police station?
9 A. It was within the walls of the compound of the police station.
10 Q. Yesterday you said that you did not have the possibility of
11 listening to the radio during your detention in Sanski Most prison. Is
12 this accurate?
13 A. Yes, it is. Sometimes when we'd go out to lunch, we would hear
14 the guards were listening to the radio, and so we would hear something.
15 Q. But when you were locked up in your cells, you could not hear the
16 radio; is this accurate?
17 A. Yes, it is.
18 Q. Yesterday you mentioned murders taking place in Hrustovo and
19 Vrhpolje. Do you remember stating that?
20 A. I remember.
21 Q. When these murders were committed, you were in prison; is this
23 A. Yes, I was.
24 Q. And you personally did not see these murders taking place.
25 A. No, I did not.
1 Q. Hence you don't know exactly what happened in Hrustovo and
2 Vrhpolje during your detention; is this accurate?
3 A. Well, I heard from others what the others experienced, but I
4 personally never saw it.
5 Q. The persons who told you about what happened, did they tell you
6 that the Muslims arrested 46 Serbian officers in that place?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Did they tell you that the persons who arrested these Serbian
9 officers were armed?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Therefore, you are aware of the fact that there was fighting going
12 on in Vrhpolje and Hrustovo.
13 A. Yes, I am.
14 Q. You stated yesterday that up to 10 June, page 47 of the LiveNote,
15 that you were not mistreated in the prison. Is this accurate?
16 A. Up till the 9th. Up till the 9th of June.
17 Q. Is it the case that the other persons who were detained with you
18 in the prison were mistreated?
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Up to the 9th of June for the time being, because --
20 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, of course. Yes, Your
22 JUDGE AGIUS: [Previous translation continues] ...
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Those who were in my cell together
24 with me, they were not mistreated.
25 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Do you know what treatment was given to persons in other cells, if
2 you are aware of it?
3 A. I do not know. I believe that they weren't beaten either, due to
4 the fact that we would be let out from the cells simultaneously. And on
5 the other hand, I never heard shouts or other suffering; therefore, I
6 assume they were not.
7 Q. Was Adil Draganovic detained during that period in the same prison
8 as you?
9 JUDGE AGIUS: That is, from the day you were admitted to that
10 prison until the 9th of June. These are the dates that you have to refer
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. However, Adil Draganovic was
13 in cell number 1.
14 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. You mentioned a transfer of the prisoners from that prison to
16 Manjaca on 6 June 1992. Do you recall stating that?
17 A. Yes, I do.
18 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Can the usher show the
19 witness Exhibit 666.
20 Q. Is this an order dated 6 June 1992?
21 A. Well, it should be.
22 Q. And pursuant to that order, the police station is given charge of
23 the transfer of 150 prisoners to Manjaca; is this correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. At the very bottom of the order --
1 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, because I'm beginning not to understand
2 now. The way the interpretation goes is as follows. The witness was
3 asked: "And pursuant to that order, the police station is given charge of
4 the transfer of 150 prisoners to Manjaca." Okay. Yes, you may go ahead.
5 Thank you.
6 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. At the very bottom of the page, there are two recipients of the
8 order; is this correct?
9 A. I don't see it. Is this under item 10?
10 Q. Can you tell me who this order was addressed to.
11 MR. CAYLEY: He doesn't -- he doesn't have the right document.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot tell you.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: [Previous translation continues] ... he definitely
14 doesn't have the right document.
15 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Sir, do you now have before you an order dated 6 June 1992?
17 A. Yes, I do. I have it.
18 Q. According to this order, the public security station is ordered to
19 transfer 150 prisoners to Manjaca; is this accurate?
20 A. That's the way it should be.
21 Q. And at the bottom left of the document, you can see that the
22 document was addressed to two recipients -- in fact, one, because the
23 other one was filing. Is this correct?
24 A. Yes, yes.
25 Q. According to this document as it stands, it was not addressed to a
1 military organ; is that the case?
2 A. Yes. Yes.
3 Q. During your detention, you were transferred to Betonirka. Can you
4 tell us who was in charge of Betonirka.
5 A. I stated yesterday who the -- was running, who was the head of the
6 camp, and who was the deputy chief. Drago Vujanic, he was the director
7 and Krunic Mico was his deputy.
8 Q. These persons were members of the police; is this correct?
9 A. Drago Vujanic was, while Krunic covered different positions in
10 different areas.
11 Q. You stated yesterday, page 59 of the LiveNote, that you were never
12 beaten by someone called Tonci in Betonirka.
13 A. Yes, I did. There were also others who didn't beat me; not only
15 Q. Can you turn to your statement, your written statement of 1999.
16 In the English version, it's the page ending with 028, third paragraph in
17 the English version. And it's at page 11, third paragraph of the original
19 A. Just a moment, please. Let me find it on page 11. I do not have
20 page 11 here in this text.
21 Q. It's page 11 of the written statement of 1999.
22 A. 1999. This one is 1995.
23 Q. The second sentence, paragraph 3.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Madam Fauveau, let him read -- let him read for
25 himself first the entire paragraph. Thank you.
1 MR. CAYLEY: Can I also point out, Your Honour, this is a matter
2 that was corrected in the corrected statement. Because actually if you
3 read the English version, it doesn't make any sense at all in English.
4 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I will return to the
6 A. Fine, yes.
7 Q. In effect you corrected this statement on the 23rd of May.
8 Unfortunately I only have the English version of that correction. And you
9 stated: [In English] "On that occasion, Tonci beat me and Tonci told me
10 that he was beating me on the orders of Mirko Vrucinic." [Interpretation]
11 And what I'm interested in -- in fact, this doesn't change much, because
12 what I'm interested in was not corrected, remains the same. You said that
13 Tonci beat you once; whereas yesterday you said that Tonci did not beat
15 A. Well, I gave that statement in the context that Mirko Vrucinic, in
16 connection with my -- he was kind to my sisters and my wife, allowing them
17 to visit me occasionally, to bring me medicines, cigarettes, and clothing.
18 And Tonci called me -- called me once out at 4.30 and was beating me till
19 6.30. Once again, when he was at a shift, he beat me again. And the
20 third time he beat me -- and the third time after half an hour of beating
21 me, he said, "Mirzo, please sit down," and he told me, "You know, I never
22 beat anyone except you, and I'm beating you at the orders of Mirko
23 Vrucinic. I won't be beating you any more, but I will be provoking you."
24 And I made this statement in this context to show that on the one hand he
25 was helping to -- helping my family, my wife, my sister, showing as if he
1 was wishing me the best, and on the other hand he was ordering this guard
2 to beat me and to mistreat me. This is the statement that I wanted to
4 Q. Why is it the case that yesterday, page 59, in the question of the OTP was:
5 [In English] "Did at any time a person named Tonci beat you at the Betonirka?"
6 [Interpretation] And you replied, "No."
7 A. Well, I said no at that moment because even the beatings I did
8 receive, I didn't consider him -- his beatings but beatings he carried out
9 as orders of others. I understood it as a question whether also he beat
10 other detainees. And this -- I would never make this statement. There
11 are many other statements I could give. But this was specific. On the
12 one hand, he was helping; on the other hand, he is forcing others to beat
13 me. And that was the Serbian policy at the time.
14 Q. In other words, this Tonci beat you on the orders of someone, of
15 Vrucinic; is this accurate?
16 A. Yes. At the orders of Mirko Vrucinic. And if he told me an
17 untruth, then I'm not speaking the truth here either.
18 Q. And the others, the others who beat you, beat you of their own
20 A. Well, I believe so, because people came from the street to beat
21 us. And may I add, there were also fine people who tried to oppose this,
22 and not all guards beat us and not every -- they weren't all the same.
23 Q. On 7 July 1992, is it the case that you returned to the prison
24 located within the compound of the police station?
25 A. Yes. I came back to the same prison, the same cell from which I
1 previously left for the Betonirka.
2 Q. And the representative of the International Red Cross came to
3 visit you in that prison; is this the case?
4 A. Yes. Yes. And they also took our names and registered us.
5 Q. And you had had opportunity to speak to them about the presence
6 of -- outside of the presence of the guards.
7 A. Yes. We -- we talked alone with the representative of the Red
8 Cross and an interpreter.
9 Q. In order to clarify, you were alone with the International Red
10 Cross representative and with an interpreter, but there were no guards
11 present; is this accurate?
12 A. Yes. Yes, alone. And the other detainees weren't present
13 either. And this is the way the discussion was carried out with all the
15 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Perhaps we could go to a
16 break now, because I'm going to change subjects.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: This is what I was going to suggest to you, that
18 it's a suitable time to go have our break.
19 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] In any event, I'll be able
20 to conclude today.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: So we'll have a break of 30 minutes, resuming at
22 1.00. Thank you.
23 --- Recess taken at 12.31 p.m.
24 --- On resuming at 12.59 p.m.
25 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
1 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, Your
2 Honours, I went to see my client for a moment, and I wasn't told that we
3 were convening.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] That's okay. You may
6 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. You were transferred to Manjaca on the 28th of August, 1992; is
8 that right?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. During the transport to Manjaca, you were not mistreated; is that
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. How many people were transferred with you on that day to Manjaca?
14 A. 48, and with me 49.
15 Q. Was anyone among that group of people mistreated during the
17 A. Let me give you an answer. When the bus reached the police
18 station compound, there were 15 of us originally. Two stayed behind.
19 Thirteen of us reached the bus. And one of the guards -- actually, one of
20 the escorts, whose name I cannot recall, had an automatic weapon, and he
21 said, "Sit down wherever you like. And until we reach Manjaca, no one may
22 give you a dirty glance, never mind touch you in any way." And that is
23 how it was. The 13 of us who were in prison reached the Krings Hall where
24 another 36 people were loaded onto the bus. And then we were driven to
1 Let me also point out that we took the shortest possible route to
2 get there, without any kind of mistreatment whatsoever or any harassment
3 of any kind.
4 Q. The day you arrived at Manjaca, that is, the 28th of August, 1992,
5 you said that a group of prisoners were released on that day is that
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Do you know how many people were released on that day?
9 A. Please don't take it against me if I'm not accurate, but I think
10 it was 60 or 61 persons.
11 Q. You said yesterday, page 70 of the LiveNote, that the prisoners
12 had no covers in Manjaca. Is it not true that the International Red Cross
13 brought covers?
14 A. I said that that was what the detainees told me, who had arrived
15 there before me.
16 Q. So when you were in Manjaca, you did have a cover or blanket.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. So actually, you were talking about the conditions in the Manjaca
19 camp in June 1992, but you personally were not there in those days, were
21 A. I was not. I said what I had heard from other detainees.
22 Q. So you personally had no direct knowledge of the conditions in
23 Manjaca in June 1992.
24 A. No, I have no direct knowledge.
25 Q. When did you leave the Manjaca camp?
1 A. On the 31st of October, 1992. I was exchanged.
2 Q. So you were exchanged, were you?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And how many people from Manjaca were exchanged on that same date
5 with you, that is, the 31st of October, 1992?
6 A. I think there were 56 of us.
7 Q. During the hearing on the 27th of May, you mentioned the
8 referendum that took place on the 28th of February and the 1st of March,
9 1992. Do you remember that?
10 A. I do.
11 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the registrar show
12 the witness Exhibit P104.
13 Q. Do you have before you a two-page document?
14 A. I do.
15 Q. You said that this document was distributed to the Serbs before
16 the referendum in Bosnia; is that right?
17 A. It was distributed.
18 Q. Could you please look at page 2 of that document, the page
19 entitled "[Previous translation continues] What the life in Bosnia mean?"
20 [Interpretation] Would you look at the words "written" right underneath
21 that title.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. [In English] "There is no peace or co-existence between the Islamic faith
24 and non-Islamic social and political institutions." [Interpretation] Do you
25 agree that this is an abstract taken from the Islamic declaration?
1 A. I couldn't say.
2 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the registrar show
3 the witness Defence Exhibit DT14, please.
4 Q. Unfortunately I don't have an English version of this document.
5 And in French, it is page 42. The first column and the last line of the
6 first column and then it goes on into the second column.
7 Sir, will you look at page 22 of that document. In paragraph 3,
8 the second sentence, isn't it the same sentence that you find on document
9 P104 of the Prosecution?
10 A. I haven't compared the two.
11 Q. Could you look, please.
12 A. It's illegible. This copy is illegible.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: What page is it in the Serbo-Croat version,
14 Madam Fauveau?
15 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] In the Serbo-Croat version,
16 it is page 22, third paragraph. And the second sentence of that
18 In document P104, it is the first sentence below the title on the
19 second page of that document.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: [Previous translation continues] ...
21 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Is it the same sentence?
23 A. No. I don't see it.
24 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] May I read to the witness
25 the sentence from the book in Serbo-Croatian?
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Does he have a copy of that page?
2 Do you have page 22 --
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do have it.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: If you look at the third paragraph, starting with
7 [B/C/S spoken]. That's the first sentence. The next sentence reads
8 [B/C/S spoken]. This is the sentence that Madam Fauveau --
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I see that.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I see that. I have that.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: So what you are being asked now is to look at the
13 previous document, the declaration, in other words, in Serbo-Croat,
14 obviously. And if you can read that. The first sentence after the title,
15 after the name of Alija Izetbegovic, whether what's written there is
16 exactly the same as what you've read on page 22 of Izetbegovic's Islamska
17 Deklaracija [phoen].
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't see here the name
19 "Izetbegovic." I'd like to see it regardless.
20 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Sir, on which document are you looking for the name Alija
23 A. Here. I know that this is from his declaration.
24 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Maybe the witness doesn't
25 have the same document that I have. I just don't know.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Bring the document, please, over to me so that I can
2 confirm whether he has the right document or not. It's the single page
3 that I want to see.
4 Yes, he has the right document. Ask him --
5 Usher, come here, please. Ask him to look at this and the next
6 three lines and the reference to page 22 and to tell us what he can read
7 from there.
8 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, it's --
9 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] Be patient.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I -- yes, yes, I've found it. I was
11 looking for it in this other text. You didn't tell me that it was the
12 subtitle. Yes, yes.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: And that's exactly a reproduction of -- a faithful
14 reproduction of the text from Mr. Izetbegovic's book; no?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I assume it is.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
17 Yes, Mr. Ackerman.
18 MR. ACKERMAN: Nothing, Your Honour. Thank you.
19 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Would you agree that this document, P104, page 2, consists in fact
21 of extracts from the Islamic declaration?
22 A. Well, you see, we are not discussing faith here. I still claim
23 that religions differ. I claim that. We are discussing religions here.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: The question was a very simple one: Do you agree
25 that on the face of it, page 2 of this document does nothing else but make
1 specific reference, in quotes, to parts -- different parts from
2 Mr. Izetbegovic's Islamic declaration? It has got nothing -- we are not
3 discussing religion here. It's the last thing that this Trial Chamber
4 wants to embark upon. It has enough trouble.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think we are embarking upon it.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Answer the question.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Karabeg, look at page 2 of the document and tell
9 me whether it -- it reproduces in quotes from different --
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: That's all we wanted to know.
12 Yes, Madam Fauveau, next question.
13 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. The Islamic declaration was written by Alija Izetbegovic, wasn't
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And Alija Izetbegovic was president of the SDA of Bosnia, wasn't
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And he became president of the independent state of Bosnia; is
21 that correct?
22 A. Yes. President of the presidency.
23 Q. Exactly.
24 Could you please look at the last sentence of the third paragraph.
25 We are still talking about page 22 of the Serbo-Croatian version. Page
1 42, second column, last sentence before the paragraphs written in italics
2 in the English version -- in the French. I'm sorry. Is it true that
3 Alija Izetbegovic wrote "there is therefore no principle of secular
4 government, and the state should be an expression and support for the
5 moral concepts of religion"?
6 A. According to what I received in the interpretation, that is what
7 it says.
8 Q. Could you please look at page 3 of the Islamic declaration, page
9 11 -- page 1, sorry, of the French version. The last part -- the last
10 paragraph of the first part: "The realisation of Islam in all walks of
11 private life of individuals in the family and in society through the
12 renaissance of Islamic religious thought and the creation of a single
13 Islamic community from Morocco to Indonesia." Is that what was written
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Wasn't that the programme of the SDA, to create an independent
17 Muslim state?
18 A. Never.
19 Q. Thank you.
20 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I have no
21 further questions.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Madam Fauveau.
23 Now, Mr. Karabeg, you are now going to be cross-examined for the
24 next 25 minutes or so by Mr. Ackerman, who is the lead counsel for
25 Radoslav Brdjanin. And then we will continue obviously tomorrow.
1 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
3 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Before Mr. Ackerman begins,
4 I should like to ask for the admission into evidence of Exhibit DT14,
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Madam Fauveau. It is so admitted. Thank
7 you. You don't have any objections?
8 MR. CAYLEY: Alija Izetbegovic's -- yeah. No, I have no
9 objection, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Sorry. I took it for granted. Sorry I didn't ask
11 you, Mr. Cayley. Thank you.
12 You can start when you're ready, Mr. Ackerman. Thank you.
13 MR. ACKERMAN: Thanks, Your Honour. I'm just trying to get
14 organised here. I'll be ready in a minute.
15 Cross-examined by Mr. Ackerman:
16 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Karabeg.
17 A. Good afternoon.
18 Q. As the Judge told you, my name is John Ackerman. I will ask you
19 some questions about the things that you are familiar with regarding these
21 The first thing I want to ask you is this: On the 23rd of May,
22 just a few days ago, you had an opportunity with an investigator from the
23 Office of the Prosecutor to go through your statement of 24/25 July 1999
24 and make corrections to that statement, didn't you?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And that actually resulted in a new statement that you signed,
2 which basically set out those corrections, didn't it?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Since that -- since those events, that time you spent with the
5 representative of the OTP going through your statement and making those
6 changes, have other things occurred to you in your original 1999 statement
7 that you now realise are incorrect and that you would like to change?
8 A. Well, let me say I wouldn't change anything. But corrections were
9 made mainly due to an erroneous translation of an important part of that
11 Q. Yes. I fully understand that. My question really is not about
12 why you made corrections. My question is: At this moment, are you aware
13 of any other parts of that statement that you would like to correct before
14 I begin to ask you questions about it?
15 A. I cannot answer that now.
16 Q. All right. We'll forge ahead and you can just tell me.
17 Do you have there before you your statement of 24/25 July 1999? I
18 think it's right there.
19 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I'm told that the witness's answer to
20 my question about whether there was anything he wanted to change properly
21 translated was "I will keep that answer to myself." And it has been
22 translated "I cannot answer that now." I'd like to clarify that, please.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Mr. Karabeg, have you followed what
24 Mr. Ackerman has just tried to explain to me?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I did.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: When he asked you this question: At this moment,
2 are you aware of any other parts of that statement that you would like to
3 correct before I begin to ask you questions about it," what was your
4 answer? Was your answer "I will keep that answer to myself," or "I cannot
5 answer that question now"?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That I will keep that answer to
8 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, I would ask you to ask him to answer that
9 question, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. And you need to answer that question, because
11 it's an important question. You are obviously going to be asked about
12 your statement, and it's also in your interests to answer that question.
13 The question is -- I will repeat it. At this moment, apart from the
14 corrections you have made, are you aware of any other parts of your
15 statement that you would like to correct before Mr. Ackerman begins to ask
16 you questions about your statement?
17 MR. CAYLEY: Your Honour, could I just say one thing, Your
18 Honour. I mean, this is traditional sort of cross-examination trick.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
20 MR. CAYLEY: Mr. Ackerman wants a blanket statement. No, this
21 statement is absolutely perfect. And then he's going to -- why doesn't he
22 just direct him to the parts of the statement --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: No. But the witness is also a lawyer, Mr. Cayley.
24 MR. CAYLEY: But we could get right to it and we could move much
25 more quickly, Your Honour.
1 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, this is not a trick. And I resent it
2 being called a trick. That is not fair --
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, let's take it -- let's take it that the Trial
4 Chamber knows exactly what it is.
5 MR. ACKERMAN: I might agree that it's a technique. Trick is
6 not --
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Technique. We all put that question when there is a
9 MR. ACKERMAN: It's an appropriate way to do it, so I resent it
10 being called a trick. Okay.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Karabeg, answer that question. It's in
12 your interest to answer that question.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, if I were to change it, I
14 would really expand it.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: That's it.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I experienced quite a lot of these
17 things -- many of these things, and I've seen many of it.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: I think, Mr. Ackerman, you can safely proceed to the
19 next question.
20 MR. ACKERMAN: Yes.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
22 MR. ACKERMAN:
23 Q. So it is your position that you stand by what's contained in that
24 statement with the exception of the changes that you made on the 23rd of
1 A. Yes, I do.
2 Q. If you will look, sir, at what probably is the second page.
3 MR. ACKERMAN: And I'm going to get some assistance here, Your
5 Q. It probably is the second page. It has the number in the English
6 version -- if number 20 at the top. In the B/C/S version, it has number
7 52 at the top. And it's a paragraph that begins with this language: "The
8 members of the executive board." And it's the third full paragraph on
9 that page that has the number ending in 52. So if you look at the very
10 top, you'll see a number ending in 52. And then the third full paragraph
11 says: "The members of the executive board of the SDS." Do you see that?
12 Very near the top, sir.
13 A. No. I haven't -- yes. Yes, I've found it.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
15 MR. ACKERMAN:
16 Q. All right. The last sentence of that paragraph: "I do not have
17 first-hand information on the functions of the Crisis Staff, and all I
18 know is only hearsay and rumours." Do you see that?
19 A. Yes, I do. Yes, I do.
20 Q. Could you tell us, please, what Crisis Staff it is that you're
21 referring to.
22 A. I was thinking that it was the defence staff of the municipality,
23 which I was heading as the head -- the leading person of the executive
24 body. And it consisted of the president of the municipality, the head of
25 the police, the head of the defence, and the head of Territorial Defence.
1 Q. So this was the Crisis Staff of Sanski Most municipality
2 essentially that you're talking about.
3 A. That's right.
4 Q. All right.
5 A. That's right.
6 Q. On the first day that you testified -- it's LiveNote page 59,
7 Mr. Cayley -- you told us that when Mr. Vrkes was talking about -- about a
8 time that Mr. Vrkes was talking about pressure coming from Banja Luka to
9 integrate Banja Luka into the region. You recall that testimony?
10 A. I do.
11 Q. And you told us that he mentioned the names of Brdjanin and
12 Krajisnik as putting pressure on him in that regard.
13 A. Yes, that that issue should be placed on the agenda. Yes.
14 Q. But what I'm focussing on is you say that he mentioned the names
15 of Brdjanin and Krajisnik as putting pressure on him in that regard. Is
16 that your position?
17 A. Yes, I do. It is.
18 Q. Do you know anything about the relationship that existed at that
19 time between Mr. Brdjanin and Mr. Krajisnik?
20 A. I do not know.
21 Q. Don't you know that Mr. Krajisnik was not even from Banja Luka?
22 A. I know that.
23 Q. Don't you know that Mr. Brdjanin was from Celinac?
24 A. No, I didn't know it.
25 Q. Would you concede that you might be mistaken about what he told
1 you and that he didn't say the names Brdjanin and Krajisnik?
2 A. No.
3 Q. I want you to look now at your statement again. And it is the
4 next paragraph after the one we had looked at earlier. It begins with the
5 language "from late March and April 1992." Do you see that paragraph?
6 A. How does it begin?
7 Q. It begins with "From late March and April 1992."
8 A. Very well. Yes.
9 Q. Okay. You said that the main issue, the main SDS issue, was that
10 the municipality of Sanski Most must become part of Republika Srpska and
11 attached to the regional -- to the regional in Banja Luka -- the region in
12 Banja Luka; correct?
13 A. Yes, it is.
14 Q. And then you said: "In early April 1992, Vrkes said in the
15 assembly sessions that there was a lot of pressure about this matter from
16 the leadership of Banja Luka. He did not mention any names." Correct?
17 A. Yes. At the official assembly meetings.
18 Q. And when you gave this statement to the Prosecutor in 1992, you
19 knew that it was in connection with the charges against Mr. Brdjanin and
20 Mr. Talic, didn't you? I'm sorry. In 1999. When you gave the statement
21 in 1999, you knew it was in connection with these charges?
22 A. No, I didn't.
23 Q. When you came here and talked with the representative of the
24 Office of the Prosecutor regarding any additions or corrections to your
25 statement, you knew it was in connection with the case against Brdjanin
1 and Talic, didn't you?
2 A. Only when I came here. Only then I knew that it referred to
4 Q. And in the process of making changes to your statement, you didn't
5 make any change to include this statement that you mentioned in your
6 testimony, did you?
7 A. I told you in what sense I would make corrections.
8 Q. And in fact, nowhere in your statement to the OTP or your other
9 two statements that were made to Mr. Ibric -- Zijad Ibric did you ever
10 mention the name Mr. Brdjanin, did you?
11 A. No. I -- it is my first time that I'm seeing Mr. Brdjanin here --
12 after arriving here.
13 Q. Yes. Now, when you say that it was the -- the main issue raised
14 by the SDS that Sanski Most must become part of the RS attached to the
15 centre of the region in Banja Luka -- when you talk about the region
16 in Banja Luka, what are you talking about?
17 A. Something which was to be done under duress, violent, and
18 something in a negative context, because at that last meeting --
19 Q. Something happened in between my question and answer that -- it's
20 probably my fault that you didn't understand my question. You talked
21 about the SDS position that it wanted Sanski Most to become part of the --
22 and I think your words -- "attached to the centre of t the region in Banja
23 Luka." What exactly are you referring to when you talk about the region
24 in Banja Luka? What specifically does that mean?
25 A. Under the term "region of Banja Luka," I'm referring to that what
1 was done.
2 Q. Well, all --
3 A. Namely, it was the detachment from the Republika Srpska and the
4 merging, integration with Yugoslavia. I would like to correct myself.
5 The division and separation from the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina
6 and the unification with Yugoslavia.
7 Q. Well, already for quite some time Sanski Most had been part of a
8 community of Bosnian Krajina municipalities centred in Banja Luka, hadn't
10 A. But not in the way that it was required of us.
11 Q. I think it was not translated properly, and I'll try it again,
12 Your Honour.
13 Sanski Most for some time had been part of what was known as the
14 community of Bosnian Krajina municipalities, was it not?
15 A. Yes, it was.
16 Q. That was about 20 municipalities that combined to form that
17 community of Bosnian Krajina municipalities, wasn't it?
18 A. Not 20, but to be precise 17 municipalities.
19 MR. ACKERMAN: Could the witness be shown Exhibit P69 B, please.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: And please conclude in the next minute,
21 Mr. Ackerman; otherwise, resume tomorrow.
22 MR. ACKERMAN: I'll have to resume tomorrow. We can't do that.
23 I'm sorry.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. So leave Exhibit P69 over there.
25 Mr. Karabeg, we are going to stop here for today. You will be
1 escorted out of this courtroom, back to your -- where you're staying, and
2 we will resume tomorrow morning at 9.00. I owe you an apology for
3 starting a little bit late this morning. The reason was again, once more,
4 we had some procedural issues relating to the trial that we needed to
5 debate and decide upon. It had nothing to do with your testimony or with
6 you. But please accept our apologies for keeping you waiting in the room
7 for a few minutes. I thank you, sir, and you may withdraw now.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
9 [The witness stands down]
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Anything you wish to tell me before -- okay. I
11 thank you. We'll meet again tomorrow morning at 9.00 sharp. Thank you.
12 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned
13 at 1.46 p.m., to be reconvened on Thursday,
14 the 30th day of May, 2002, at 9.00 a.m.