1 Tuesday, 18 September 2007

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 2.16 p.m.

6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good afternoon to everybody this afternoon.

7 Mr. Registrar, will you please call the case.

8 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you. Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is

9 case number IT-04-83-T, the Prosecutor versus Rasim Delic.

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

11 And could we have the appearances, please, for today, starting

12 with the Prosecution.

13 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President. Good afternoon, Your

14 Honours, Counsel, everyone in and around the courtroom. For the

15 Prosecution, Daryl Mundis and Kyle Wood, assisted by our case manager,

16 Alma Imamovic.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

18 And for the Defence?

19 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good

20 afternoon, learned friends from the OTP, to everybody in the courtroom and

21 around the courtroom. Appearing for the Defence, Vasvija Vidovic and

22 Nicholas Robson, with assistants Lejla Gluhic and Lana Deljkic.

23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Let me just mention the very

24 obvious, that for reasons beyond our control, Judge Lattanzi is not here

25 today, so we -- this session will take place pursuant to Rule 15 bis of

1 the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

2 Sir, good afternoon to you too. Yesterday before you commenced

3 your testimony, you made a declaration to tell the truth, the whole truth,

4 and nothing else but the truth. Excuse me. I remind you that you are

5 still bound by that declaration to tell the truth. Thank you very much.

6 Madam Vidovic.

7 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

8 WITNESS: KADIR JUSIC [Resumed]

9 [Witness answered through interpreter]

10 Cross-examined by Ms. Vidovic: [Continued]

11 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Jusic. Yesterday we stopped

12 while discussing the siege of Sarajevo and very poor flow of information

13 from the field to Sarajevo. You may remember that you said that for a

14 year you did not receive -- or you had no contact with your superior

15 command in Sarajevo. Do you remember that?

16 A. Good afternoon, Your Honours and everybody present, Madam Vidovic.

17 Yes, I do remember. This is correct.

18 Q. And that was the reason for in April or May 1993 for the

19 establishment of a forward command post of the command of the Supreme

20 Command.

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. That is correct.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. In other words, it would be correct to conclude that the

25 headquarters of the Supreme Command during 1992 and the first half of 1993

1 did not control the situation out in the field outside of Sarajevo, that

2 is.

3 A. I do think that they did not control the situation.

4 Q. Thank you. You remember that you gave testimony to the

5 investigators in September and October 2006 -- correction, 2006. I

6 apologise.

7 A. Yes, I did.

8 Q. 2006?

9 A. Yes, I did provide a statement in September/October last year,

10 2006.

11 Q. On that occasion - and I quote paragraph 71 of your statement to

12 the OTP's investigators, and then there you state that: "Until 1995, the

13 headquarters of the Supreme Command was an imaginary command of the army."

14 First of all, do you remember giving such a statement?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Would I be correct in concluding that the reason for your

17 providing such an estimate of the situation -- I correct myself for giving

18 such a statement -- was the fact that the Supreme Command Staff did not

19 control the situation out of -- outside of Sarajevo until 1995?

20 A. That was the reason for me thinking that and maintaining that

21 opinion even today, because this was so, because the Supreme Command Staff

22 had no influence whatsoever on the course of combat operations, defence,

23 and all other military matters that obtained outside of Sarajevo. Corps

24 command was in charge of those matters or brigade commands respectively.

25 Q. Thank you. Among other things, this was the reason for a decision

1 to be made on dislocating major parts of the Supreme Command Staff from

2 Sarajevo to the free liberated territory; is that correct?

3 A. Yes, I presume that this was so. This is how I understood it.

4 Q. Most of the Supreme Command Staff was located at Kakanj, to your

5 knowledge.

6 A. At that time I had no direct contacts with the organs of Supreme

7 Command Staff at Zenica, of the forward command post in Zenica, but I do

8 know that some organs of the General Staff were there, deputy commander,

9 operative organ or part of the operative organ, and some other officers

10 from the General Staff.

11 Q. Mr. Jusic, maybe we did not understand each other. I would like

12 you to see a document, and then I will ask you questions about it.

13 Currently I'm talking about the Kakanj command post, but I'd like you to

14 take a look at Exhibit 280, if we have it appear on the screen for the

15 witness, please.

16 For the record, this is an order of the Supreme Command Staff of

17 the armed forces dated the 2nd of January, 1994. This is an order for the

18 relocation of the Supreme Command Staff to the command post of Kakanj.

19 Please, Mr. Witness, could you take a look at this document, the

20 first page of this document. Take a look at the introductory part, and

21 then the sentence immediately below the word "order" -- "I order." I'd

22 like to ask you: Did you know that on the 5th of January, 1994, it was

23 ordered for the Supreme Command Staff to relocate to a new command post at

24 Kakanj?

25 A. I did not learn of this order, but I know it was implemented. The

1 headquarters of the Supreme Command Staff entered certain facilities at

2 Kakanj and established a command post. We called it an IKM or forward

3 command post. I did not see this order, but I knew of its existence. I

4 know it was implemented at -- I visited personally that. That was the

5 headquarters of the General Staff headed by the chief of staff,

6 General Hadzihasanovic.

7 Q. Thank you very much. I would like you to take a look at the last

8 or third page of this document. You mentioned General Hadzihasanovic.

9 You see the signature there on the page. Could you please, being a

10 trained and educated professional soldier, do you agree that in the

11 absence of -- of the commander, his deputy had powers to represent him and

12 to deputise for him?

13 A. Yes, this was the procedure. This was so.

14 I would like to emphasise that at any rate, the deputy commander,

15 and when they were abandoned, then chief of staffs were empowered to

16 regulate certain matters, to organise the work of the command, and the

17 staff as -- as per their job description, and they could make arrangements

18 orally with the command -- they could sign documents. But this was signed

19 by General Hadzihasanovic. I know that -- I knew him because from March

20 to November I was part of the 3rd Corps.

21 Q. Do you mean that they made oral arrangements about powers?

22 A. No, I'm -- no, I think that they orally arranged about the

23 transfer of the command post.

24 Q. Thank you very much. I want to make it clear when you said "made

25 oral arrangements," what it really meant.

1 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if -- I would like

2 this document to be removed from the screen, and I would like the witness

3 to see Exhibit 281.

4 Q. I'd like you to take a look at this document, Witness. It is

5 entitled -- or in other words, this is a Supreme Command Staff document

6 dated 16th February, 1994, and it's entitled "Order, organising the

7 deployment of the Supreme Command of the armed forces."

8 Witness, you just mentioned something that I believe -- what I

9 believe would be very useful. You mentioned the staff of the army. Could

10 you for the benefit of the Trial Chamber explain the following: It is

11 true, isn't it not, that the staff of the army is not the same as Supreme

12 Command Staff?

13 A. We had analgous formations of the commands and the General Staff.

14 The General Staff comprised of a part of departments and sectors headed by

15 assistant commanders, intelligence, security, morale, finance, logistics,

16 who were not part of the staff and the staff was a separate organisational

17 unit of the General Staff, which in its remit had and in its company --

18 position had operational centre, operational organ, aspects -- now, just

19 aspects of the forces; such as artillery, communications, engineers,

20 anti-aircraft defence, anti-biological and chemical and nuclear, and IT,

21 informatics. And they had a unit for the supply of the commands. They

22 provided logistics for the command, they supplied materiel, consumable,

23 et cetera.

24 Q. Thank you very much, Witness, for such an exhaustive explanation.

25 Let me ask you just one thing: Did I get it right that the staff

1 of the army is an operational arm of the Supreme Command Staff which is in

2 charge of preparing, organising, and monitoring the combat operations?

3 Did I get it right?

4 A. That's correct in essence, but the Supreme Command Staff or

5 Supreme Command should be understood as the General Staff. The General

6 Staff used to change its title like General Staff, Supreme Command,

7 et cetera, et cetera. So don't think that the -- the staff was the

8 operational organ of the Presidency.

9 Q. No, no, no.

10 A. It was part of the General Staff. The army staff was a planning

11 organ of the General Staff.

12 Q. Supreme Command Staff or General Staff.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Now, take another look at this order, please. Do you agree that

15 the army staff, that operational body of the Supreme Command Staff, was

16 that dislocated to Kakanj? Take a look under "1."

17 A. I can't see very well what is on the document, but I know that

18 this was so. It was dislocated to Kakanj.

19 Q. Well, if it is necessary, I may provide you with a paper copy or a

20 hard copy of that order.

21 A. I know what did happen in real life. I don't need this document.

22 I can't see it very clearly on the screen.

23 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like the

24 witness to see this hard copy, just in case.

25 Q. Take a look at item number 1, please. Please keep this paper and

1 take a look at item 3. Can you see that?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Do you agree --

4 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, could we have page 2

5 appear on the screen both in the B/C/S and English version.

6 Q. Sir, please take a look at item number 3. Do you agree that this

7 item regulates that the activities of the staff will be -- proceed in

8 accordance with the staff plan under the direct command of the chief of

9 staff? Is that correct?

10 A. Yes, this is as per procedure; although, it was unnecessary to put

11 it in writing, because it is well known that the chief of staff is in

12 charge of those things.

13 Q. Thank you. Can we close this document.

14 Now I'm going to ask you, witness, about some things that you

15 testified to yesterday and which were related to the planning of combat

16 operations. We saw that the staff of the army was dislocated to Kakanj,

17 and you said that as per usual course of proceedings, that staff would be

18 in charge of planning. But, Mr. Jusic, you will agree with me, will you

19 not, that the staff -- Supreme Command Staff, neither that in Sarajevo nor

20 the command post in Kakanj, planned the combat activities at -- around

21 Vozuca Dzep in the July of 1995. Am I right?

22 A. You're correct, sir. They did not plan division commands of the

23 35th Division -- did the planning, corps command did not do the planning

24 either.

25 Q. In other words, that operation in July 1995 against the Vozuca

1 pocket was planned by the command of the 35th Division; is that correct?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Now, Mr. Jusic, what is correct, though, is that the Supreme

4 Command Staff at the beginning of 1995 adopted a directive which concerned

5 the combat activities and operations in the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

6 Do you know that?

7 A. Yes, I know of it. I extracted tasks for my corps from it.

8 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if we can have the

9 witness take a look at document D399. It is an act of the army General

10 Staff dated 5th of January, 1995 generated at Kakanj, which is entitled

11 "The directive for continued offensive combat operations."

12 Your Honours, I wanted this document to be translated. It's a

13 lengthy document, and I see it is a very important document and I will say

14 that we will insist on it being translated in its entirety.

15 Unfortunately, the translation service has not managed to translate even

16 the small excerpts that we sought to be translated as a priority, and I

17 will seek your understanding, because this is beyond my powers.

18 The witness, if need be, will be given the copy that I have in my

19 hand.

20 Q. Mr. Witness, could you take a look at this document and confirm

21 whether this is the directive dated 5th of January, 1995, that you had

22 occasion to peruse. Take a look at it. Do you recall this directive it

23 can be seen that is addressed to the commands of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th,

24 5th, 6th, and 7th Corps and the in accordance with the IBOG.

25 A. Yes, I see that the 3rd Corps tasks were listed there and I can

1 remember it.

2 Q. Yes, we will come to that. But, first of all, I'd like you to

3 take a look at page 9. And then we will go back to the beginning of this

4 document.

5 Could you scroll down to the signature.

6 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] What we need from this page, Your

7 Honours, is to see the signature.

8 Q. Witness, do you agree that the brigade general, Hadzihasanovic,

9 produced this document and that it was approved by General Delic?

10 A. Yes, I can see that.

11 Q. Thank you.

12 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] And, Your Honours, if we can take a

13 look at page 10, the one following this one, and then later on I'll be

14 going back to the beginning.

15 If we could take a look. And, Your Honours, I apologise for this

16 part not being translated. I will try to translate it with the help of

17 the witness.

18 Q. Mr. Witness, do you agree that it is written here that this

19 directive was made in eight copies and delivered to the commands of seven

20 corps? Can you see that?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Do you recognise the signature of your commander?

23 A. Yes, I do.

24 Q. Well, and do you agree that there's a note that -- to the effect

25 that at a joint meeting in Zenica with the commander of the General Staff,

1 army general Mr. Rasim Delic, on the 25th of December, 1994, partly and

2 orally, this content of this directive has been made known to the chiefs

3 of administrations of the General Staff commanders of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd,

4 4th, and 7th Corps, and deputy commander of the RV commander of GLLC,

5 commandant of guards brigades, assistant commander for aspects of the

6 armed forces, PK for prospective development of the army of

7 Bosnia-Herzegovina? This is the original, and it says: "Original at the

8 staff of army of Bosnia-Herzegovina."

9 A. Yes, this is correct.

10 Q. So you agree that this directive has been forwarded to all corps.

11 A. It was definitely received by the 3rd Corps and it can be seen

12 here that all the other corps received it.

13 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, can we now please show

14 page 6 of this document. This is page 2 in the English. Page 2 in the

15 English.

16 Q. Witness, look closely at the portion that says "I hereby decide,"

17 or "I have decided." I will quote this short portion for you. It reads:

18 "In the coming defensive combat operations, firmly hold the taken line of

19 defence. Continue carrying out offensive combat operations of operative

20 and tactical importance, particularly for the army, with the following

21 objective: Free the PZT --"

22 And this is what I mean to ask you: "PZT" is short for what?

23 A. Temporarily occupied territory. Temporarily occupied territory.

24 PZT.

25 Q. Thank you very much.

1 "Lift the blockade of the surrounding free territories in the

2 Drina River Valley. Lift the siege of Sarajevo. Link up the forces of

3 the 4th and 7th Corps with those of the 5th Corps. Cut off important

4 roads used by the aggressors for supplies and evacuation. Take control of

5 important roads and industrial facilities for our own needs. And create

6 conditions for the final liberation of our homeland. Carry out battles

7 and operations in accordance with the tasks received or authorised by the

8 commander of the BH army General Staff commander."

9 All right. My question about this is as follows: This assignment

10 may be received by the commander, but it can also be approved. And that's

11 not the same, is it?

12 A. Yes., it's not the same.

13 Q. Can you please explain to the Chamber what that means.

14 A. The task or an assignment received is a task that a superior

15 command hands out to a subordinate unit. A task that is approved or

16 authorised is a task designed and prepared by a subordinate unit. For

17 this task they seek authorisation or approval from their superior command.

18 This task received is a task planned, a design by a superior command. A

19 task that is approved is something that is designed or planned by the

20 directly subordinate command through whichever command is issuing

21 authorisation.

22 Q. In other words, the subordinate command was planning and the

23 commander was authorising this; right?

24 A. Yes, that's precisely what I said, isn't it?

25 Q. Right. Can we now please go to page 7 of the Bosnian. The

1 English reference is page 3. Page 7, please. Page 3 in English.

2 Can you please look at items 5 and 6, sir. In actual fact, item 5

3 is in reference to the tasks of the 2nd Corps and item 6 in relation to

4 the tasks of the 3rd Corps. You see that; right?

5 A. Of course I do.

6 Q. You mentioned a while ago yourself: "I will know as soon as I set

7 eyes on the tasks that we received at the time. I will be able to

8 recognise them."

9 First of all, let me read out the relevant portion to you, the

10 portion that talks about the tasks of the 2nd Corps. That's 5.2. The

11 task of the 2nd Corps is the following: "Liberate the areas of

12 Mount Majovica [phoen], Ban Brdo, Stolica, Busija, and then a list of

13 locations, and reach the Prevoj-Lopare-Celic road, as well as the

14 following, in coordination with the 3rd Corps, liberate the general sector

15 of Vozuca along the Klokotnica-Sevarlije axis cutting off the Chetnik

16 forces at Mount Ozren. With the assistance of other corps, lift the

17 blockade of the free territories of Srebrenica and Zepa and get as far as

18 the River Drina from Zepa to Zvornik. Use parts of its forces in

19 accordance with the decision of the General Staff and join the effort to

20 lift the siege of Sarajevo."

21 And now on to the task for the 3rd Corps. It reads: "Liberate

22 the general sector of Teslic, reach the Mladikovina-Rankovici-Ukunica

23 [phoen] axis and press on towards Prnjavor. In coordination with the 2nd

24 Corps, clear the general sector of Vozuca along the Sevarlije-Preslica

25 axis, cut off the Chetnik forces at Mount Ozren and seize control of the

1 road between Mala Bukovica and Stanari, use some of the forces pursuant to

2 a decision of the General Staff to contribute to the effort of lifting the

3 siege of Sarajevo and the Podrinje area."

4 You agree that the goals set in this directive for the 2nd and 3rd

5 Corps is crystal clear, do you not? The goal being liberating the general

6 Vozuca area and cutting off the Chetnik forces at Mount Ozren in order to

7 be able to enlist the assistance of other corps to lift the siege of the

8 Srebrenica and Zepa territories and get as far as Drina eventually? Would

9 I be right in claiming that?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. For the purposes of the Trial Chamber, if you could just tell us

12 this, the Srebrenica and Zepa areas, the Podrinje area, the Podrinje River

13 Valley, those were protected UN areas, weren't they? Regardless of the

14 protection they enjoyed, they faced an enormous amount of pressure from

15 the Serb forces. Would I be right in stating that, sir?

16 A. I know that this was the case in fact, yes. You are right, as a

17 matter of fact.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry, Madam Vidovic. I see you have stopped

19 because you're looking at us.

20 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I apologise, I thought

21 you were about to ask the witness a question, and that's why I --

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: No, no --

23 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] -- paused. May I press on now?

24 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's fine. No, no. I do want to raise something

25 with you that does concern me. I -- and before I ask the point or

1 question, I just want to put it up front. I do understand that as a

2 cross-examiner you are entitled to lead the witness, to put leading

3 questions to the witness. I'm aware of that. But when you look at your

4 question, if you look at that screen from page 13, line 4 up to page 14,

5 line 4, that's you speaking and the witness says "yes," after all that

6 long speech. And I ask myself, what is he saying yes to? And I ask

7 myself, When -- when judgement is to be written, what -- what sense do we

8 make out of that? I would prefer you to put a question and let the

9 witness answer, even if you want a "yes" answer only. If you want a "yes"

10 answer or a "no" answer, put as one fact at a time. Then we'll know

11 exactly what we're talk -- what he's saying "yes" to.

12 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, well, I do understand

13 what you are suggesting. I'm trying to ask short questions, but this was

14 not a question. This was a quote. What I spent the last few minutes

15 doing is quoting this particular directive. And my only question -

16 perhaps it didn't come across as very clear - was a question that wasn't

17 that long really, and I'm about to repeat it. I do understand the point

18 you're trying to make, and I will try in the future to keep my questions

19 as brief as possible and ask single questions and not multiple ones. I

20 know exactly what you're saying, and thank you for this caution, Your

21 Honour.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: I understand. You're quoting something that we are

23 going to ask that it be admitted into evidence, and if you go back to our

24 guidelines, they say if you have quoted it as extensively as you have

25 done, then it shouldn't be admitted because you're just burdening the

1 record. But even then, you can ask the witness, because you have given

2 him the copy of the document, to read it silently, put your question, and

3 get an answer, but, you know, a short focused question which all of us can

4 understand. That's all I'm asking for. Okay? But you say you

5 understand. You may proceed, ma'am.

6 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honours.

7 Q. Witness, it's true, isn't it, that the goal of this directive was

8 to lift the siege of free territories of Srebrenica and Zepa. Those areas

9 were facing a horrendous situation, weren't they?

10 A. That was one of the goals. That much is certain, yes. I think

11 that paragraph 2 of the commander's decision states this, in no uncertain

12 terms, what the goals were, to liberate the territories and to ease the

13 pressure on the protected areas, the UN-protected areas. It also states

14 the goal of setting free and using again roads, industrial facilities,

15 getting them up and running, that sort of thing.

16 Q. Thank you. You will agree that these measures were necessary for

17 the survival of thousands of people who were stuck in those areas that

18 were under siege?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. The Supreme Command Staff envisaged a tragedy early 1995. They

21 predicted that a disaster would occur, and this was one of the reasons for

22 them issuing this directive. Would I be right in saying that, sir?

23 A. I'm not exactly aware of what they were predicting at the time,

24 but I think this directive was a result of assessments and predictions

25 made not just by the Supreme Command Staff but also by the country's

1 leaders.

2 This is high politics. This is about negotiations. This is about

3 agreements that were being reached. And we know that negotiations were

4 very much futile at the time and continue to be that way all the way up

5 until Dayton, to all practical intents. We know that many areas and

6 enclaves were at risk. This also included the Bosanska Krajina area, the

7 Sarajevo area itself, which was another UN-protected area, and all the

8 other areas. Those most at risk, of course, were Zepa and Srebrenica, and

9 we know what happened.

10 Q. And that's where the disaster struck. Over a matter of days, over

11 seven thousand people were killed. Is that right?

12 A. Yes, that's what most information seems to indicate.

13 Q. Will you agree with me that this directive talked about certain

14 assignments that were justified in the military sense and fully so?

15 A. Yes. There was every military justification. I think it's an

16 inalienable right of any ethnic group to try to protect itself and save

17 itself from extinction.

18 Q. I will ask you about another aspect of the document now. Do you

19 agree that a directive is a general document normally detailing general

20 tasks and assignments to corps?

21 A. What you've just said is something that has been bothering me for

22 a long time, and during the war as well. It was a general document. Did

23 it have to be like that? I don't know. We never really analysed what was

24 done pursuant to this do you -- document. This is the most general kind

25 of document in terms of its nature. This is a general plan, the most

1 general plan possible on how to wage a war of liberation. Had we not

2 carried this through in Vozuca -- well, we hadn't around Tesic and nobody

3 was asking any questions, were they? In my opinion, the questions should

4 have been asked.

5 Q. Very well. Thank you. But the point of my question is this:

6 General Delic is not handing out any assignments to any particular unit in

7 this directive apart from these general assignments in reference to the

8 corps; right?

9 A. Yes, no particular tasks. These are very, very general sweeping

10 assignments, very broad. They don't get any broader than this.

11 Q. Very well.

12 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we can put this

13 document away, but can it please be assigned a number before we do that.

14 I'll come back to it at a later stage, but for the moment I want to move

15 on to another document, P2423.

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can we give you an opportunity to assign it. The

17 document is admitted into evidence. May it please be given an exhibit

18 number.

19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, Exhibit number 384.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

21 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

22 Q. Witness, this document is about to turn up. I wish to state for

23 the record that this is a document by the 3rd Corps command dated the 22nd

24 of August, 1995. This is an order, a stepping up combat readiness order.

25 Witness, can you please have a look. It's a brief document.

1 A. I'm done.

2 Q. Do you agree that above all - at least, that's what the OTP told

3 us - you studied this document closely while you were being prepped for

4 your testimony here; right?

5 A. Yes, on the 22nd of August, 1995. That was the best look I got it

6 at it, because I was the person who actually produced this document.

7 Q. Thank you very much. Do you agree, then, that there is an

8 attachment to this document, a plan, the implementation of assignments

9 given by the General Staff and measures to be taken by the 3rd Corps to

10 step up combat readiness?

11 A. Yes, indeed. That's true.

12 Q. Can you please now turn the page. There's just one thing I'd like

13 you to look at, sir. It's the -- the first box. It says that: "This

14 order --"

15 Oh, right. I apologise, Your Honours. All right. There you go.

16 Number 1 in the English.

17 The first box reads: "Develop plan 'Farz' and provide high degree

18 of safety and success."

19 You say that you were the person that produced this document,

20 don't you.

21 Now, you see that there's reference there to the Farz plan. I

22 want to ask you something about this. This plan, Farz, is a plan of

23 combat activities for the 3rd Corps in September 1995, is it not?

24 A. Indeed it is. This is a plan that was devised by the 3rd Corps.

25 This is what they called it. It was about lifting the siege of the

1 Zavidovici-Tuzla road and also liberating the Vozuca pocket.

2 Q. Can we now move on to the following page, please, page 5 in the

3 English. Page 5.

4 Witness, right at the top of the page you see paragraph 9. Have a

5 look, please, so I don't have to quote for the record. Can you look at

6 paragraphs 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, and 16. It's just what I've been talking

7 about, Your Honours. The pages 10, 11, 13, 14, and 16 are on the

8 following pages. If we can get these pages on our screens, please, in

9 English, the next page.

10 And until such time, Witness, please try to comment on the other

11 paragraphs there you can see. Do you agree that this implementation plan

12 in paragraph 9 entailed assignments by the General Staff in terms of the

13 responsibility of the command staff in terms of combat readiness and

14 carrying out combat operations, and this is something that you included in

15 your plan in relation to lower-ranking commands? Is that right, sir?

16 A. I don't know if the General Staff plan entailed this, but I do

17 know that the General Staff knew about this too, and I did. So it was

18 possible. I know that we needed to remain adamant about reinforcing the

19 command and control structure in lower-ranking units, given the situation

20 in terms of technical ability and -- and in training as well as the

21 overall command and control situation that prevailed in lower-ranking

22 units at the time. As for this assignment, I'm not sure if it stems from

23 this particular plan, but I know that it was indispensable in terms of its

24 inclusion in the 3rd Corps plan in relation to their subordinate units.

25 The plan did entail a necessity to detect criminal activities

1 under paragraph 11.

2 A. Correct.

3 Q. Then under 13, direction of the General Staff to continue working

4 on building the subordinate unit's morale. Did you instruct subordinate

5 units to that effect?

6 A. This assignment was given to subordinate units' commands. There

7 was the corps command handed down this instruction of the General Staff to

8 re-study it with the purpose of building morale.

9 Q. Did you make an assessment of the vices and readiness of the

10 command personnel?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Then you instructed them to analyse the work of court martial and

13 responsibilities of commanders and other measures to be taken. That's

14 under 16.

15 And, Your Honours, that's on page 7 of the English version. I

16 apologise. This is the following page in the English version.

17 A. Yes, this task was assigned, because it was thought that it was

18 necessary to do something in this respect in preparation and mobilisation

19 of the people for the forthcoming combat operation.

20 Q. Do you agree with me that the General Staff and the command of the

21 3rd Corps did much to build up the morale, to fight crime in the

22 subordinate units? Am I right in saying so?

23 A. Yes.

24 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we admit this document into

25 evidence and give it an exhibit number, please.

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

2 please be given an exhibit number.

3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, Exhibit number 385.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

5 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, could we have the

6 witness to take a look at document P2456. P2456. It is, for the benefit

7 of the record, it is a decision of the General Staff of the army of

8 Bosnia-Herzegovina dated 26th of August, 1995.

9 Q. Witness, please take a look at this document. It is entitled

10 "Undertaking of measures as per the directive for 1995."

11 Do you agree that that directive is the one that we perused a

12 couple of moments ago?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And could you tell me, please, that do you agree that this

15 document was forwarded to the commands of the 2nd and 3rd Corps,

16 personally to the commanders?

17 A. Yes, I do remember that.

18 Q. Can you confirm that it was produced at Kakanj?

19 A. Yes.

20 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, could we scroll down,

21 please, so that we can see the end of the document, both in the B/C/S and

22 the English versions.

23 Q. It can be seen, do you agree with me, that -- yes, this is on that

24 page in the English version.

25 So, Witness, do you agree next to the rubber stamp there is the

1 word "approved" and there is a signature?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Do you recognise the signature?

4 A. As far as I can remember, this is the signature of the chief of

5 staff of the operational centre, Mr. Dzambasovic.

6 Q. Do you recall where he was located?

7 A. In 1995, he was at Kakanj together with the person who produced

8 this document.

9 Q. So these initials indicate that --

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. -- do you agree that this document was not signed by General

12 Delic?

13 A. I see it is not signed by him. We used to receive this document

14 through packet service. Most probably Brigadier Dzambasovic approved the

15 signals, personnel to relay it. But I know that this document or this

16 order reached us after the planning had been finished, and I believe that

17 the command -- corps command went to the forward command post at Luke.

18 Q. This is what I want to ask you about: Do you agree that the

19 planning for the operation had complete -- been completed until the 26th

20 of August, 1995, on the part of the both 3rd Corps and the 2nd Corps?

21 A. I know for the 3rd Corps that it had been completed. I think that

22 the approval had been signed or the -- it -- the action was approved.

23 Q. Another thing I'd like to ask you is: Provided that

24 General Delic was at Kakanj on that stage -- on that moment, there would

25 be no reason for somebody else forwarding the document in his stead. He

1 would have signed it were he there.

2 A. Yes. Every soldier at the communications centre knew his

3 signature and there would be no need for another approval.

4 Q. I'd like to ask you about the nub of this document. Do you agree

5 that by this document it was ordered from the command post for -- of

6 Kakanj that commanders of the 2nd and 3rd Corps should prepare -- prepare

7 and elaborate documents in relation to the liberation of the Vozuca

8 pocket? Do you agree that this is stated in -- under 1, item 1 of the

9 document?

10 A. Yes, it is stated so.

11 Q. It is also written that it should be sent back to Kakanj so that

12 it could approve and regulate all the other matters concerning the

13 implementation in order to approve all the other matters. Am I right?

14 A. Yes, you are right.

15 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, could this document be

16 given an exhibit number.

17 Q. And now I would like to ask you another thing --

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

19 please be given an exhibit number.

20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, Exhibit number 386.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

22 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Sir, regardless of who signed this document, General Jusic, please

24 tell me, it is correct, is it not, that it is clearly visible that the

25 General Staff hands down tasks to the commanders of the 2nd and 3rd Corps,

1 their immediate subordinates? Am I right in saying that?

2 A. Yes, this is the procedure. That's correct.

3 Q. You said that's the procedure. The commander of the General Staff

4 is not empowered to hand down directions to the second line of subordinate

5 units; am I right in saying so?

6 A. The commander, as a matter of principle, never issues orders to

7 the 2nd or 3rd line of subordinate units, because in -- by doing so, he

8 would be ignoring the existence and the functioning of the commands of the

9 immediate subordinates. This would never happen, I think. I don't recall

10 it ever happening during the war.

11 Q. Well, thank you. In other words, corps commander will decide and

12 define the task of divisions and autonomous units of divisions.

13 A. Yes, you are right. A corps commander defines the tasks to the

14 divisions and brigades, but there were several immediately subordinate

15 units such as the 3rd Sabotage Reconnaissance Detachment, battalion of

16 military police, anti-aircraft units, and ABHO and communications company.

17 These were subordinate units of -- smaller than battalions but as per our

18 schematic, they were directly immediately subordinate to the corps command

19 or the commander of the corps.

20 Q. In other words, it was envisaged that they -- these units were

21 organically within the composition of the corps.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Brigade commanders would then relay those tasks to their

24 subordinate units, battalions, et cetera; am I right?

25 A. Yes. Division commander to brigade commanders, and staff units;

1 brigade commanders to their subordinate units, such as battalions and

2 autonomous companies.

3 Q. Now I'm going to go back to -- to the Farz operation that we've

4 been discussing. You told us that the commander could hand down a task

5 or, alternatively, he could approve.

6 A. Which commander? If I may interrupt you.

7 Q. I apologise. I am talking about the commander of the Supreme

8 Command Staff or General Staff, and you recently said that the commander

9 could either approve a task from the immediate subordinate or hand down a

10 task to the immediate subordinate.

11 A. Yes, I said that.

12 Q. So such approval would be given on maps when the commander would

13 have available the graphical representations of the planned actions. Am I

14 right?

15 A. As per standards, commanders would approve activities and plans on

16 a map. Mostly he would analyse maps. And in this concrete example, the

17 whole plan was forwarded to the army staff, headed by General

18 Hadzihasanovic. He analysed and studied that plan and proposed to the

19 commander to approve it. I'm not sure how -- to which extent the

20 commander would analyse and study that. I presume that he believed and

21 trusted his chief of staff and his subordinates. I think even that I

22 delivered it personally. And it seems to me that he signed it just taken

23 a look -- having taken a look at the map.

24 Q. I'm going back to the plan. When you say "a complete plan" you

25 mean the plan of the 3rd Corps and not of the subordinate units.

1 A. Yes, just the plan of the 3rd Corps. I reiterate.

2 Q. Thank you. So we are talking about the 3rd Corps' plan, not the

3 plan for the subordinate units or lower units.

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. When a commander approves a plan on a map of the 3rd Corps or any

6 other corps, he -- he does not hand down the tasks or he does not see the

7 task of units which are below the level of corps. Am I right?

8 A. He would see only the tasks of the units which are directly

9 subordinate to the corps command. Division command, autonomous units

10 which are part of the corps command and brigades.

11 Q. And you said when you delivered that plan to the General Staff, to

12 Kakanj, you meant the plan that you had occasion to see yesterday.

13 A. No. A complete plan was delivered to the army staff.

14 Q. What does this mean, "the complete plan," so that the Trial

15 Chamber understands you?

16 A. The complete plan contains both the graphic outlay and the

17 textual -- the text, the narrative, which means the text of the order for

18 the operation. This is a document number 1 in that plan.

19 Furthermore, the schematic of the decision and the plan on a map.

20 Furthermore, orders for important activities, such as intelligence and

21 reconnaissance, security, together with a plan of morale and political

22 affairs in both text and in tables. Then an order for the artillery,

23 together with the action plan that targets for the artillery. Then

24 anti-aircraft defence, ABHO orders, and the plan and order for the

25 communications. This would be a most complex plan, because it would

1 elaborate into great detail how communications should be organised. This

2 would be a very voluminous plan.

3 And finally, a plan and an order of the assistant commander for

4 logistics.

5 All these plans and orders, the individual orders I listed, were

6 signed by the commander and the plans attached to those orders and for the

7 implementation of those orders were signed by the organs who produced

8 them. Orders list the tasks for the immediately subordinate units. That

9 would be the commander of the 35th Division, the commander of the 37th

10 Division, 33rd, 14th Brigade, 7th Muslim Brigade, 375th Brigade, 1st and

11 2nd Manoeuvre Battalion, and the 3rd Sabotage and Reconnaissance

12 Detachment. I think that security, morale, and political issues and

13 logistics were also detailed out.

14 Q. Thank you very much. I will revisit this part that you testified

15 about to provide further clarifications, because I would like to ask you

16 about, specifically about the situation on the unit that we mentioned

17 yesterday. But before that, please, Witness, I would like you to see the

18 map that we mentioned yesterday. I would like the witness to see it as

19 well, because what we saw on the screen was very poorly visible.

20 I would like the Chamber and the witness to see the map that we

21 received. It is a photocopy of the original in colours, and we provided

22 copies for the Trial Chamber, the learned friends, and the witness so that

23 we can elicit some explanations from the witness.

24 Q. Witness, first of all I would like to ask you --

25 MS. VIDOVIC: But before that, Your Honours --

1 Witness, first of all, I would like you to confirm that this is

2 the same map that you saw yesterday and that you drew lines on and

3 encircled certain locations prompted by the Prosecutor. Could you

4 confirm?

5 A. Yes, this is the same map --

6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Ms. Vidovic, just before you proceed, do we have a

7 copy for Mr. Delic?

8 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, we do. However, he signaled to

9 us that he didn't need one, since we spent a long time studying this map

10 together with General Delic, he knows it by heart.

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. I see him smiling and raising

12 a hand. Okay.

13 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. Witness, first of all, do you agree with me that it says "attack

15 plan of the 3rd Corps between the 10th of September and the 10th of

16 October"? Is that correct? I would like you to ask -- I would like to

17 ask you to look at the bottom portion, what is relevant, and I will then

18 go back to the upper part, where it says "approved army General Rasim

19 Delic."

20 It says here that he approved the map and the plan. Can you

21 explain to us why there is no rubber stamp there. It would be customary

22 to see one there, wouldn't it?

23 A. There should be a rubber stamp here.

24 Q. Very well. Let us go to the lower portion of the map where we can

25 see everything marked. Maybe we can put the map on the ELMO, but I

1 believe that Your Honours can follow.

2 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, perhaps at this moment

3 I could kindly ask the witness to take the map with him during the break,

4 to have a good look at it, and then we can go back to the map after the

5 break, since I will have several questions concerning the map, if

6 possible, of course.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: I see Mr. Wood is on his feet. Yes, Mr. Wood.

8 MR. WOOD: Just a point of clarification, Your Honour. I see

9 here, page 29, line 17, 18, 19, "It would be customary to see one there,"

10 referring to a rubber stamp. I just wonder, before we take the break, if

11 he -- she could clarify -- Defence counsel can clarify with the witness

12 exactly what she's talking about, whether where on the map there is no

13 rubber stamp or appears to be none.

14 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

15 Q. Witness, I believe you understood the question. I would like to

16 thank my learned friend. It is important for us to clarify something.

17 Can you see a stamp on this map and where should it be? Also, what sort

18 of a stamp it should be.

19 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we are now discussing

20 the upper left corner. I believe that is what the Prosecutor had in mind.

21 A. In the part where there should be a signature and the stamp of the

22 commander, we can see the signature but there is no stamp. I don't know

23 why that is. There should be one.

24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I -- can I just ask a question: Is there a

25 signature of Mr. Delic on this map? I see his name. I don't see his

1 signature.

2 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

3 Q. The upper left corner, witness.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes. I'm looking at the upper left corner. I see

5 his name. I don't see his signature.

6 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

7 Q. Have a look, witness.

8 A. I see his signature. That is his signature, just below "Rasim,"

9 it says "D." You can clearly make out "Rasim Delic" and then his

10 signature, "D" and the rest of the signature.

11 Q. We do not dispute that, Your Honour.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: I beg your pardon. I thought that looks to me like

13 part of the lines of the map. I -- I take --

14 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] We're not disputing that, Your

15 Honour, since the witness has already confirmed to us that he saw him sign

16 that. It is a bit unclear, but one can say that that is indeed his

17 signature. Perhaps we can continue discussing the map after the break.

18 Does this suffice my learned friend, the Prosecutor?

19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Your learned friend the Prosecutor asked about the

20 stamp and where it should be. If you can deal with that when we come

21 back.

22 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

23 Q. Before the break, can you tell us where it should be?

24 A. It should be across the signature. It should be a round large

25 stamp of the General Staff, or below the signature. But at least part of

1 the signature should be visible.

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: I can see a stamp there.

3 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it seems to me that one

4 can make out the stamp as well. But at the moment I was putting the

5 question, I wasn't able to see that. However, the copy that you have is

6 of better quality than the one I have that was given to us by the

7 Prosecutor. I believe there is a stamp there. Perhaps the witness can

8 confirm that.

9 We are not disputing in any way, Your Honour, that General Delic

10 indeed signed the map. I just wanted to know why there is no stamp.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, you are correct. There

12 is a stamp there to the left of the letter "R." That is the stamp. I

13 know its size, and this is the proper place for it, so that it partially

14 covers the signature.

15 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Very well, Your Honour, we are not

16 disputing that.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Would this then be an

18 appropriate moment?

19 We'll take a break and come back at 4.00, Court adjourned.

20 --- Recess taken at 3.32 p.m.

21 --- On resuming at 3.59 p.m.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes.

23 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

24 Q. Witness, I believe you had sufficient time to have a good look at

25 the map, the map of the Farz plan.

1 A. Yes, I know -- I've known it since 1995.

2 Q. Could you please look at the -- the key, which is in the lower

3 left corner, I believe. It says "Key." There are four arrows, as far as

4 I can understand. They are also in different colours.

5 Is it correct that they should depict the tasks of the 2nd and

6 3rd Corps? Am I understanding it correctly?

7 A. That is the main role of the arrows. However, they should also

8 indicate the direction of activities or operations. They also differ in

9 terms of colour. Therefore, the arrows' role is twofold: The direction

10 of movement of units, and how far they should go in performing the task.

11 Q. In other words, those are the tasks of the unit.

12 A. Correct.

13 Q. Do you agree with me that we can see here the tasks of the

14 3rd Corps?

15 A. Yes. We can see the tasks of units immediately subordinated to

16 the 3rd Corps command.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: I hear you, Madam Vidovic, and the witness seem to

18 see the tasks of the corps and see the significance of those arrows. I

19 for one, I don't see -- I don't understand anything, if you're saying the

20 arrows show the direction of movement, if you say they are different

21 colours, I want to know what is the significance of the difference in

22 colours, and what the tasks are that are being mentioned in each arrow.

23 One, I don't understand the language. Two, even if I did, I don't

24 think I'd be able to understand what the tasks are just by looking at the

25 arrow and the -- and the words next to the arrow. And then I wouldn't

1 understand the significance of the difference in colours.

2 So as you go along and agree with each other, take us along. Tell

3 us what the colour means, what is the direction of each one, which one is

4 3rd Corps instruction there. I see 2nd Corps and the other one is zadatak

5 and it's detailed twice. I don't see 3rd Corps there, so please help us

6 understand. Thank you very much.

7 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

8 Q. Witness, let us look at the key again.

9 A. I can see it.

10 Q. Under the word "key," is there a light yellow arrow? It says

11 "immediate task."

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Below that, there is a dark yellow arrow and the words there are

14 "following," "the following task."

15 A. Yes, that was supposed to be the following task.

16 Q. Very well, Witness. Perhaps in practice it should have been the

17 following task, but now we can only discuss what we can see on the map.

18 The second arrow and the words after it read "the following task"; is that

19 correct?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Underneath there, the third arrow says "subsequent task." Am I

22 correct?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And the pink or light purple arrow reads "2nd Corps task"; am I

25 correct?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. If we have a look at another portion of the map, on the opposite

3 side, can you explain to the Chamber that what we see here are certain

4 directions marked with arrows bearing different colours? Can you explain

5 that to us? You took part in the planning. Can you tell us whether

6 indeed we can see different colours on the map and what they mean.

7 A. By your leave, certainly I will explain.

8 Q. Yes, please go ahead.

9 A. Your Honours, the key on the map is an explanation of certain

10 markings or a part of the plan that we can see depicted on the map. The

11 arrows were there to show -- for example, let's have a look at the Vozuca

12 pocket. From the west to the east, we see yellow arrows. And at the tip

13 of those arrows, there is a dotted line connecting all of the yellow

14 arrows.

15 Please have a look at this part, where it says -- where it says

16 "the 7th Muslim Brigade," looking from the west towards the east. At the

17 top of the -- at the tip of those arrows, you can see a dotted blue line,

18 and it depicts the immediate task to be performed by these units. That

19 was the line in the field which they were supposed to reach in the course

20 of the immediate task.

21 The following task is the advancement of units. And that is

22 standard procedure to call tasks immediate, following, and subsequent.

23 The next phase, as explained already by the Defence counsel, is

24 marked in darker yellow, and the tips of the arrows are connected by a

25 double dotted line. That was the area in the field that the units were

1 supposed to reach in the following task.

2 The green arrows depict the subsequent task and the line to be

3 reached in the course of that task. For the 3rd Corps, it was the River

4 Krivaja. We have a double dotted line interspersed with the dots. That

5 was supposed to be the subsequent task. This was the subsequent task for

6 the 3rd Corps; whereas, the 2nd Corps had their subsequent task to reach

7 the Krivaja River from the opposite side. We can see their arrows here,

8 pertaining to the 2nd Corps.

9 The map depicts the axis of activity of the 2nd Corps, and the

10 tips of the arrows show the area which they were supposed to reach. The

11 line of contact is the double dotted line interspersed with dots.

12 Can you follow me, Your Honours?

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Not quite. I see you pointing at arrows which seem

14 to be coming from the north-west towards the double dotted line, which I

15 would have assumed would have been the task of the -- of the 3rd Corps,

16 because the -- the 2nd Corps, I thought, should be coming from east going

17 west. That's how I thought it should be. And I see one, two, three

18 arrows that show the movement of the 2nd Corps.

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is correct. That is what I

20 wanted to explain. I described the immediate, following, and subsequent

21 tasks of the 3rd Corps; that is, my corps.

22 I wanted to explain what the colours mean, as well as the arrows

23 that we can see in the key and what they are supposed to represent on the

24 map.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sure.

1 JUDGE HARHOFF: Can I just follow up with one question to the

2 witness: General, in the following attack, suddenly the lines become

3 double tracked. Does that have any significance or is it just to show

4 that this is the following attack?

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is correct. It merely

6 indicates that it is the next task of the same unit, of the same force.

7 JUDGE HARHOFF: So it has nothing to do with the speed of the

8 advance.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

11 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] May I continue, Your Honours?

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just a moment.

13 [Trial Chamber confers]

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry about that. Thank you so much.

15 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. General, you told us that you are very familiar with the map, and

17 now you had an occasion to see it again. A simple question therefor:

18 Would you with me that there are no tasks depicted on this map that would

19 pertain to the El Mujahidin unit? Am I correct?

20 A. On this map, we can see the tasks of the 35th Division, then of

21 the 7th Muslim Brigade, the 375th Brigade, and the 1st Manoeuvre Battalion

22 as units who are immediately subordinated to the 3rd Corps.

23 Q. My question therefore is: Can you confirm to us that we do not

24 see the tasks of the El Mujahidin unit on the map?

25 A. I presume that the order of the 3rd Corps did not envisage any

1 particular movements of the El Mujahidin detachment. However, in the

2 35th Division, they had their own tasks, and their tasks are depicted on

3 the map, and they, the El Mujahidin Detachment, were a part of the 35th

4 Division. Therefore their tasks should be encompassed in the tasks of the

5 35th Division.

6 Q. But can you see that on the map? That is the question.

7 A. It is difficult to answer the way you want me to. I know where

8 the unit went; however, it is not marked on the map. We do not see its

9 first and last name on the map.

10 Q. Do you agree with me that this was for the reason that it needn't

11 be marked on the map? Or, rather, can you explain to the Chamber - I

12 don't want to lead. I want to elicit answers from you - do you know why

13 we cannot see the unit on the map?

14 A. We cannot see any particular unit of the 35th Division at the

15 level of battalion. Therefore, standard procedure does not require to

16 depict units of subordinate commands. Therefore, we do not see them here.

17 Q. That is because that unit is at least three levels down below the

18 General Staff, which was supposed to approve this attack. Am I correct?

19 A. Yes. The General Staff would be the fourth level up.

20 Q. Therefore the General Staff would be four levels up, compared to

21 the El Mujahidin Detachment; is that correct?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Concerning this, I want to ask you the following: Is this

24 correct, is it not, that General Delic by signing approved the plan of

25 activities of the 3rd Corps, and they approved their task as his

1 immediately subordinated unit? Am I correct?

2 A. It is correct that General Delic, or rather, the General Staff,

3 approved the plan for the 3rd Corps, including only the subordinated units

4 of the 3rd Corps -- the first subordinated units of the 3rd Corps.

5 Q. Therefore that does not encompass the El Mujahidin detachment?

6 A. The El Mujahidin detachment was not part of the 3rd Corps.

7 Several months before that it had been resubordinated to the command of

8 the 35th Division.

9 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I wish to tender this

10 map as an exhibit since I believe it is much clearer and easier to

11 understand and therefore will be of greater assistance to the Chamber.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: The map is admitted into evidence. May it please

13 be given an exhibit number.

14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, Exhibit number 387.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

16 JUDGE HARHOFF: But before we leave the map, Mrs. Vidovic, I think

17 it would be useful if the general could assist us in pointing out some of

18 the locations which we were discussing yesterday and which brought us to

19 an exchange of views about the -- the -- the accuracy of the witness's

20 testimony.

21 Questioned by the Court:

22 My question is: If we look right north from Paljenik, we see a

23 flag saying "34" -- sorry, "35" and then IKM, and that is Livarde. I

24 suppose that was the forward command post of the 35th Division at Livarde;

25 is that correct, General?

1 A. Yes, of the 35th Division at Livarde. Yes. Yes.

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: All right.

3 JUDGE HARHOFF: Then if we move down towards the south from that

4 point, it says in the middle of the area 35D and then KOV. What does that

5 mean? Is that just the area of responsibility of the 35th Division or

6 ...? Do you see it?

7 Yes, there, just where you have your pen. There.

8 A. This is the name of the 35th Division of the land forces. This is

9 the mark inscribed by the map writer and should be in the middle of the

10 zone of responsibility of that division. We have discussed this, division

11 zone of responsibility from Krvavac and north of Maglaj. In my opinion,

12 it would have been better if that mark were made here with larger -- in

13 larger letters, larger letters than the letters for the brigades. And

14 this would be as -- as per our standards. But whoever drew this map, they

15 did it poorly. They should have relocated the marking, because then one

16 would be misled to believing that this is -- only this was the

17 responsibility of the 35th Division. But this whole area was their zone

18 of responsibility. This is not a zone. This is the name of the largest

19 unit whose zone of responsibility this is, and this is the 35th Division.

20 JUDGE HARHOFF: Yes. And the reason I'm asking, of course, is

21 that if you look south of Zavidovici, there you see again the same marking

22 of the 35th Division in -- in larger letters now. So I just wanted to be

23 sure if there was any difference between the two, but I understand from

24 your testimony that the whole -- the whole operation was controlled by the

25 35th Division. Is that correct?

1 A. No. No.

2 JUDGE HARHOFF: No. Oh.

3 A. No. The operation was managed by the commander of the 3rd Corps,

4 Your Honours. This is the overall zone. But in this region, we had

5 defensive units which were under the 35th Division. So they were engaged

6 in defence. But the other units were encompassed by this plan and the

7 plan envisaged their engagement in defence. But the basis and the launch

8 pad for the offensive part of the operation were units outside the 35th

9 Division, because the 35th Division was involved through one or two

10 battalions. Most of those attacking units were from the 3rd Corps: The

11 7th Muslim, 375th Brigade, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Manoeuvre Battalions,

12 sabotage and reconnaissance companies. All these units were part of the

13 command of the 3rd Corps. They were subordinated immediately to them.

14 And in practical terms, the Operation Farz was commanded by the 3rd Corps

15 command and was effected in the area where the 35th Division had organized

16 and maintained defence for years before that in 1992, 1993, 1994, and then

17 in 1995.

18 If you have not grasped what I am saying, you may ask additional

19 questions, please.

20 JUDGE HARHOFF: I understand you perfectly well, but I just wanted

21 it to be clear, because I saw that the -- these markings had been done

22 several places on the map. Thank you.

23 So one more question: Also on the map, inside the pocket you see

24 small signs of armoury or weaponry in red. I would assume that these are

25 the Serb -- or the -- the Serbian positions? Is that correct?

1 A. Yes, these are Serb -- Serb positions marked in red.

2 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Maybe -- let me also just raise one or two

4 questions. At coordinate longitude 14 and vertical 20, there -- there's a

5 name there, "7.vmobr." What does that mean? Longitudinal 14 and

6 latitudinal 20. Have you found it?

7 A. I think I have. This is the 7th -- the 7th Chivalrous Muslim

8 Liberation Brigade. And you have the digits "7" and "10" behind it in

9 red. Is that it?

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's it.

11 A. Which means -- this is the name of the 7th Muslim Brigade. It had

12 its full title as follows: It was the Chivalrous -- 7th Chivalrous

13 Muslim Liberation Brigade. And this is the area where they were located

14 and performed an attack, and that brigade, the 7th Chivalrous Muslim

15 Liberation Brigade.

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: All right. Then at coordinate longitudinal 10 and

17 latitudinal 24, there's a little fleck there to the left, and below it in

18 a -- in a south-easterly direction there's 1.mnb. What does that stand

19 for?

20 A. The acronym -- the acronym for the 1st Manoeuvre Battalion, which

21 was directly subordinated to the command of the 3rd Corps, which means it

22 was immediately subordinated unit, and manoeuvre battalions were

23 immediately subordinated units of the corps command.

24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

25 And finally, we -- we have Exhibit 380, which was this map that

1 was being used, I think, by the OPT yesterday -- OTP, I beg your pardon.

2 Notwithstanding that, you still want this one to go in? I understand that

3 that one was not as detailed as this one. It was much smaller and...

4 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, by all means, yes, Your Honour.

5 Yes.

6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. And we have given it Exhibit

7 number 387. Okay. Thank you so much.

8 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] If I may continue, Your Honours.

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may. You may. Thank you so much.

10 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you very much.

11 Cross-examination by Ms. Vidovic: [Continued]

12 Q. Witness, I'm going to dwell on planning a while longer. Did I

13 understand you correctly when you said that in July 1995 the Vozuca action

14 was not planned by the 3rd Corps but, rather, by the 35th Division?

15 A. Yes, you understood me correctly. At that point -- at that time,

16 the 3rd Corps command was engaged in the lifting of the siege of Sarajevo.

17 Q. Which means that this plan was approved by the corps command, if I

18 understood you correctly.

19 A. I must explain this right now. I did not see that plan at all,

20 but I think I did not see it and I don't know whether the commander signed

21 it, but I think he did, because that activity would not have been

22 implemented without his signature. It was not submitted for study. I did

23 not study it, but I think the commander approved it. I stress, after

24 explaining the difference between "approved" or"authorised" and "given" or

25 "received" tasks, I think that the commander approved it, yes.

1 Q. Right. Which means that the plan for the July action was not

2 approved by the Supreme Command Staff. Am I right in saying so?

3 A. That plan did not go to the -- through the approval procedure at

4 the Supreme Command Staff as per our standards. Such plans approved by

5 3rd Corps or corps level should not or do not have to be relayed upwards

6 to Supreme Command Staff.

7 Q. Thank you. You told us that you were involved in Operation Farz

8 planning, and you told us at the time the El Mujahid division was

9 resubordinated to the 35th Division. Am I right in concluding that

10 neither in the written decisions and orders nor in the maps and plans the

11 El Mujahedin was mentioned?

12 A. You are correct. That detachment, that unit was not mentioned

13 anywhere there.

14 Q. In other words, in the plan that was seen by the staff, be it by

15 General Delic or General Hadzihasanovic, there was no mention of the

16 El Mujahedin detachment. No, there was no markings and no mention, and

17 they could not know that.

18 Q. Thank you. I'll ask you another question about this thing. Do

19 you agree that units which are attached to some other units or are

20 resubordinated to some other units, that they are given the tasks by the

21 commander in whose composition that unit implements a combat task? Am I

22 right in saying so?

23 A. Yes, you are right. By all means, the resubordinated unit must

24 effect the orders of the commander to whom they're resubordinated, and

25 that command is duty-bound to supply them with everything as if they were

1 their own unit.

2 Q. Thank you. Discussing the issue of commanding yesterday, you

3 said, and you reiterated that today that, the July operation against the

4 Vozuca pocket was commanded by the -- a commander of the 35th Division.

5 A. Yes, that's correct.

6 Q. Then you said that the September operation was commanded from one

7 axis -- from one direction by the 3rd Corps and from the other direction,

8 the 2nd Corps.

9 A. Yes, commander of the 2nd Corps from one direction and the

10 commander of the 3rd Corps from the other direction.

11 Q. Now I'm going to focus on the September operation, and in

12 connection with that, I would like to have the witness see the document

13 D390.

14 And for the record, before it appears on the screen, I would like

15 to say that this is an information of the forward command post of the 3rd

16 Corps at Luke dated 29th of August, 1995.

17 Let us see whether it's on the screen in both versions. And would

18 the witness please peruse this document.

19 You said yesterday that the 3rd Corps established a forward

20 command post for that September operation at Luke and Kamenica.

21 A. At Luke, yes.

22 Q. Thank you. So did I understand you correctly that this was the

23 forward command post from which combat activities were commanded from on

24 the part of the 3rd Corps against the Vozuca pocket?

25 A. Yes, this was the forward command post and it became the main

1 command post throughout this operation, which means that the report from

2 the command of Zenica were sent to the forward command post of Luke, where

3 then these reports were processed as daily combat reports.

4 Q. Thank you. Let us dwell on this document a while longer. Do you

5 agree that this document tells about reporting of the subordinated units?

6 Please take a look at what is stated below the delivered -- the phrase

7 "delivered to," or "sent to."

8 A. I can see. And not for the first time.

9 Q. Yes. Do you agree that this document serves to inform that the

10 reporting of commanders of the subordinate units to the commander of the

11 3rd Corps will be -- will take part at a certain date at a certain time

12 and who is going to be attending that briefing?

13 A. Yes, it can be seen and it is standard procedure to determine who

14 should come where.

15 Q. Thank you. And do you agree that El Mujahedin is not part of the

16 briefing?

17 A. El Mujahidin's representatives did not take part or attend.

18 Q. And they were not meant to attend?

19 A. No, they were not meant to attend.

20 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we admit this document into

21 evidence and can it be given an exhibit number, please.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. And may it

23 please be given an exhibit number.

24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, Exhibit number 388.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

1 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, a clarification for

2 the transcript. Page 45, line 23, my question concludes with the words

3 "the El Mujahedin detachment" and then the witness said - it was his

4 answer - [In English] "there is no marking and no mention." That was the

5 witness's answer; whereas, the transcript shows as if it was all part of

6 my question.

7 I am doing my utmost not to speak too quickly today. Perhaps we

8 can clarify that.

9 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Would the counsel and the

10 witness mind to pause between questions and answers.

11 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

12 Q. I wanted to ask the witness the following: In the plan that was

13 studied by the staff, be it by General Delic or General Hadzihasanovic,

14 there was no mention of the El Mujahedin detachment. Can you repeat

15 your -- what your answer was.

16 A. There was no mention. It was not marked anywhere.

17 Q. Thank you very much.

18 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this should clear the

19 mistake in the transcript.

20 Has the latest document been given an exhibit number? It has.

21 Thank you very much.

22 Perhaps we can show D391 to the witness. For the record, it is an

23 order of the 3rd Corps at Luke, which has to do with the team for direct

24 command and control of the attack Operation Farz.

25 Q. Witness, please have a look at the document. Its first page, then

1 the second page briefly. I presume you're familiar with the document.

2 Do you agree with me that it is a 3rd Corps document signed by the

3 commander?

4 A. Yes. Yes, it does come from the 3rd Corps. It is the

5 organisation of monitoring and control of the Farz operation.

6 Q. Therefore you agree with me that a team was put in place to

7 directly control and plan this action.

8 A. This order is on the formation of a team which is supposed to

9 immediately control the operation that had been planned from beginning to

10 end.

11 Q. Do you agree that this order was implemented?

12 A. Yes, it was implemented in full, as stated in writing.

13 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Perhaps we

14 could assign an exhibit number to this document.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

16 please be given an exhibit number.

17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, Exhibit number 389.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

19 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Perhaps to gain some time I would

20 like to deal with the following topic briefly only.

21 Q. Do you agree with me that the way of reporting between units was

22 standard procedure? It was well-regulated. Namely, it was well-known

23 which level of command can report to what level that comes next.

24 A. It was clearly stated who was to inform the General Staff, the

25 corps command, and the subordinate units, including brigade commands. It

1 was all regulated by separate orders, and those orders are usually

2 entitled "The organisation of reporting in the units."

3 Q. Thank you. Let us have a look at D393 now.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: As we go to D393, Madam Vidovic, how much time do

5 you still need? You've exhausted the 1 hour, 59 minutes that was used by

6 the OTP.

7 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Not much, Your Honour. Twenty

8 minutes at the most, depending on the answers. Maybe less.

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. You may proceed, ma'am.

10 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] D393. For the record, it is a

11 document of the forward command post at Luke dated the 29th of August,

12 1995, ordering regular daily combat reporting of the subordinate units.

13 Q. Have a look at the document. Since we are -- do not have much

14 time, can you confirm us -- to us that this is a 3rd Corps document?

15 A. This is an authentic document, and it was issued immediately prior

16 to the combat activities regulating the way of reporting to the 3rd Corps

17 command.

18 Q. Have a look at item 5, please. But before that, have a look at

19 item 3. Do you agree that this order states that: "The reports will be

20 sent by all subordinated commands and units in direct communication with

21 the corps commander, except the units that are currently resubordinated to

22 other units"?

23 A. Correct. In principle, it always had to be defined so as to avoid

24 any confusion in the process of reporting.

25 Q. Related to this, I wanted to ask you a simple question: Even had

1 the El Mujahedin sent reports, according to this order, theoretically,

2 hypothetically speaking, according this order, such orders would not have

3 been sent to the 3rd Corps. Am I correct?

4 A. They were not supposed to, and they did not send any reports to

5 the 3rd Corps.

6 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I wish to

7 tender this as an exhibit.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Let me just get something clear here. This

9 paragraph 3 however does say "except the units that are currently

10 subordinated to other units." Is it -- am I correct to say that it is

11 your evidence that the El Mujahedin detachment had been resubordinated to

12 the 35th Division?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: So by this very order, they were not expected to

15 give their report, because they are accepted.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is correct.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Thank you very much.

18 The document is admitted into evidence. May it please be given an

19 exhibit number.

20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, Exhibit number 390.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

22 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Witness, to clarify something, His Honour asked you the

24 following: Judge Moloto asked you, which reads "it wasn't expected of

25 them to send reports because they were accepted"?

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Excepted, not accepted. Excepted.

2 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Excepted. Sorry. I apologise, Your

3 Honour. Very well. I withdraw the question.

4 Q. But so can you explain briefly why they were not expected [as

5 interpreted]?

6 A. Your Honour, the El Mujahedin was resubordinate to the 35th

7 Division. It was not the resubordinated unit. I cannot tell you exactly

8 which units there were subordinated to that division, though. I think it

9 was the 3rd and the 4th Manoeuvre Detachment. However, this order

10 stipulates that all the units should forward their reports apart from

11 those that were resubordinated, who were lent, so to say, to another

12 command. And I hope that is the way you understood it.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes. That's the explanation you gave me. You've

14 just given it a second time and I understand. Thank you very much.

15 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

16 Q. Witness, I want to move to a topic that you were not examined on

17 still or yet, which has to do with the treatment of prisoners of war.

18 Can we show Exhibit 385 to the witness, please. 384. That was a

19 directive. Page 8. 384.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's exhibit, not document? Madam Vidovic?

21 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, as I said, exhibit. This is

22 the exhibit. Page 8, please. In the English, it is page 4.

23 Q. Witness, please have a look at item 17, one part of it, the last

24 sentence at page 17, at the very bottom. It reads: "Procedure with

25 prisoners is to be initiated and completed together with the military

1 police organs, engaging commanding officers from the military security and

2 trained organs as necessary."

3 I wanted to ask you the following: You saw the front page. It

4 was a directive issued in 1995. Do you agree that the directive orders

5 that no one should have any contact or be able to treat prisoners of war

6 apart from the military police and competent intelligence organs? Am I

7 correct?

8 A. You are, and this is what is stated in the directive. That was

9 the standard way of organising of the functioning of any activities

10 pertaining to the prisoners of war. Throughout the war, the military

11 police and military intelligence organs should have been involved in that.

12 No one else. This is merely reaffirming something that had been defined

13 and was supposed to be put in place.

14 Q. Very well. In other words, the corps were warned yet again that

15 it was the military police that was supposed to be dealing with the

16 prisoners of war.

17 A. Precisely so.

18 Q. We can put this document away.

19 I wanted to ask you this: Corps -- the various corps received

20 orders from the General Staff to treat prisoners in keeping with the

21 Geneva Conventions; am I correct?

22 A. Yes.

23 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, could we please show

24 D184 to the witness -- D184A.

25 Your Honours, a clarification for the transcript. Page 53, lines

1 19 and 20. The witness said that it was the military police and military

2 security who were supposed to work with witnesses. What was put in the

3 transcript was "military intelligence."

4 Q. Witness, were we discussing military security or military

5 intelligence?

6 A. Military security and the military police. I did not mention

7 military security.

8 Q. Therefore you mentioned the military police and military security.

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And you did not mention the military intelligence service.

11 A. No. Military intelligence service dealt with completely different

12 tasks. It is a separate part, a separate sector within the organ of the

13 command.

14 Q. Witness, that is clear now. Let us have a look at the document.

15 The date of the document is the 27th of July, 1993, sent from the staff of

16 the Main Command to the 3rd Corps command.

17 Do you see that?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. It is a short document. Do you agree that it has to do with the

20 provincial, Mr. Petar Andjelovic, member of the Presidency, concerning

21 certain issues with Croatian citizens?

22 Have a look at the lower portion of the document. Can you see

23 that part, the third paragraph, do you agree that it says the units under

24 your command in this and other similar cases should display discipline and

25 correct behaviour forces which will guarantee security for all the

1 population, regardless of its religious or national affiliation? And do

2 you agree that this document as well is trying to direct the attention of

3 the 3rd Corps to the treatment -- appropriate treatment of prisoners of

4 war according to the Geneva Conventions?

5 A. I know that this document came into being after the events of

6 Bugojno where there were many victims and casualties on both sides. On

7 one side was the HVO; on the other, the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina. I

8 heard that General Delic was in contact with certain politicians and

9 certain -- with certain clerics. I know when this document was sent out,

10 and it is quite clear in what it states. It directs everyone to behave in

11 keeping with the Geneva Conventions.

12 Q. Did he merely react to an issue raised by the Provincial Mr.

13 Petar Andjelovic?

14 A. Yes, he's a prominent person in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

15 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I wish to

16 tender this as an exhibit.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

18 please be given an exhibit number.

19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, Exhibit number 391.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

21 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Now, if the witness can see document

22 381.

23 Q. Please take a look and tell me if you agree that this is an order

24 for the implementation of provisions of international humanitarian law

25 from -- dated 8th of May, 1995, addressed to the commands of all corps,

1 among other addressees.

2 Do you see that?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Could we scroll down to see the phrase "I order."

5 General, please take a look at that. This is on the following

6 page in the English version, please.

7 I would like to ask you, Witness: Is it correct that this

8 document also instructs the addressees to implement provisions of Geneva

9 Conventions which are provided to the addressees on these pages?

10 A. Geneva Convention as a document had already been sent to the

11 units, and they had occasion to study it. I remember when we received

12 this document this was initiated -- this initiated and prompted

13 subordinate units to study and be familiar with provisions of the Geneva

14 Conventions.

15 Q. Thank you.

16 Can we see the following page in the Bosnian version.

17 Please, do you agree that there is strict instruction provided in

18 item 3 which says: "Do not accommodate prisoners of war in areas caught

19 up in immediate combat operations"?

20 A. Yes, this is how it was defined in this text.

21 Q. Thank you. So you are familiar with the existence of such

22 instructions.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Then, General, I'd like to ask you in connection with this the

25 following --

1 MS. VIDOVIC: Can we have this document admitted into evidence,

2 Your Honours, please.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

4 please be given an exhibit number.

5 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, Exhibit number 392.

6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

7 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

8 Q. Witness, please, I would like to ask you about this document the

9 following: You said that you were part of a command which planned the

10 Farz operation. You never heard about any other misconduct addressed at

11 prisoners of war. I could conclude from the document that I saw or from

12 the communication you had you did not receive any information about any

13 mistreatment of prisoners of war during that operation or any killing of

14 prisoners of war. Am I right in saying that?

15 A. Although I was present at briefings and reportings that were

16 organised then, I never heard anybody reporting that they had taken

17 prisoners. I do not recall and I think that assistant military

18 security -- assistant commander for military security, I presume he may

19 have briefed the commander at another point in time. I don't know about

20 that.

21 Q. So you do not have any information that anything of the sort was

22 briefed.

23 A. I don't have any information about this being the topic of

24 briefings. I did not hear myself personally anything. But I know that at

25 a subsequent stage around the 20th and the 30th, that two -- or, rather,

1 four people were captured at Kraljica, and I know that they were forwarded

2 to the Zenica prison.

3 Q. Thank you.

4 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we show the witness another

5 document, and this -- by this I will conclude my cross. Please retrieve

6 document D382.

7 For the record, this document is a document from the 3rd Corps

8 command dated 15th of September, 1995. And, Your Honours, I noticed that

9 this copy is a poor one in the Bosnian language, so I would like to ask

10 that the witness be given this hard copy, and I would like the witness to

11 pay attention to this document and which section of the document I'm about

12 to tell him.

13 Q. First, Witness, can you confirm that this is a 3rd Corps command

14 document dated 15th of September, 1995. And please take a look at page 3,

15 which is page 4 in the English version. Page 4, Your Honours.

16 Mention is being made in this report of the corps or in this part

17 which regulates the security situation. You've taken a look at this

18 section. Can you confirm or can you agree that this text states that the

19 condition and functioning of the security system is satisfactory? Can you

20 see that?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. That the forces conducted a search of the newly liberated

23 territory and that during the course of the day some ten Chetniks were

24 liquidated and that the action is continuing; and that in the newly

25 liberated visits of Vozuca, military police and MUP forces together

1 control the territory, and can you see that on the 15th of September

2 prisoners of war are treated in accordance with the Geneva Conventions and

3 that they are organisationally being transferred to the CPRVZ. I presume

4 this is a POW reception centre.

5 Can you confirm that?

6 A. Yes, I agree that this is how the General Staff received this

7 information. What the acronym CPRVZ stands for is the reception of

8 prisoners of war centre in Zenica. So this centre was not under a tree

9 somewhere in the field, so to speak. Security organs the military police,

10 and once captured, would escort prisoners of war to this military prison.

11 Q. So this report mentions prisoners of war that are being treated in

12 compliance with the Geneva Conventions?

13 A. This can be concluded from this report, and I do believe that this

14 was so.

15 Q. In other words, the 3rd Corps had no information that prisoners of

16 war are being mistreated or killed on -- by anybody in their zone of

17 responsibility until that date. Am I right?

18 A. There were no such information reaching the command. Had there

19 been, they would have been forwarded to the superior command.

20 Q. Thank you very much.

21 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I have no further questions for this

22 witness. But before that, I would like this document to be tendered into

23 evidence as an exhibit.

24 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

25 please be given an exhibit number.

1 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, Exhibit number 393.

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

3 Mr. Wood.

4 MR. WOOD: I do have some follow-up questions, Your Honour. I see

5 that we're approaching time designated for the break. I believe these

6 questions might go longer than the five minutes that we might have before

7 that. I leave it to your discretion as to whether we should take the

8 break now or if I should ask a few questions and then we could go on.

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Wood, that's something like seven minutes. I'm

10 sure more than seven questions can be asked. Let's make use of the time.

11 MR. WOOD: I'll do that, Your Honour.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

13 Re-examination by Mr. Wood:

14 Q. Mr. Jusic, you mentioned in your testimony that -- I believe it

15 was page 26, lines 18 through 20 -- you said you delivered the map that

16 we've been discussing today personally to the Commander Delic. Can you

17 tell the Court where that was that you delivered the map and where it was

18 that he signed that map?

19 A. Your Honours, I must explain and use a couple of minutes for that.

20 I remember to -- that I've carried a complete plan of an operation to the

21 Supreme Command Staff at Kakanj. I'm not sure, but I think that that plan

22 was left there for one night to be studied by the professional and expert

23 services of the General Staff. I cannot remember exactly whether I

24 delivered this plan for the signature of General Delic or my commander,

25 because there was several occasions during the war where plans had to be

1 carried and delivered. Sometimes my commander would do so; sometimes I

2 would. The way that happened in Mostar in the 7th Corps.

3 I'm not sure whether I did it every time, but at least once I did

4 deliver it for it to be studied, but I'm not sure whether I went back to

5 collect it. I'm not sure whether I did go back to collect it. It is

6 possible. It's just that my memory does not serve me well. Maybe I may

7 be reminded of that.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just for my own edification, if we can just get a

9 clearer answer: Is it your testimony that you did deliver this map but

10 you didn't fetch it -- you're not sure whether you fetched it, or is your

11 testimony that on one occasion you delivered a map but you didn't fetch it

12 but you can't say which map it was?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this map, this is the

14 map I'm referring to, the map of the Farz operation. Once I delivered the

15 whole plan, I'm not sure whether it was returned for further elaboration

16 and I'm not sure whether I brought that same plan for signing. If it was

17 not sent back for further elaboration, it was signed, because we saw the

18 map with the signature on it. But what I cannot claim is I'm -- that I'm

19 sure that I brought it or that the commander of the corps brought it

20 there. They are the only two persons who could have done it, me or the

21 commander of the corps.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may proceed, Mr. Wood. I give up.

23 Q. And when you say, Mr. Jusic, that it was brought "there," where do

24 you mean? Where exactly was this map signed?

25 A. To Kakanj. To the forward command post at Kakanj.

1 Q. As the 3rd Corps chief of staff, did you ever see Rasim Delic in

2 the 3rd Corps command headquarters?

3 A. After I assumed my duty --

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry. Madam Vidovic.

5 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I do not see this question being

6 derived from my cross-examination. I did not dwell on this in my

7 cross-examination.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Wood.

9 MR. WOOD: Yes, Your Honour, this goes to the part of the

10 cross-examination relating to the alleged lack of communication between

11 different units in the ABiH. I believe this goes to that part of it, in

12 that way is relevant.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Why don't you talk about communication rather than

14 talk about seeing him in the 3rd Corps headquarters, 3rd Corps command

15 headquarters. And if he tells you about communication, you can ask him

16 where that communication took place. And if it took place in that, he

17 will tell you. [Microphone not activated] And then at least you are

18 making a basis -- you are laying your foundation.

19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour, please.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Pardon.

21 I think -- I think try to restrict yourself to communication and

22 if you want to build up to communication in the 3rd Corps, do so.

23 MR. WOOD: Thank you, Your Honour.

24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

25 Q. On the question of communication, Mr. Jusic, we heard testimony

1 that during the cross-examination that there was difficulties in

2 communication among the different units of the 3rd Corps, among the

3 different units of the ABiH. Was that your testimony?

4 A. Yes.

5 MR. WOOD: If the witness could be shown Exhibit 2561 -- I'm

6 sorry, document P02561, please.

7 And I see, Your Honour, it is fifteen after.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: If it's convenient for you, but if you want to show

9 the document, do say so. What do you want to do?

10 MR. WOOD: It is convenient to take a break.

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, in that event then we'll take a break and

12 come back at quarter to 6.00. Court adjourned.

13 --- Recess taken at 5.13 p.m.

14 --- On resuming at 5.45 p.m.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Wood.

16 MR. WOOD: Yes, Your Honour.

17 Again if document P02561 could be brought up in e-court so that

18 the witness can see that. I see that's there now.

19 Q. First of all, Mr. Jusic, could you tell the Court what is this

20 document?

21 A. I can see the operational log of the observation post of the

22 commanders. After that, the 3rd Corps command.

23 Q. And what would be the purpose of this document? What would be the

24 purpose of producing this document in terms of military necessity?

25 A. Such a document practically did not have any significance at the

1 moment when it was produced, because this document contained notification

2 of certain information maintained by the duty operational officer in the

3 duty operational centre or a person appointed by the duty operational

4 officer, and the purpose of the information maintained in such a document

5 was as a reminder at a later date or for study purposes of -- if anybody

6 were studying and trying to decide what was going on at that precise

7 moment.

8 Q. Was it important that the information in this document be

9 accurate?

10 A. I think it was important, but it -- this information did not have

11 immediate use, because everybody in the command had these information

12 available. So this log may have an importance for later historical

13 analyses.

14 Q. If page 2 of that document could be shown to the witness, please.

15 And this would be page 1 of the English translation.

16 If I could draw your attention, sir, to numbers 4 and 5. If you

17 could read those to yourself, please.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can we see the end of the entry for item 5 in the

19 English, please.

20 MR. WOOD: Yes, the end for -- the end for number 5 spills on to

21 page 6 of the English translation. There's a few words there.

22 Q. Have you had a chance to read those, sir?

23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Wait a minute. We came from point 5. Now we see

24 point 29.

25 MR. WOOD: I see that, Your Honour. So it's going to be page -- I

1 might have misspoken. It's page 2 of the English. Item 6 spills on to

2 page 2 of the English. And I see that it's on the screen now.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Item 5.

4 MR. WOOD: Item 5, yes. Item 5 spells on to page 2 of the

5 English.

6 Q. Now, first of all, Mr. Jusic, can you tell us what is meant by the

7 designation 09.09.95 19.15 on number 4?

8 A. This is the date of the 9th of September, 1995, and the time 19

9 hours and 15 minutes. This is the moment when this information was jotted

10 down, when this entry was entered.

11 Q. And, sir, if you could tell us, please, what would be meant by the

12 phrase "all communications operating."

13 A. It means that wired communication had been checked, those wire

14 communications established with units, and that these were functioning.

15 They are in function --

16 Q. And if I --

17 A. -- with the subordinated units.

18 Q. If I could then draw your attention to number 5, what can we

19 conclude by this phrase: "Luke reported that all units which operate

20 according to plan F are doing all right."

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Madam Vidovic.

22 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours objection, only now did

23 I realise what it was about. When I asked, during my cross, the witness

24 about communications, we very clearly discussed communications, very poor

25 communications during 1992 and 1993, and I did not touch upon

1 communications during the unfolding of the Operation Farz. If you may

2 recall, we discussed the period of 1992 and 1993 and the poor

3 communication and not within this time frame discussed right now.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Wood.

5 MR. WOOD: Well, Your Honour, this goes to testimony not from

6 earlier today but from yesterday. And as I recall, there was discussion

7 about poor communications throughout the war. I believe that showing this

8 document to the witness would be important to add some context to that.

9 [Trial Chamber confers]

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm advised that in fact yes, there was this

11 discussion.

12 Do you have any comment to make on that yesterday? Well, in that

13 event, then the question will be allowed and the objection will be

14 overruled.

15 MR. WOOD:

16 Q. So again, Mr. Jusic, what can we conclude about communications by

17 the line "Luke reported that all which operated according to plan F are

18 doing all right"?

19 A. I'm not sure whether I'll be able to explain; however, this, what

20 is stated here, means that the positions that were captured by units,

21 which means the observation posts and command posts, and that the new

22 communications were established. This is what is done in such a

23 situation. Field phone lines were being established because of a very

24 small distances, distances of maybe 3 to 4 kilometres. Or in the process

25 of continuing the operations, there would be maybe 10 kilometres of field

1 telephone, and units were equipped by a certain amount of field cables or

2 wires which are on wheels; the length is 750 metres. And they are

3 prepared before combat operations.

4 We're not discussing here communications between commands and

5 units. These communications in question did function, were operational,

6 because the previous night cable had been laid to be used by inductor

7 telephone or field telephone. I believe that such telephones were used in

8 World War I and World War II and now they were used in the third Bosnian

9 war.

10 We're not discussing radio relay communications or permanent

11 communication nodes, but wired communications between combat units during

12 combat operations. These communications had to function because otherwise

13 some officers should have been put in prison for failing to establish such

14 communications.

15 Q. If I could draw your attention then to item 21. This is on page 4

16 of the B/C/S version and page 4 of the English.

17 If you could read that to yourself, please, sir, and let us know

18 when you've had to chance to --

19 A. Which one? Which item, please? Could you repeat.

20 Q. 21.

21 A. I've read it, yes.

22 Q. And what, sir, does this indicate about communications between the

23 field and the corps command?

24 A. This corroborates what I just said. Those temporary

25 communications were established with the observation post, et cetera,

1 up -- down to the lowest level of units, to companies and even platoons,

2 if the equipment was available. And throughout that system, whoever

3 was -- had access to the network of the PTT -- no, I correct myself, not

4 PTT but wires for field telephones, could phone anybody else if they knew

5 their code name, which was confidential. This is possible, this what has

6 been described, because a commander could have been reached through the

7 switchboard of the brigade and the switchboard of the division and could

8 reach the commander of the 3rd Corps. Of course, this is not a usual

9 method, but there were technical capabilities for doing so.

10 Q. If I could draw your attention --

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Madam Vidovic.

12 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would not object to

13 this had the Prosecutor asked these questions during his

14 examination-in-chief, but what I did discuss yesterday and today was the

15 general state of affairs in -- in terms of communication between commands

16 and units and not particular communications during a particular operation.

17 What I did ask the witness about was the relationships in terms of plans

18 between the 3rd Corps and the Supreme Command Staff. I see no reason for

19 reopening this examination. They could have done that during their

20 examination-in-chief, but now they're trying to enter through the back

21 door. Otherwise, I would have done so myself. I did not ask anything

22 pertaining to this issue in my cross-examination.

23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Wood.

24 MR. WOOD: Well, again, Your Honour, I'm asking questions about

25 communication because it was raised during the cross-examination. It

1 sounds as if the -- the objection this time is very similar in substance

2 to the objection that was just overruled. The Prosecution submits that

3 the ruling should stand.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, the new dimension that is coming in this

5 objection is that in the cross-examination, the lines of communications

6 that were being discussed were communications between the 3rd Corps and

7 the command -- the command -- control command. Now you are asking about

8 communication on the field. Do you have an answer to that?

9 MR. WOOD: I believe that this does go to the issue of general

10 communication, Your Honour. I believe that when the issue of

11 communication or lack of it was raised, it was among the different units

12 and it was also to the General Staff. I do have some material that will

13 address this latter issue as well, Your Honour.

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you able to refer us to a page and line shown

15 in the cross-examination where communication on the field was raised?

16 MR. WOOD: I cannot. I don't have that in front of me, Your

17 Honour.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: But you say it was discussed.

19 MR. WOOD: That is my recollection, yes, Your Honour, though I

20 can't cite -- I can't cite to a page.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can you give us the context in which it was

22 discussed and what was being discussed at the time?

23 MR. WOOD: Again, Your Honour, it's -- it was the discussion about

24 how communication was hindering and even hindering the specific execution

25 of certain operations. I believe the general answered a question that it

1 was actually not just that it was a bad communications but that the

2 communications were so poor that they put certain operations at risk.

3 That's what I recall.

4 [Trial Chamber confers]

5 MR. WOOD: Your Honour, I can cite to something in the record that

6 might assist the Trial Chamber in this regard.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry, what did you say, Mr. Wood?

8 MR. WOOD: Sorry to interrupt your conferring there, but I do have

9 a citation. If you go to page 2541, this is from yesterday's transcript.

10 If you look at line 10, the question begins: "Another thing,

11 communication was very poor with subordinated units, in your case in the

12 3rd Corps. This obtained until the end of the war; is that correct?"

13 Then the answer is: "Yes, that's correct. Communications were through

14 messenger." And that answer goes on through line 17 of page 2541.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: You say 2 --

16 MR. WOOD: 2541, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: 2541.

18 MR. WOOD: Page 2541, yes.

19 And, Your Honour, if I might, then, on to page 18 there's a

20 follow-up question.

21 JUDGE HARHOFF: Which line?

22 MR. WOOD: Line 18, page 2541.

23 MR. WOOD: Essentially, Your Honours, if you focus on lines 10

24 through the bottom of the page, that, I believe, provides a basis for me

25 to ask these questions now.

1 [Trial Chamber confers]

2 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if I may.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes.

4 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] This is precisely what I had in

5 mind. Yesterday with the witness I discussed the communication between

6 the 3rd Corps and the units in the field in general. Today the Prosecutor

7 is asking -- well, you can see for yourself. And what the witness told me

8 yesterday was that the relay hubs were being -- were destroyed and

9 couriers were being used, and today the Prosecutor is asking about

10 communication inside a specific military operation. That is a very

11 specific pointed question. It has nothing to do with the communication in

12 general that I discussed with the witness.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. I'm sorry, Madam Vidovic, you -- you are

14 trying to explain today what was asked yesterday. That -- that line that

15 we were referred to does talk of communication with subordinates, and, I'm

16 sorry, I'm going to rule you out of order. I'm going to overrule that

17 objection for that reason. So you may proceed.

18 MR. WOOD: Thank you, Your Honour.

19 Q. If I could draw your attention, Mr. Jusic, to item 38, which is

20 page 7 of the English and page 6 of the Bosnian version. And let us know

21 when you've had a chance to read that.

22 A. 38?

23 Q. 38. Yes, sir, 38.

24 A. I've read it.

25 Q. What does this indicate to you, sir, about communication between

1 the 3rd Corps and the -- the General Staff at the time indicated here?

2 A. Your Honours, I know the way communication functioned. This item

3 tells me that the chief of staff of the General Staff of the army of

4 Bosnia-Herzegovina called the commander of the 3rd Corps and asked him

5 about the ongoing combat activities since the commander of the 3rd Corps

6 for various reasons failed to submit his report. To me this means that at

7 the moment when they had that conversation, he managed to establish the

8 connection. It doesn't mean, however, that communication was perfect.

9 There were radio relay links. However, all those devices were prone to

10 becoming inoperative, and they could easily be interfered with or jammed.

11 This tells me that General Hadzihasanovic simply calls the commander of

12 the 3rd Corps and that they discussed the ongoing combat operations.

13 Q. If I could draw your attention now to -- finally, this is the last

14 one, item 43, which is on page 8 of the English and on page 7 of the

15 original. And just let us know when you've had a chance to take a look at

16 that entry, General.

17 A. I've read it.

18 Q. Now, in the English, this reads: "General Staff of the ARBiH

19 submits an interim combat report." Can you explain to us that entry might

20 mean?

21 A. That means that the duty operations officer at 10 hours and 18

22 minutes wrote down the following: That from the command of the 3rd Corps

23 a report was sent to the General Staff, and it was an interim combat

24 report, sent to the General Staff of the ARBiH. In the fourth column, it

25 says it was sent to the operations centre of the General Staff.

1 MR. WOOD: The Prosecution offers P02561 into evidence, Your

2 Honour.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

4 please be given an exhibit number.

5 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, Exhibit number 394.

6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

7 Q. I want to ask you a few questions now about the map, very briefly.

8 We don't have to get the map out again, but some of the notations might

9 need some context.

10 First of all, the Judges asked some questions about what you

11 referred to as the 7th Chivalrous Liberation Brigade. Do you recall that,

12 sir? I'm sorry, the 7th Muslim Chivalrous Liberation Brigade or words to

13 that effect.

14 A. I remember what I said on that topic. I said that the acronym on

15 the map specifies what unit was active in that part of the theatre.

16 Q. And this is strictly a notation question. If you could tell the

17 Court, please, what's the relation between that brigade that you mentioned

18 and the brigade, the 7th Muslim Brigade, that we've heard testimony about

19 earlier?

20 A. I'm sorry, I do not understand. The connection between the 7th

21 Muslim Brigade and ...?

22 Q. And the 7th Chivalrous Muslim Liberation Brigade.

23 A. It is the same unit. It was termed "chivalrous" by the General

24 Staff. Many units of the 3rd Corps carried titles such as "glorious," and

25 then the next level that would serve to praise a subordinate command would

1 be the "chivalrous". Therefore these two are the same units, and the full

2 name is the 7th Chivalrous Muslim Liberation Brigade.

3 Q. Thank you, sir.

4 I want to clear up something else that was in the record. You

5 said on -- I wrote down page 39, lines 10 to 12. I know that that isn't

6 exactly accurate, but it was earlier today. It was page 39 of today's

7 transcript. You said the El Mujahid detachment was not part of the

8 3rd Corps and then went on to explain that it was part of the

9 35th Division.

10 Just to clear up any confusion, was the El Mujahid detachment a

11 part of the 3rd Corps?

12 A. I don't remember having said that it was not a part of. I don't

13 think such a mistake could have been made by me. Officially, in terms of

14 establishment and by an order of the superior command, one of the units of

15 the 3rd Corps was the El Mujahid detachment since mid-1993. We are not

16 discussing here the issue of command and control and any problems thereof,

17 but at the time of this operation, the command of the 3rd Corps had the

18 legal right to resubordinate the El Mujahid detachment to the

19 35th Division. In terms of all elements of combat readiness, starting

20 with command and control, down to logistics. Practically speaking, it was

21 not part of the command of the 3rd Corps but of the 35th Division, up

22 until a certain moment when the command of the 3rd Corps, by its order,

23 requests the detachment back as part of its own establishment.

24 Q. And to whom did the commander of the 35th Division report

25 directly?

1 A. The commander of the 35th Division was directly answerable to the

2 command of the 3rd Corps.

3 Q. Finally, one final question: On page 4 from yesterday, lines 8

4 through 10, you said "Some organs of the General Staff were there,"

5 meaning in Kakanj, at the command post. And you listed some of those.

6 A. I don't know. I don't remember what I was talking about. Certain

7 command organs of the General Staff were in Zenica for a while. After the

8 January 1994 order, they were stationed in Kakanj. If this refers to

9 Kakanj, then I must have said the organs of the General Staff, and these

10 are the branches department, including the artillery, the armoured units,

11 the communications, the anti-aircraft units, the ABHO, that is,

12 anti-biological chemical warfare unit.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry, Ms. Vidovic, you started talking while the

14 interpreter was still talking. Can you stand up. What did you want to

15 say, Madam Vidovic?

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Page 75 --

17 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Page 75, I no longer seem to be able

18 to find the line. The witness was talking about certain organs of the

19 staff of the General Staff, and it keeps repeating -- being repeated

20 organs of the General Staff, but the witness is making a distinction

21 between the organs of the General -- of the staff of the General Staff and

22 organs of the General Staff.

23 Perhaps the witness could clarify it.

24 I found it, Your Honour, page 75, lines 7 and 8. It says: "I

25 have to say that organs of the General Staff and parts of command," and so

1 on and so forth. Can you clarify, Witness?

2 Perhaps the Prosecutor can ask the question. Were you talking

3 about the organs of the staff of the General Staff or about the organs of

4 the General Staff? Is there a difference?

5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry, Madam Vidovic, let's just be clear where we

6 are -- what we are talking about. Did you say page 75, lines 7 and 8?

7 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Now, just a second. Lines 7 and 8 on my -- on my

9 monitor here doesn't seem to -- to be the same as the other one. It

10 says -- mine says "you said the El Mujahid detachment was not part of the

11 3rd Corps and then went on to explain that it was part of the 35th

12 Division." That's what my line 75 -- line 7 and 8 of page 75 says.

13 But having said that, I see -- now it's disappearing on the other

14 screen: "And these are the branches department, including the artillery."

15 Now it's gone. On the screen over which I have no control.

16 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I see it now. I don't know, Your

17 Honours. I no longer have it on the screen. But it was precisely as I

18 described.

19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you able to go to the screen that you are able

20 to control with your mouse?

21 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Page 76, line 9: "[In English] I

22 must have said the organs of General Staff." That's where he didn't say

23 "organs of the General Staff" but "organs of the staff of the General

24 Staff."

25 Today, if you remember, during his testimony he made a distinction

1 between this staff and the General Staff; whereas, in the record it says

2 "organs of the General Staff." There is a difference.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Wood.

4 MR. WOOD: I have nothing further to add to this discussion, Your

5 Honour.

6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Let me add to the confusion. I also don't

7 understand what is meant by "organs of the General Staff" or "organs of

8 the staff of the General Staff," you know. If it -- if it could be

9 explained what the organs are, what the staff is, what the General Staff

10 is, and what is part of what, I would -- I would appreciate it. I did

11 hear during cross-examination this was being mentioned, and I just

12 thought, Well, they've left me behind, and I don't know what they're

13 talking about.

14 MR. WOOD:

15 Q. Mr. Jusic, if you could please explain to the Court what is meant

16 when you say "the General Staff."

17 A. When I say "the General Staff," I mean the entire superior

18 command, including all of the sectors, departments, and bodies of the

19 superior command. That is the General Staff. That was headed by General

20 Rasim Delic. The General Staff --

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can you just hold on. When you say you mean "the

22 entire superior command," do you -- are you referring to what is called

23 the Presidency? The War Presidency? It's not that? It excludes

24 Alija Izetbegovic. It ends up with the general.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I don't know the exact

1 translation. I said "the General Staff." I didn't say "the Supreme

2 Command, the civilian command." The General Staff is the military -- a

3 part of the military structure. The civilian leadership with

4 Alija Izetbegovic and the rest does not fall under that. I am merely

5 talking about the military Supreme Command that was headed, as I said, by

6 General Delic. That command --

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: If you can tell us who it was composed of, even if

8 it is not the people's names but the offices. Is it -- it's the commander

9 of the army, who's General Delic. And who else? What other commanders

10 come in in the General Staff?

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] General Delic, commander; deputy

12 commander, Stjepan Siber; another deputy commander, Jovan Divjak. Chief

13 of staff of the General Staff, General Hadzihasanovic; assistant commander

14 for finances, Himzo Hodzic; assistant commander for legal affairs, Getz

15 [phoen] -- I don't know what the rest of the name is; assistant commander

16 for intelligence, General Mustafa Hajrulahovic; assistant commander for

17 security, General Jusuf Jasarevic; assistant -- well, those were the

18 assistants to the commander. They are separate.

19 And then, on the other hand, you have the chief of staff, who was

20 General Hadzihasanovic. Within his staff, he had organs or bodies. I'm

21 using the terms that were official in terms of establishment. Organs or

22 bodies of the staff of the General Staff. Branches or organ. And in the

23 Balkan armed forces, such branches are the artillery, armoured units,

24 anti-aircraft defence, ABHO, that is nuclear biological chemical defence,

25 communications. Those are the branches.

1 I don't think I've left anything out. All this was within the

2 staff of the General Staff.

3 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, but no matter what the

4 witness says, we have the same interpretation. It is completely wrong.

5 The man is talking about another staff within the General Staff and the

6 record doesn't reflect that.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: But, you see, Madam Vidovic, the problem is some of

8 your interjections are actually tantamount to leading evidence.

9 Now, you raised a problem about confusion about staff. The

10 Chamber has asked a question to the witness to try and explain that. Now

11 you're saying the witness is not explaining it correctly. Do you want to

12 take over and tell us what the composition of the General Staff was? I

13 don't understand this now, because I told you I'm also confused about the

14 staff and I'm -- and the General Staff and all these staffs that are being

15 mentioned here. We're trying to get the witness to tell us. If the

16 witness is not saying it correctly, you will correct it with your

17 witnesses if you don't have an opportunity to cross-examine this witness.

18 But to interject when he is busy answering a question is highly

19 unacceptable.

20 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise. First and

21 foremost, believe me, I am only trying to have the transcript reflect what

22 the witness had said. There is an insistence here on an erroneous

23 interpretation. God forbid that I should try anything. We can have the

24 tape checked here in the courtroom, since I am deeply insulted now.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Who is insulting you, Madam Vidovic?

1 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, you said I was trying

2 to lead the witness. I have never done that. I'm trying to say that what

3 was said in Bosnian was incorrectly interpreted.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is that an insult, madam?

5 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, what should I say? To

6 me it is. I never resort to such actions. I never try to lead.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam --

8 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I merely am trying to have a correct

9 transcript.

10 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Sometime in the past I had asked you

11 to understand that when the Bench is asking questions, you cannot object.

12 If the Bench is asking questions that are wrong, yours is to correct those

13 questions after the Bench has asked its questions. You are doing today

14 exactly the same thing that you have done then, which you promised you'd

15 never repeat the last time I talked to you about it. Do you remember

16 that? And now you are insulted when I'm telling you that you are leading

17 by saying to this witness that he's not saying the correct thing and

18 you're trying to explain what the correct thing is.

19 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, believe me, I'm trying

20 to object to the interpretation, not to the witness's words.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: No, you --

22 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] The interpreter's interpretation.

23 The interpreter's.

24 JUDGE MOLOTO: No. You --

25 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] The man is saying one thing and the

1 transcript is saying another.

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Now, Madam Vidovic, if the man is saying one thing

3 and the interpretation is different, all you can say is, "Your Honour, it

4 looks like there's been an incorrect interpretation. Could the witness

5 repeat himself," and let the interpreters listen properly, rather than

6 telling us that things are wrong. And what should be coming on. You

7 should know the kind of questions that you must ask to avoid suggesting

8 any answer to the -- to the witness.

9 I'm very sorry, sir. I don't know whether you are able to go back

10 to where we were. If you are able to, please do. My question was simply

11 I'm trying to understand what is the staff -- the various names. If you

12 can tell me what they are, the General Staff and the staff and -- and all

13 those things. And the organs. What is an organ, what is a staff, and

14 what is the General Staff, and what is each composed of.

15 You have told us what the General Staff is composed of. Can you

16 tell us what the staff is.

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A staff is an expert organ for the

18 planning of combat actions, activities within the General Staff. It is a

19 separate organ, an expert organ. There may be a problem with regard to

20 the terminology. Body or organ, sector, department. In Bosnian

21 terminology, organ is the term of an organisation.

22 As per levels, we have departments, then sector, then organ. And

23 the staff of the General Staff was a separate staff which comprised

24 organs, as we called them. I cannot use another term. And within this

25 staff, we had organs. And it was labeled "operational training organ" or

1 "department," "artillery organ" or"artillery department," "communications

2 organ" or "communications department." In Bosnian language, if you say

3 "communication detachment or department," this may be associated with

4 privates dealing with communication. And this is why we use the term

5 "organ" for communication.

6 I can go into greater detail about the staff of the General Staff,

7 but I -- maybe it would be best if it were drawn in an organisational

8 chart. This would be the best way for me to express this.

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do I understand you to be saying the staff within

10 the General Staff would be a subcommittee of members of the General Staff

11 who are assigned a specific task to accomplish? Perhaps because of their

12 expert knowledge in that area? Is that what you are saying?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct. That's correct.

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: And that same subcommittee, you call it "staff" at

15 some stage, and at some other stage you call it "organ" because it is part

16 of the General Staff? Is that how I understood your last answer? What is

17 then the organ?

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no. An organ is a component

19 part of the staff, of that staff, that specific body which does the

20 planning. The organs are component parts of the staff.

21 I'm very sorry --

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: And by "organ" you refer to individual members of

23 that subcommittee, or does it refer to further smaller committees into

24 that subcommittee?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] An organ, the term "organ" used to

1 imply the -- let's take an example: Artillery organ. There were three

2 officers within it: The chief. He was the head of artillery. And there

3 were two or three assistants, clerks. Each organ of an -- a branch of the

4 armed forces within the general -- within the staff of the General Staff

5 used to comprise several personnel as per establishment, as per the

6 estimate of the command. Maybe two, three, or four members of personnel.

7 An organ would have -- comprise several members of personnel. It could be

8 a -- an organ with sub-organs, but we didn't use this terminology. We

9 would have head of an artillery organ and then his assistants, which were

10 clerks.

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Jusic. You've done your

12 best. Thank you so much.

13 Yes, Mr. Wood.

14 MR. WOOD: The Prosecution has nothing further at this time, Your

15 Honour.

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

17 [Trial Chamber confers]

18 Questioned by the Court:

19 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you. General, I'd like to take you back to

20 the much-debated Exhibit 379, I think it was, the chart of the 3rd Corps.

21 If we could have a look at that on the screen for just a second. And the

22 reason I'm taking you back to this chart is that I also have a bit of

23 difficulty to understand just what were the implications of the changes

24 when the new division was -- was incorporated. So let's have a look first

25 at the chart.

1 Can anybody assist us? Yes, I think that was the one. I can't

2 remember.

3 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

4 JUDGE HARHOFF: I'd like to see it on the screen. I don't know if

5 that's possible.

6 Madam Usher, can you -- is there any way of making it more clear?

7 Because it's almost illegible on the screen. And if you could pull it out

8 so that we could focus on the right part of the organigramme. That's

9 right. Yes.

10 Now -- and if you could pull it up a bit, because I think I recall

11 that the Mujahedin detachment was somewhere down at the bottom here. Yes.

12 General, this was the organigramme before the new division was

13 incorporated; is that correct?

14 A. This was the organigramme before the detachment was resubordinated

15 to the division, because the division had existed previously.

16 JUDGE HARHOFF: Right. Do we see the division anywhere in this

17 chart?

18 A. You can see the division in the left-hand corner in the first

19 column.

20 JUDGE HARHOFF: You can move the document so that we can see it on

21 the screen.

22 A. Here it is. This is that division, to which El Mujahid was

23 resubordinated. It was resubordinated.

24 JUDGE HARHOFF: And this happened in -- just to be sure about the

25 time, do you recall when this was done?

1 A. I don't know the exact date, but after this document was produced.

2 So if we take that this document was produced in January - and I cannot

3 confirm that - that fact occurred -- the fact of resubordination must have

4 taken part in -- taken place in either April or May 1995, after this

5 organigramme had been produced and after this structure had been

6 established.

7 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thanks. Now, what was the purpose of taking

8 Abu Mali's El Mujahid detachment away from the 3rd Corps and putting it

9 under the 35th Division?

10 A. This took place at a time when I personally was more focused on

11 the preparations for the lifting of the Sarajevo siege operation. I was

12 not in the loop. I did not consult with the commander about this

13 resubordination of this detachment. I can share with you my assumption

14 that it was resubordinated at the request of the commander of the

15 35th Division, because I know that the 35th Division was quite exhausted

16 and the 328th and 329th Brigades were quite exhausted. The personnel was

17 by defence. And I know personally that the commander of the 35th Division

18 wanted to improve the tactical position in -- towards the Vozuca pocket in

19 the area of Podsjelovo.

20 I don't know whether he had maintained any contacts with anybody

21 before. But this was my assumption because I was not in the loop during

22 the resubordination process, but probably in agreement with the commander

23 and the leader of the El Mujahid detachment, they agreed and decided to

24 resubordinate it to the 35th Division. My assumption is that it was done

25 at the initiative of the 35th Division and in -- and in concert with the

1 leader of the El Mujahid detachment, because without such consent on their

2 part, nothing could have been done with that unit.

3 JUDGE HARHOFF: Before the El Mujahid detachment was

4 resubordinated to the 35th Division, was the Mujahedin -- El Mujahid

5 detachment then placed at the same level as other brigades? That's what

6 it looks like here on the chart. So it would have the same hierarchical

7 status as, for instance, the 7th Muslim Brigade and -- and the other

8 brigades that we see here on -- on the chart; is that correct?

9 A. Yes, in part. The detachment had to be given a certain status,

10 but the detachment and battalion, these are units of the same strength. A

11 battalion is a battalion but brigades are establishment of higher status.

12 There is a step between them. But when a corps commander issues a task,

13 then commanders of detachment of El Mujahedin should have been attending,

14 because they were directly at that time subordinated to the 3rd Corps

15 command.

16 But I can tell you that the 3rd Corps commander never issued a

17 task or a -- to the El Mujahid detachment in the same manner as he did to

18 brigade commanders, because that -- their representative never attended

19 the briefings where tasks were handed down and that unit never reported

20 back -- I don't know how I'll be understood. Maybe I'm taking too long to

21 explain this -- but that detachment, until it was engaged in -- under 35th

22 Division, had never been successful in anything they did.

23 And this is why I wanted to -- protective measures from this

24 court, because of what I said just now, they never had been successful.

25 They were only used under the 35th Division at Podsjelovo and the Vozuca

1 pocket. They managed to achieve certain tasks. Before that they had not

2 done so. They had not reported back. They had not attended briefings and

3 meetings. And commanding that unit meant that you should obey their

4 orders and no commander wanted to deal with them in that way.

5 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thanks, General. You will appreciate that -- that

6 your testimony on exactly this is very crucial to the trial, so I will

7 pursue my questions, my line of questions, a bit further on -- on this

8 because it is still a bit unclear to me how I should understand what

9 you're saying. And so let me just continue with a couple of more

10 questions.

11 I hear you saying that the 35th Division needed some support

12 because they had had difficulties in their earlier combat activities and

13 they were asking for support. In response to that request, the corps

14 commander then offered to have the El Mujahedin detachment resubordinated

15 to the 35th Division. Is that a correct understanding?

16 A. I wouldn't say that he offered. I don't know whether he offered

17 or maybe the commander of the 35th Division requested that. I did not

18 attend this discussion. But it's either one or the other.

19 JUDGE HARHOFF: In any case, the 35th Division wanted to have some

20 reinforcement, and they got it in the form of having the El Mujahid

21 detachment subordinated to them.

22 A. Yes.

23 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you. Now, when they were then subordinated

24 to the 35th Division, was it then the commander of the 35th Division who

25 gave orders to the El Mujahid detachment, to Abu Mula and his people --

1 Abu Mali. Sorry.

2 A. Well, I never attended such meetings, but he was in charge of

3 issuing tasks and orders, be it combat, organisational, and others. There

4 was nobody else to give them tasks, because the corps commander no longer

5 issued tasks to them after they were resubordinated.

6 JUDGE HARHOFF: Right. Then let's go back to the situation before

7 and after the resubordination to the 35th division. My question is here:

8 Who controlled the activities of the El Mujahid detachment? Who gave them

9 orders? Was that the corps commander?

10 A. If you take a look before this, in one of my appearances and in an

11 outbreak of emotions, I said that that detachment had not done anything

12 properly, and I said that they would never attend briefings at the

13 3rd Corps command, and that they would never submit reports. I don't know

14 whether the commander contacted them personally. Ajman would come, but

15 that was way before. He could not receive any tasks. I know that the

16 issue of records on them and issuing them with confirmations was being

17 resolved.

18 But let me answer your question. The commander was -- corps

19 commander was the only person to issue them with orders. I was not

20 present there. What I can tell you, given that they did not achieve

21 anything, no tasks must have been given to them. I don't know. Probably

22 maybe they've received some tasks, but I don't know about that.

23 [Trial Chamber confers]

24 JUDGE HARHOFF: General, I would like to ask you -- to put my

25 question very frankly, what was the matter with this El Mujahedin --

1 El Mujahid detachment? And if you wish to go into private session while

2 you give your answer, you can do so. We can go into private session.

3 That means that your testimony will not be made public.

4 A. I apologise. What was wrong with that detachment? Was that the

5 question? In terms of being given orders or being controlled, I fail to

6 grasp the nub of your question.

7 JUDGE HARHOFF: I apologise. My mistake. The basis of my

8 question was that you said that this detachment had never been able to do

9 anything. You also said in a sentence or two that nobody wanted to give

10 orders to them and -- and I think you said also that they had been

11 unsuccessful in their earlier missions. So I sense that -- that this

12 detachment, the El Mujahid detachment, was not just an ordinary part of

13 the 3rd Corps. It -- it was a special detachment. And I'm trying to find

14 out from you just how was it special? What was the -- didn't they behave

15 well or were they uncontrollable or -- tell us frankly what you remember

16 from that time.

17 And -- and again, if you feel that you are being asked questions

18 that you would prefer to answer in private session, we can do so.

19 A. Let's do it.

20 JUDGE HARHOFF: Private session?

21 A. Yes.

22 JUDGE HARHOFF: If we could then please move into private session.

23 [Private session]

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 2631-2632 redacted. Private session

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 [Open session]

21 JUDGE HARHOFF: General, I do have a few more questions to put to

22 you, so I'm sorry to have to ask you to come back tomorrow. I think we

23 are reconvening at 2.15 tomorrow in this same courtroom.

24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Court adjourned to quarter

25 past 2.00 in the afternoon tomorrow in the same courtroom. Court

1 adjourned.

2 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.01 p.m.,

3 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 19th day of

4 September, 2007, at 2.15 p.m.

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25