1 Monday, 8 April 2002
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone. Madam Registrar, could you
6 please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Case Number IT-98-29-T, the Prosecutor versus
8 Stanislav Galic.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
10 Mr. Stamp, is the Prosecution ready to proceed with its next
12 MR. STAMP: Indeed, we are, and that is Edin Suljic.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Would you then, please, Mr. Usher, escort the witness
14 into the courtroom. But what he -- that's what he understood already.
15 While we are waiting until the witness arrives, I could inform the
16 Defence that if there's any urgent need to have a smaller document
17 translated, it can be offered to the Registry, to the services who provide
18 the translation. But especially if there's -- if it has to be done
19 urgent, for example, because we ordered that a translation should be
20 there, then the best way of doing it is to attach to the request perhaps
21 the page of the transcript in which the Chamber ordered that a translation
22 should be provided, and perhaps highlight in yellow the order. That, as
23 far as I understand, could be of some assistance in order to get a quicker
24 translation. But of course, only if it's a smaller document and not big
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] The Defence thanks your
2 Chamber, Mr. President, for this. We were just about to do so. What we
3 hadn't told you last time is that, as a general rule, if we go through the
4 translations services of the Tribunal, the delays are very long, one month
5 to three months, I believe. This is the reason for which we used a rough
6 draft, but thanks to your assistance, we will rely upon it. Thank you
7 very much.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Usher, escort the witness into the courtroom.
9 Thank you.
10 [The witness entered court]
11 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning. Can you hear me in a language you
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I do.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Suljic, I assume. Mr. Suljic, the Rules of
15 Procedure and Evidence require you before you testify in this Court to
16 make a solemn declaration that you'll speak the truth, the whole truth,
17 and nothing but the truth. The usher will now hand out the text of this
18 declaration to you. May I invite you to make that declaration.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
20 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much. Please be seated.
22 WITNESS: EDIN SULJIC
23 [Witness answered through interpreter]
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Suljic, the order in this courtroom is that
25 you'll first be examined by counsel for the Prosecution, then by counsel
1 for the Defence. And whenever the Judges have any questions, they will
2 put them to you as well.
3 Please proceed, Mr. Stamp.
4 MR. STAMP: Thank you, Mr. President and Your Honours.
5 Examined by Mr. Stamp:
6 Q. Good morning, Mr. Suljic. Could you please start by telling the
7 Court your name and your present occupation.
8 A. My name is Suljic Edin. I am in charge of the legal services of
9 Sipad, interior in Sarajevo.
10 Q. I take it, then, that you're a lawyer?
11 A. Yes, I am a lawyer, and I graduated from a law school.
12 Q. Now, in the early 1990s, before the conflict started, were you
13 engaged in any type of activity?
14 A. Before the war, I was also working as a lawyer in a firm in
16 Q. And at the beginning of the conflict in 1992, did you become
17 engaged in any way related to that conflict?
18 A. In the beginning of 1992, to be more precise, in the month of June
19 1992, I was mobilised and I was drafted within the army of the ABiH. Up
20 until that time, I had no function within the party or within a political
22 Q. For how long did you remain in this army?
23 A. In the army, I remained up until the month of September 1993.
24 Q. And in September 1993, were you employed in another capacity?
25 A. In September of 1993, I started working in what was called at the
1 time the CSB, or the MUP as it is called today, of the Sarajevo
2 department, canton of Sarajevo.
3 Q. And this CSB, as it was called then, is or was the regular police
4 force for Sarajevo, was it?
5 A. Yes. The CSB, the Security Services Centre, was an institution
6 belonging to the state, and it also existed there before the war, and it
7 continued being a security service centre during the war. And it operated
8 under the same principles as it had before the war.
9 Q. How did you come to be employed there, and what was your
10 appointment when you became appointed there?
11 A. I was working in the crime scene department because a lot of
12 people had left that department. Some posts became available, and the
13 position of a crime scene inspector was available. I had found out about
14 that job through a friend. I then made a written application. I
15 forwarded it to the CSB, the Security Services Centre, and I suggested or
16 I asked at the time I take what was called at the time a work obligation
17 and that I work there for -- within the Security Services Centre. My
18 first job was in the criminal department, breaking and entering and
19 material damages. This is where I worked up until the month of January
21 Q. Sorry, this is where you worked up until when?
22 A. Up until the month of January 1994. This is when I was
23 transferred in the second department. This department was called
24 Department for War Crimes and Genocide. It was a department which was to
25 investigate and to try crimes carried out during the war, and genocide.
1 Q. And for how long did you remain in that department?
2 A. I worked in that department up until the month of May 1995.
3 Q. And you said you are presently a lawyer with a company. Just tell
4 us for how long did you remain with the police force, or when did you
5 effectively leave the police force?
6 A. In the Security Services Centre, I worked from the month of
7 September 1993 up until the month of May of 1995.
8 Q. Now, can you remember the 5th of February, 1994, at about mid-day
9 or after mid-day that day, where were you?
10 A. The day before, i.e. on the 4th of February, 1994, according to my
11 duty assignment, I was on duty at the CSB. And according to the
12 regulations of the time, the man in charge, the duty officer, was
13 beginning his shift at 4.00 p.m. and he was to take part in all the
14 investigations that had to do with the department in which he was working.
15 On that day, the shelling on the Markale market and the massacre of the
16 Markale market occurred, and as a duty officer within that Department for
17 War Crimes and Genocide, I was part of a team that was to carry out the
18 on-site investigation. We had to gather all clues and elements involving
19 the massacre in question.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 Now, where were you when you learned about this event at Markale
23 A. I was in the offices of the SCB -- CSB, rather, which were in
24 Marin Dvor. That was in the central part of Sarajevo.
25 Q. And about what time did you hear about it?
1 A. I cannot recall precisely. I know that it was in the afternoon
3 Q. And this was on the 5th of February, 1994, was it?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. You said you were part of a team involved in the investigation.
6 Did that team leave from the police building and go to the market?
7 A. From the police building, the whole team left without the
8 investigating judge, who we picked up on our way there. We went to the
9 courthouse, and together with the investigating magistrate, we arrived on
10 site. I don't know how long it took exactly.
11 Q. Now, could you briefly tell us what were your observations when
12 you arrived on the scene of the market?
13 A. On site, when we arrived, we found traces of blood, scattered
14 objects that were on the stalls, human body parts, as well as a great
15 number of citizens that were in a state of panic. And they watched the
16 scene in terror. The site was already secured. The police had proceeded
17 to do that, police from the Stari Grad Police Station. And on site of the
18 Markale market, it was not possible to approach that perimeter. Nobody
19 had access to it aside from us, who had come there to carry out the
20 on-site investigation.
21 Q. Thank you. Were there ballistic specialists with your team?
22 A. Every time that we do an on-site investigation, the team -- the
23 team would be comprised of ballistic experts, crime scene technicians.
24 There was always a photographer, as well as a representative of the
25 services for the investigation of war crimes and genocide service within
1 the CSB. And the on-site investigation was presided by the investigating
2 judge, who on that day was on duty in the courthouse. This was the
3 composition of the team, of our team, and such a team came out to carry
4 out the on-site investigation on that day.
5 Q. Thank you. Now, after investigations were conducted at the site
6 on the 5th of February, 1994, did you go anywhere in particular in respect
7 to the continuing investigations?
8 A. Yes. After conducting the on-site investigation, I went to the
9 Kosevo Hospital in order to establish the identity of the deceased and of
10 the wounded people, people who had died therefore and were wounded as a
11 result of this massacre.
12 Q. Was that your primary role in this investigation?
13 A. The war crimes and genocide division played a certain role in such
14 investigations. The role was to determine the identity of the injured and
15 those who had been killed.
16 Q. When you went to the hospital, what did you do in respect to this
17 task of trying to identify the dead and the injured?
18 A. In the admissions department of the Kosevo Hospital, the records
19 are kept of all the persons who had -- had been admitted to the hospital,
20 so the full name of the person admitted is recorded, the time of
21 admission, as well as other personal details. And these records enabled
22 me to determine the number of patients that had been admitted to the
23 Kosevo Hospital in the time period after the explosion at the Markale
24 market. After that, I went to the morgue and there, on the basis of the
25 documents that I had gathered from the personnel in the morgue, I verified
1 the identity of the persons who had been killed and brought there after
2 the explosion at the Markale market.
3 Q. Did you interview any persons in respect to your determination
4 that these persons had been killed at the market?
5 A. The duty personnel in the Kosevo Hospital at the admissions and
6 also in the morgue, and they told me that all the patients that had been
7 admitted were, in fact, the people who had been killed at the Markale
8 market. And their knowledge is based on their conversation with the
9 people who had brought in the dead and the wounded.
10 Q. And in attempt -- in attempting to identify some of these deceased
11 and wounded persons, did you speak with friends and relatives of these
13 A. Yes, I did. For some of the deceased, we were unable to determine
14 their identity because they did not have any personal documents or IDs
15 with them which would make it possible for us to determine their actual
16 identity. And that is why we asked the local radio station to notify the
17 citizens, instructing them that if some of their relatives had gone
18 missing or had not returned home on that day, that they should go to the
19 Kosevo Hospital to see if they can identify any of the dead persons who
20 were there in the morgue of the hospital.
21 Q. Now, during your investigations, did you -- can you tell us what
22 was the composition of the persons who were injured at the hospital and
23 those who were deceased at the morgue in terms of their ages, if you could
24 give us an approximation.
25 A. As far as I can remember, they were mostly elderly men and women.
1 Q. How long did you remain at the Kosevo Hospital on the 5th of
2 February, 1994?
3 A. On that day, I remained there for two hours, about two hours in
4 the Kosevo Hospital.
5 Q. Now, from your observations of all these dead, wounded persons,
6 and the reactions of their family, how, if at all, would you say that this
7 has affected you in respect to what happened to these persons?
8 A. Well, the scene was frightening, terrifying, I mean the one in the
9 morgue. There were four or five rooms there, and on the floor, there were
10 about 60 dead bodies. Most of them were disfigured with shrapnel, the
11 shell fragments. And each person who came there to identify a relative of
12 his or hers, I would go through the morgue hoping, sincerely hoping, that
13 that person would not be able to recognise any of his relatives. And this
14 was particularly harrowing when that person was a friend of mine or a
15 person I knew.
16 Q. The next day, did you return to the scene at Markale?
17 A. Yes. The next day, we went to the site again at the Markale.
18 Q. And the next day, did you also return to the Kosevo Hospital?
19 A. Yes, I went to the Kosevo Hospital again.
20 Q. Which one did you go to first on the 6th of February, 1994?
21 A. We went to the Markale market. The scene was secured by the Stari
22 Grad Police Station officers just as it was the day before, and the
23 ballistic experts and the forensic technicians or the crime scene
24 technicians were conducting their activities. And then I went to the
25 Kosevo Hospital again in order --
1 Q. You went to the Kosevo Hospital in order to do what, you were
3 A. In order to collate the lists of the victims that were changing
4 from day to day with the new information.
5 Q. And perhaps you could explain that a little bit further. Explain
6 what you mean by collating the list of victims with the new information.
7 A. On the first day, we had records of a certain number of the dead
8 and a list of the wounded persons who were killed or wounded at the
9 Markale market. A certain number of persons died due to their wounds the
10 next day, so this information changed, and that is why I had to update the
11 list to reflect the current situation.
12 Q. Now, were all of the injured and deceased taken to the Kosevo
13 Hospital or were some of them taken to other hospitals?
14 A. The majority of the dead and wounded were taken to the Kosevo
15 Hospital. A smaller number was taken to the French hospital, as it was
16 known at the time, and some of the wounded were taken by the UN to their
17 clinic which was located in the premises of the PTT Inzenjering in
19 Q. Which hospital is it that you call the "French hospital"?
20 A. Before the war, this hospital was called a military hospital.
21 Later on, its name was changed into the "French hospital." It changed its
22 name several times so that I don't recall what its name was at the time.
23 Q. Very well. Now, on the 6th of February, 1994, did you observe any
24 proceedings carried out on the bodies of the deceased?
25 A. All the persons who had been killed were examined by the
1 pathologist, and he carried out an expert examination of the bodies in
2 order to determine the cause of death. And every person that was brought
3 into the Kosevo Hospital, the cause of death was determined and records
4 were kept of the proceedings.
5 Q. Were you present when these examinations were conducted?
6 A. I was present in most of the cases but I don't remember whether I
7 was present during the examinations of all those who had been killed. But
8 I had the relevant documents by the pathologist confirming the cause of
9 death for all those persons, specifying that they were all killed by shell
11 Q. Did you speak -- or maybe I should ask this question first: What
12 was the name of the pathologist? Do you recall?
13 A. The postmortems were conducted by Dr. Ilijas Dobraca.
14 Q. And did you speak with him after he conducted these examinations
15 or during these examinations?
16 A. I spoke with the doctor about these autopsies, and Dr. Dobraca
17 also participated in the process of identifying the persons because many
18 of the citizens were, in fact, unable to recognise their relatives. And
19 then certain information such as previous surgeries that they told Dr.
20 Dobraca about were used -- this information was used to identify their
22 Q. And did Dr. Dobraca confirm to you anything in respect to the
23 cause of death of these persons?
24 A. Yes. For every dead and wounded person, Dr. Dobraca would verify
25 that the death was caused by mortar shell fragments.
1 Q. About how many days did you visit at the Kosevo Hospital in
2 respect to your investigations as to the number and identity of the
3 injured and deceased?
4 A. I don't remember exactly, but I think that I went there for at
5 least three or four days, but possibly even more than that.
6 Q. Now, in respect to your investigations of the incident, did
7 yourself and the police at the CSB Sarajevo prepare a report?
8 A. Yes. Every service had to draft their section of the report that
9 pertained exclusively to the areas in their jurisdiction. So I had the
10 report of the ballistics expert, the report of the forensic technician,
11 the crime scene technician, a photo file that was compiled by the
12 photographer, and we also had the documents and the correspondence from
13 the military hospital and the UN, confirming the death and injuries of
14 those persons -- the victims. And on the basis of these reports, the
15 genocide section compiled the final report which was then submitted to our
17 Q. Well, let me go back. Yourself and the police were
18 involved in the investigations, prepared a report which you signed. Is
19 that correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And in the system which obtained then in Sarajevo in respect to
22 incidents like this, was another report done in respect to charges to be
24 A. According to the procedure, the rules of procedure, after all the
25 elements have been determined and when they are stated in the report that
1 we drafted, the criminal report is then drafted against persons known or
2 unknown who committed the crime. And then this criminal report is then
3 submitted to the chief of the CSB for his signature; and once he has
4 signed the criminal report, the proceedings involving this criminal
5 offence begin, the prosecution begins.
6 Q. Now, in respect to the incident of the 5th of February at Markale,
7 who prepared the criminal report?
8 A. I took part in the drafting of the criminal report, and so did
9 Nedim Curevac, a colleague of mine, also an inspector, and Nurija Makas,
10 who was a senior colleague of ours, also an inspector.
11 Q. And who was the chief of the CSB who signed it?
12 A. At that time, the chief of the CSB was Munir Alibabic.
13 MR. STAMP: With your leave, Mr. President, Your Honours, I
14 respectfully ask to tender to the witness Exhibit P2365, and to also
15 tender to the Court copies of it with Exhibit P2365.1, which is a
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Stamp.
18 MR. STAMP: Thank you, Mr. President.
19 Q. Firstly, Mr. Suljic, I'd like to take you to the page of that
20 document with the number 0026-8323 at the bottom of the page. Do you see
21 a copy of your signature there?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And the document was also signed by the colleagues you mentioned
24 earlier, Nedim Curevac and Munir Alibabic?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And this is a police report of the incident?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Briefly to go through the document - I'll not ask you about every
4 word on it - the first page marked 0026-8315 is a cover page summary of
5 the event?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And may I, if you will, take you to the page marked 0026-8319 at
8 the bottom of it. Now, that is where the actual police report that you
9 drafted with your colleague begins. Can I ask you who from your report
10 were the ballistic experts present at the scene on the 5th of February,
12 A. The ballistic experts were Cavcic Hamdija, Mirza Sabljica, as it
13 says here in this report.
14 Q. On the second page of this report, you have a reference indicating
15 that it was established that the projectile was launched from a north
16 north-eastern direction.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And was that information obtained from the ballistic experts?
19 A. Yes, this information was gathered by the ballistics expert.
20 Q. In the penultimate page of the report, you speak of interviews
21 with citizens who are located -- who had been situated on the flight path
22 of the shell that exploded at Markale market. Can you see where you have
23 made that reference?
24 A. Our role was to find all the circumstances and establish the
25 circumstances and find all the facts that are pertinent to this incident.
1 This is why we conducted interviews with a certain number of injured
2 citizens who, through their statements, confirmed the time and place and
3 the way the people were injured. So we gathered those statements, and we
4 use them as proof later on at the stage of the criminal procedure.
5 Q. Thank you. Now, I'd like to take you back precisely to the area I
6 was referring to. You said in this report, and it's the page before the
7 last, that interviews were conducted with citizens on the flight path of
8 the shell. Was this flight path as it had been -- or should I ask, the
9 flight path that you refer to, the path that had been determined by the
10 ballistics experts, that is, to the north north-east?
11 A. Yes. The information was received from the ballistics expert, who
12 was able to determine from which direction the projectile was fired. In
13 this case, we're talking of a shell. This is why we tried through
14 interviews with citizens who were there on the flight path to establish
15 the fact whether they may have, perhaps, heard at the time of the incident
16 the explosion or the detonation or if they had heard the shell flying over
17 which, through the findings of the ballistics' experts, would have flown
18 over their houses or their dwellings.
19 Q. Thank you. If you have a look at the third page, I think it is,
20 of the report -- I think, on your copy, it's the second page, on the
21 original copy, the second page. From your report, is it correct that on
22 the 6th of February, there were three court experts who attended to
23 participate in the investigation? And I invite you to have a look
24 specifically at the persons at number 7, 8, and 9 on the list of that
1 A. Yes. The following day, during the on-site investigation, the
2 following experts were present. They had a greater experience and they
3 had better training in that field, which was important in order to find
4 out the direction from which the projectile was fired.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 On the third page of the report -- may I just confirm if that is
7 the third page on your report. The fourth page of your report, the page
8 numbered 0026-8322, there is a summary of the numbers of deceased and
9 injured persons. From your investigations, the summary indicates that
10 there were 142 people who incurred minor or serious injuries that were
11 admitted to the hospitals.
12 A. Yes, that is the information that we can see in the report.
13 Q. And the shell claimed 67 lives?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. From the report, it is indicated that Kosevo Hospital admitted 167
16 victims, of whom 106 suffered minor and serious injuries.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And the state hospital had 31 admitted who suffered minor or
19 serious injuries but did not die?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And the French battalion hospital had 8 victims; 7 of them who
22 suffered serious injuries and were admitted there?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. That is 106, 31, and 7, which is 144. There is a slight
25 difference between the number you had above at 142 and the total 144.
1 Could you just briefly, if you could in a sentence or two, explain that.
2 A. It is probably a technical error. The official information --
3 informations are those that exist in the lists of deceased and injured.
4 It is possible that there had been a mistake during the printing, the
5 typing, of this information.
6 Q. Thank you.
7 You were personally involved in the investigations at the Kosevo
8 Hospital where the vast majority of the casualties were taken to. Were
9 other members of the police team involved in investigations at the state
11 A. Yes. My colleagues were involved in the establishing of the
12 identity people who were in the French hospital or what was known as the
13 military hospital, and the UN hospital as well.
14 Q. And there were also victims at the -- what is referred to here as
15 the French battalion hospital.
16 A. The hospital of the French battalion is not, in fact, a UN
17 hospital, and it was probably under the control of the French battalion.
18 Q. That is a UNPROFOR French battalion who were then based in
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And if I could ask you to have a look at that page of your report
22 numbered 0026-8321, from that report, can you confirm that they, at your
23 request, provided a list of the dead and injured who were taken there in
24 respect to this incident?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And also, some of the victims of this incident were also evacuated
2 to other countries?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. You said that the police prepared a list of the deceased and
5 injured, and also a criminal report was also prepared by the police which
6 was signed by one Mr. Alibabic?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. STAMP: Mr. President, Your Honours, with your leave, may I
10 put to the witness Document P2366, and also tender to the Court that
11 document and its attachment, P2366.1.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed, Mr. Stamp.
13 MR. STAMP:
14 Q. You have looked at that document, Mr. Suljic?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Now, the pages marked 0026-8620, are those pages a computer
17 print-out of the deceased from this incident?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And the pages marked 0026-8623 to 8624, are they a part of a
20 computer print-out of the list of injured?
21 A. I didn't understand which pages you're talking about.
22 Q. These are the pages with these numbers at the bottom of the page:
23 0026-8623 and 0026-8624.
24 A. Yes, they are part of this list.
25 Q. Who inputted the information into the computer?
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 A. At the time, the computer operator was Goran Kulenovic.
2 Q. And the document -- the data from which these print-outs were
3 made, was the data or was the inputting ongoing over a period of time or
4 did it remain static, in that it was just put in the computer on one
6 A. This data was updated following information received by the
7 hospital, and those informations would change all the time.
8 Q. Have a look, if you will, at the page numbered 0026-8624. That is
9 the last page of the list of deceased, and the number of the last person
10 is number 151. I beg your pardon, that is the list of the injured at page
11 0026-8624. Do you see that?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Could you explain to the Court the difference, if you may, between
14 this figure of 151 and the figure in your police report of 142 -- or 144,
15 I beg your pardon.
16 A. The discrepancy probably occurred because at a later stage when we
17 verified the information, we would not -- we were not able to confirm with
18 certainty the identity of all the people on this list, or that they were
19 injured, in fact, at the Markale market during that incident. This is why
20 those people were eliminated from the list when we drafted the final list
21 of injured.
22 Q. Thank you.
23 Can I take you, then, to that part of the document which has on it
24 at the bottom the numbers 0026-8627 to 0026-8634.
25 MR. STAMP: And may I apologise to the Court, perhaps in the
1 course of this I should have been referring the Court to the pages on the
2 English translation of this document because it's a pretty long document.
3 The English translation is 0087-7805 to 0087-7810.
4 Q. This part of the document which is headed "criminal charges," I
5 invite your attention to the last page of it, 0026-8634.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. There's a signature there below the typewritten name
8 Munir Alibabic. Is that the signature of your superior who signed it?
9 A. Yes. At the time Alibabic was the chief, and this is his
11 Q. And was this the final report or your last report with all your
12 confirmed findings with respect to the dead and injured that you
13 participated in writing?
14 A. Yes. This is the last part of the report that we usually do.
15 Q. And would the list of the dead and the injured in this report be,
16 to the best of your knowledge, an accurate reflection of those that were
17 killed or injured at Markale market on the 5th of February, 1994?
18 A. Yes. This is an accurate reflection of those that were killed and
19 injured, and it is the final list.
20 Q. May I take you back to the computer-printed list which you said,
21 in effect, was a work in progress, and I'd like you to look at the list of
22 deceased -- I beg your pardon, the list of injured from 0026-8623 to
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. On the first page, that is 0026-8623, the list goes up to number
1 53. Is that correct?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And on the next page, it goes to 109 -- it starts, I beg your
4 pardon, at 109.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Do you know anything about the reason for this? Well, before we
7 ask about that, I take it that it would mean that there's a page missing.
8 Is that correct?
9 A. The list is incomplete. I can just confirm this, and I can
10 confirm to you with certainty that this list was made in the -- according
11 to the normal order, and I think that this must have been a mistake during
12 the photocopying process.
13 Q. Thank you. However, it is your evidence that the final official
14 list is that which was signed the document by Mr. Alibabic?
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I'm terribly
16 sorry to interrupt, but we don't have the same numbers.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, I was just at a point to ask. It
18 might be the same. Mr. Stamp, if you're referring to the page ending with
19 the number 8623 and you say that the list goes up to number 53, that's
20 true if you take the original one. If, however, if you would look at the
21 translation, it seems that 623 and 624 have been interchanged. At least,
22 if you look at the bottom, the reproduction of the numbers at the bottom
23 of the list, you see that there's a --
24 MR. STAMP: Yes, I --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps, just to clarify the issue, was this the
1 issue you wanted to raise, Mr. Piletta-Zanin?
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Your humble servant,
3 Mr. President.
4 JUDGE ORIE: At least I think that -- it's now at least on the
5 transcript --
6 MR. STAMP: Yes, perhaps we should place it on the record.
7 JUDGE ORIE: -- that we could note this mistake.
8 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much, Mr. President, and my learned
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stamp, it is 10.30. How much time would you
11 still need approximately, which would enable me to decide when we have a
13 MR. STAMP: Mr. President, I was just about to move on to another
14 area, which it probably would take around 10 to 15 minutes, so perhaps
15 this might be a convenient time.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps we might have the break now. But may I
17 ask you, when you -- yes, well, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. If we
19 take a break now, could we not perhaps ask the technicians to check the
20 ventilation in this room because I am under the impression that we are all
21 suffocating, and your humble servant, myself, the most.
22 JUDGE ORIE: It might be a consequence of the weekend where the
23 usual systems do not function, but I'll ask Madam Registrar.
24 Madam Registrar has taken whatever measures to have a better
25 air-conditioning in this room, and it might be a matter of time until it
1 becomes effective. May I then ask you just before having a break,
2 Mr. Stamp, we have had several times questions about translations, et
3 cetera. I just had a quick look, of course. I was not able to go through
4 P2365 thoroughly. First of all, I noted that the translation is -- well,
5 there are a few markings in it, but that would not cause me to make any
6 observation. But going quickly through the text, would you please try to
7 find with me page 0026-8321. That's the... Yes. In the original. Not
8 in the translation but in the original. Would you look perhaps at the end
9 of the first paragraph, fourth line from the bottom of that first
10 paragraph, you may see that there's a sentence which starts with a word -
11 and of course my pronunciation is not correct - "rekonstrukcija." Do you
12 see that word? So first paragraph, the first line of the original of
13 8321. You found it?
14 MR. STAMP: I'm afraid I haven't found it as yet. Is this --
15 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
16 MR. STAMP: I beg your pardon. Is this on the --
17 JUDGE ORIE: The B/C/S original, the page ending 8321.
18 MR. STAMP: Yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Approximately at the middle of the page, that's where
20 the paragraph ends. Yes?
21 MR. STAMP: Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Then the fourth line from the bottom of that
24 MR. STAMP: Yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know whether you see a sentence starting with
1 the word "rekonstrukcija."
2 MR. STAMP: Yes, I now see that.
3 JUDGE ORIE: If you look two lines lower, the sentence ends
4 with "60 degrees plus or minus 5 degrees." You see that?
5 MR. STAMP: Indeed.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Would you perhaps please try to find during the pause
7 in the translation of this page where the translation of this sentence
8 appears? I recognise a few words in that sentence like "stabilizator" and
9 "projektil," and I'm fully unable to find any translation of this
10 sentence. But perhaps you check that during the break, and inform us
11 after the break.
12 Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I will verify, Mr. President,
14 are you talking about the ERN number ending with 321, 8321?
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Because I must say I do not
17 see the words "rekonstrukcija" in the first paragraph. Mr. President, is
18 this the document?
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think that's the document. But I think
20 Mr. Stamp found it. Perhaps if you try to find it during the break as
21 well, and we'll be informed by Mr. Stamp.
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I found it.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it's the fourth line from the bottom on the
24 first. Yes.
25 We'll have a break until 5 minutes past 11.00.
1 --- Recess taken at 10.35 a.m.
2 --- On resuming at 11.00 a.m.
3 JUDGE ORIE: I would say welcome back in the sauna. I am informed
4 that everything is done in order to bring the temperature down to an
5 acceptable level. It was partly due to not changing the system from
6 wintertime to summertime. Mr. Stamp.
7 MR. STAMP: If it please you, Mr. President, Your Honours. I have
8 in the time allotted made enquiries as to the reasons for the discrepancy
9 in respect to the translations. We have not had any official explanation
10 as yet from the responsible unit and I am told that we will have an
11 explanation by the end of today or tomorrow. However, I am told that the
12 probability is that the omission is the result of error, that this
13 sentence was overlooked, and pending obtaining a full explanation because
14 I will still follow it up, I propose to ask a question -- ask the witness
15 to read this sentence into evidence, into the record.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So that it will just be one line. As least we
17 will have a translation in the record which is, well, of course, not the
18 ideal solution for the problem, but at least it helps us out for the
19 moment. You will understand that the problem of the Chamber is, in
20 general, that we would not be happy that we have to check every document
21 for the accurateness of its translation. I mean, it has happened now
22 several times in all different variations but I would not be amused by
23 sitting at my desk every day and checking whether every part of the
24 document is translated. That's our major concern. You may ask the
25 witness to read that part so that at least we have a provisional
1 translation in the transcript. Please proceed.
2 Mr. Usher, would you please...
3 Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. The
5 Defence would like to point out that it is absolutely indispensable to do
6 so as you said. There are already mistakes in terms of the landing, the
7 degree. We are talking about from 45 degrees to 60 degrees, so the degree
8 is already a mistake or there is a problem or a discrepancy, and this is
9 very important for the transcript.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. At least whether the content of the document
11 is an error or is in contradiction with other parts of the evidence, that
12 is, of course, a totally different matter. But at least we need to know
13 what is there.
14 Please, could you guide, escort the witness into the courtroom,
15 Mr. Usher.
16 Mr. Suljic, you are the only one who is not aware of what I just
17 said about the technical problems and the temperature in this courtroom.
18 Everything is done in order to bring it down so it is a more acceptable
19 temperature in this courtroom.
20 Mr. Stamp, please proceed.
21 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much, Mr. President.
22 Q. Mr. Suljic, could you have a look at your original report, your
23 police report, again at the page marked 0026-8321, and I think you have it
24 on document --
25 Perhaps you could assist us, Mr. Usher. We are looking at P2365.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Usher, it is in the hands of the registrar. I
2 think it is the seventh page of the document.
3 MR. STAMP: It is perhaps the page printed at the bottom
5 THE WITNESS: Yes.
6 MR. STAMP:
7 Q. I'd like you to look at the first paragraph of that page, and
8 there is a sentence, next to last sentence of that page, which ends with
9 the figure "5" and the figure designating degrees, "5 degrees." Do you
10 see that?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stamp, there are two sentencing following each
12 other, both having the same ending.
13 MR. STAMP:
14 Q. Look at the one that is the next to the last sentence of the
15 paragraph that ends with "5 degrees." And there is a sentence which
16 follows which is a last sentence of that paragraph. Can you say what word
17 that sentence begins with?
18 A. All the activities and all the evidence found --
19 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues...] Mr. Stamp, I
20 don't quite follow you --
21 MR. STAMP:
22 Q. May I ask it, put it this way. I am afraid I was not -- I didn't
23 feel confident to try to pronounce that word.
24 Can you look at the sentence beginning with the "rekonstrukcija"?
25 A. Yes. "The reconstruction of the position of the flight
1 stabilisers of the exploded projectile found on the -- in the asphalt
2 surface led to the determination of the angle of descent of 60 degrees
3 plus/minus 5 degrees."
4 MR. STAMP: Again, just for the record, Mr. President, may I just
5 state that that sentence which the witness just read is a sentence which
6 was not on the original translation of this document.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Stamp.
8 MR. STAMP:
9 Q. This determination of the angle of descent was made after the
10 analysis by the court-appointed experts that you mentioned before:
11 Kurtovic, Zecevic and Hadziomerovic; is that correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. You indicated to us that you interviewed various persons who lived
14 or who were positioned on the path of the flight of the projectile as it
15 had been indicated to you by the ballistic experts. Did they confirm the
16 direction and the area from where the missile came?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Could you have a look at that page of your report which is now
19 marked 0026-8322.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And can you have a look at the third and fourth paragraphs of that
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. These witnesses all confirm that the shell was launched from the
25 direction of Mrkovici?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And were reports of interviews with these persons done?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. If I may, Mr. Suljic, take you back to the examination that you
5 said were conducted by Dr. Dobraca.
6 MR. STAMP: And if I may, with your leave, Mr. President, have the
7 witness -- have tendered to the witness this Document P3061. For the
8 Court, it is P3061.1.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Stamp.
10 MR. STAMP: Thank you, Mr. President.
11 Q. I am going to ask you to quickly look through those documents.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I would like to check
14 something, and I will be back in just a few seconds.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. Here I am.
17 Mr. President, just to take one example, and I hope that this will
18 be the last time, but I just wanted to show you with this example, to show
19 you how the Prosecution is playing a game with the Defence. I don't know
20 how to call it. If I take 8694, Exhibit 8694, that you received, it is a
21 perfectly legible document, Mr. President. I think that you will agree
22 with me. And we have the document that was given to us bearing the same
23 number, and this is the example -- this is the copy with which we had to
24 work. We had a considerable amount of documents communicated to us by
25 the Prosecution on the deliberate -- in a deliberately illegible --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, make your point. And for the time
2 being, I do not assume either party to intentionally try to obstruct the
3 work of the other. So you are fully entitled to complain about illegible
4 documents. But whether or not this was intentionally done, it would be
5 rather stupid to at one moment provide you with a legible copy, and
6 another moment with an illegible copy. But let's refrain at this
7 document, until there's good ground to assume that there is a good basis
8 for it, that it is all intentionally done in order to obstruct the other
9 party. That is not my starting point.
10 But if there are good grounds to believe that, then of course you
11 may come back with that. But let's just for the time being first
12 concentrate on what happened.
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well, Mr. President. So
14 I do say the following: I was not able to prepare the cross-examination
15 with documents such as this one. We are talking about a black box. All
16 the documents we received are in that state. I do not understand why was
17 I delivered documents in such a state, and I was not able to prepare the
18 defence of General Galic. And I do say this on a voluntary basis. When
19 I say "voluntary," I mean --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Did you ask for better copies to the Prosecution?
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we are
22 constantly asking here, as general rule, that all the medical documents --
23 very well, Mr. President. I cannot spend all my time to say that all the
24 documents I receive are badly copied, and I would like to have a clear
25 copy. I may say it every morning when I wake up but it seems that it is
1 falling into deaf ears. We have received translations of this document
2 only this morning, and I would like to remind you that as a general
3 principle - and I will repeat this every morning - that the Defence
4 would like to get the original of these documents. On the one hand, we
5 would be able to see what these documents are all about; and secondly,
6 there wouldn't be a problem of a bad copy.
7 And I am very astonished to see that with the number of document
8 that are perfectly legible that were communicated to us today, not one is
9 badly copied; whereas if I take any documents from the old documents that
10 I received, if I just pick one out of the pile of documents, you will see
11 that they are black boxes. Thank you.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Just to give you an example, first of all, I had -- I
13 see that you are referring to a page where I have some -- still some
14 difficulties to find. But let me say this, Mr. Piletta-Zanin: If you
15 would have told us while making reference to a bad copy of a medical
16 document which turns out not to be necessarily bad copy because there are
17 better ones available, you would refer to that document, and you would
18 have brought to the attention of the Trial Chamber that the Prosecution
19 owes you an explanation on why they did not provide you with the
20 better-quality copy before, and that it has hindered you in preparing for
21 cross-examination. I think we would have fully understood what we
22 now understand, and that could have been done in three lines. And it
23 would have been just as effective as what you did now.
24 I think - of course, I haven't seen the originals, Mr. Stamp - but
25 if this is true, that Mr. Piletta-Zanin has been provided the black box
1 and only now gets a good copy, you owe him an explanation, and the Chamber
2 as well.
3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. I would
4 like to raise another point, however, and the English translation - and I
5 do sometimes like to work with the English translation - I must say that
6 we only received it a few moments ago, first point. And the second point,
7 Mr. President, for which we are asking the production of the original
8 documents is the following: That if you look at 868 -- 8585 which I
9 received, looking this way, it seems to confirm to me that the second
10 copy, 268585, is the number, it appears that the date of the 5th of
11 February, 1994 is very oddly clearer on the copy; whereas if I go to the
12 second version, the more legible one, I must notice as well that this date
13 is more legible, it is clearer, and I may allow myself to interpret it as
14 if it was scratched out something on the paper, as if a date was added
15 on. Only the production of the original documents would enable us to see
16 what the case is. And this is why every morning, I will ask for the
17 production of originals of this Chamber. But as a general comment, as I
18 said the other day, "erga omnes urbi et orbi." I cannot say it
19 differently. Thank you.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stamp, if we look at the page just indicated by
21 Mr. Piletta-Zanin, that is the one ending with 585, it seems as if there
22 would have been once different characters in the originals. If you take
23 it one page back, 8584, it also has the appearance of multiple entries, as
24 far as the date is concerned. I think those are not the only ones.
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the Defence
1 just wanted to confirm to you that --
2 THE INTERPRETER: Inaudible. The interpreter didn't hear what
3 Mr. Piletta-Zanin just said.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I notice, Mr. Stamp, that on all these documents
5 where we find similar what seems to be redactions of original text. I
6 really find it in many, many of them, that also in the copies where the
7 date is mentioned, the copy shows far brighter, especially where the
8 copies are relatively dark. You know that the Chamber can ask for
9 authentication of documents, and you also know that we do not do it unless
10 there is a good reason to do so. But I don't know whether you could given
11 an explanation right now before we consider whether we will have to ask
12 for authentication of these documents or that you first have to enquire
13 further in the matter.
14 MR. STAMP: We had proposed to lead whatever evidence that this
15 witness would give in respect to those documents. A great degree of what
16 we can do in terms of calling witness is to explain whatever might be
17 required to be explained, including the maker of the document, possibly,
18 would depend on what is raised in issue by cross-examination and by the
19 whole conduct of the case.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but I think the Defence, although it has not
21 been formulated as an objection already against presenting this document,
22 since it has the appearance of being a redacted document, I don't know
23 whether -- of course, if the witness could tell us about it, please do so.
24 MR. STAMP: I am not suggesting at all that this witness is in a
25 position to do that. These are the documents as we have them in our
1 position here. He can, to some degree, testify about them.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. STAMP: We have to make a determination having regard to time
4 constraints as to how many witnesses we call in respect to documents.
5 These are decisions that, to a great extent, will have to be made having
6 regard to the conduct of the proceedings, what is in issue, and primarily
7 how much time we have to deal with every item which might arise. Because
8 We could call witnesses to explain a variety of different issues which are
9 raised, and it is a determination we will have to make in the course the
11 We have this witness here now, and he can say something about the
12 documents, but not everything about them.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 MR. STAMP: He did not make these documents and may I just -- I
15 think I should be careful since he is here. And it is a decision that we
16 will have to make whether or not we are going to call persons who made
17 these documents or try to obtain the original of these documents. We have
18 delivered these documents to the Defence on at least three occasions. We
19 have sent copies to them. We were not aware up until now that they had
20 some copies which were illegible. We have copies in our vault which they
21 are always free to ask to have a look at; and any time they do so, we do
22 facilitate them.
23 Specifically in respect to the dates on the documents, if there is
24 an issue in respect of the dates, we can make enquiries, and we can do as
25 much as we can to satisfy the Court with explanations. But, of course,
1 that will depend on the conduct of the trial, how much certain things
2 become an issue. We can't call every witness that might be able to say
3 something about every aspect of the case.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand that. But on the other hand,
5 Mr. Stamp, at first sight, it is one of the things that jumps to your
6 eyes, that the dates are, well, not normal entries in these documents. But
7 let me just confer with my colleagues, please.
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. Another
11 reason that seems to be very important to us is, of course, it is
12 absolutely impossible for the Defence, even if we are very willing to
13 check dozens of translations that have just been delivered this very
14 moment, we would like to work from these translations but we cannot. You
15 will tell me it is the same form, it is the same document, but you have
16 seen how it is important to make sure that there isn't one single sentence
17 missing, and we cannot take that risk. And humanly, it is not possible
18 for me to verify all these documents, to verify all the translations that
19 figure in these documents at this very instant. On the one hand, we
20 cannot work, we cannot prepare; and on the other hand, the originals are
21 not produced, and it is quite obvious. So as you said, it would be best
22 to just set aside these documents for now. Thank you.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, you might have noticed, as I have
24 noticed, that these documents are forms with all the same content which,
25 of course, we can check that, whether it is really literally the same. At
1 least it has the appearance that apart from the form itself, that it's
2 mainly the entries that are of importance, and the entries are dates,
3 names and, usually in Latin, the diagnosis, which is abbreviated "DG" in
4 the original documents. So I think that checking the -- yes.
5 So I think as far as translation is concerned, that should not be
6 the major problem in respect of this document as far as we, the Chamber,
7 can see it now.
8 Mr. Stamp, the Chamber has -- yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. Regarding
10 the translation, there won't be a problem as soon as Mr. Stamp will give
11 us the translation of the stamp that appears on this document.
12 Mr. Stamp, would you be able to give us the translation of the
13 stamp that appears on this document?
14 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, that your
15 objection also concerns the stamp, and what we see at the translation, the
16 stamp is mentioned but not literally translated. If you have any
17 difficulty in this respect, I am certain that the additional translation
18 of the stamp, if that is of specific interest for the Defence, will be
19 easily be obtained. I see on some documents it is quite well readable.
20 We see that it is both in Cyrillic and in -- and it's -- well, even 80 per
21 cent could be translated by me already by now in that it's the faculty of
22 medicine, that it is the University of Sarajevo and it is in Sarajevo. So
23 let's not play games and let's concentrate on the really important
25 Mr. Stamp, this Chamber decided that you may present the documents
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 to the witness, but the Chamber expects you to clarify the issue raised by
2 Mr. Piletta-Zanin as to the entries, specifically, of the dates.
3 MR. STAMP: Very well, Mr. President. I am obliged.
4 JUDGE ORIE: It will depend on your explanation whether finally
5 the documents will be admitted in evidence.
6 MR. STAMP: Thank you. May I make an enquiry?
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 MR. STAMP: Would the Court be satisfied with an explanation by
9 myself or one of the counsel for the Prosecution from the bar or would the
10 Court require a witness who could speak about it?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Of course, it depends on the type of explanation. If
12 you say we still have the originals here but we wiped it all out and put a
13 nice date on it, then of course you could tell it ourselves. If it would
14 be another explanation, perhaps it would be -- it could be done in what
15 way, it is difficult to decide. Let's first try to find the explanation
16 and we then see how the explanation can be brought to the attention of the
17 Chamber. Yes.
18 MR. STAMP: We will take the appropriate steps.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, this is a very
20 important point so I would like to raise it. I would like to examine the
21 document 8585. This document is now legible. I have it now in the
22 legible form, and it is very important that we see what is going on in
23 this courtroom this very moment. I don't know if you can read underneath
24 the inscription "05020" or "1994," rather. But I can just guess that
25 there is a "3" there, maybe even a "9" under the inscription "994." I do
1 not know if we have the same document before our eyes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please repeat the number so that I --
3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] The number is 0026-8585.
4 JUDGE ORIE: 8585, yes.
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [In English] At the end. [Interpretation]
6 Mr. President, if you look at the date, on my copy, finally in the copy
7 that I can finally read, under "1995," slightly to the right, I can see
8 that something appears to be "93" or it seems that it is the year 1993. I
9 don't know if you can see it. I don't know if we have the same document.
10 But on my document I can very clearly see that there is a "3" for sure,
11 and may be in front of it a number "9."
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, that is what I pointed at before.
13 That is exactly what I wanted an explanation about.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President, but what I
15 wanted to say is that, having received for this document, a document such
16 as this one, Mr. President, I do not have the same number any more, but
17 this is what I have received for this document, Mr. President. I would
18 like you to look at it, please. I have it in my left hand. It is
19 absolutely impossible that I work with this document, that I cannot
20 discover elements that we see right now on this other document, and I must
21 point this out.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, I ask two things to the
23 Prosecutor: First, I said that I think the Prosecution owes an
24 explanation why they did not provide you with better copies before; and
25 the second one is that we want a clarification, especially of these kind
1 of issues. What you do at this moment is to repeat that it's
2 intentionally done to deceive the Defence, that is at least what I -- but
3 it is clear that these kind of things you could not, on the basis of these
4 bad documents, you could not properly prepare whatever examination of
5 these documents is concerned. So if, finally, you say you need more time,
6 we will see that at the end of the cross-examination whether there are
7 still issues left which you -- for which you need more time. We will see
8 that at that very moment.
9 Mr. Stamp.
10 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much, Mr. President. In respect to
11 the second question, the question of clarification on the dates, the
12 Prosecution will endeavour to clarify the matter in a manner which
13 pleases the Court and which is sufficient, hopefully, for my learned
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 MR. STAMP: In respect to the first matter as to the legibility
17 of the copies received by the Defence and an explanation for that, these
18 documents were served on the Defence on three occasions and this is the
19 first occasion that we are becoming aware that they had illegible copies
20 of these documents. If we did, we would have -- if we had that knowledge,
21 we would have given to them the best copies we could.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Do I understand that they have been served three
24 MR. STAMP: Three times.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the second or the third time, were these better
1 copies or still the --
2 MR. STAMP: I don't know which copies my friend refers to, which
3 service. The point is, if I may, Mr. President, is that we did not become
4 aware of legibility issues in respect of these particular documents.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Ms. Pilipovic.
6 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have to say that I
7 am quite surprised and indeed quite concerned by this type of behaviour of
8 my learned colleague who is presenting facts which are definitely not
9 correct. I believe that my learned colleagues and we on the Defence team
10 have had so many meetings where we discussed the documents, primarily
11 medical documents, and we always lodged the same complaints, that the
12 documents are illegible, cannot be read and we cannot accept this type of
13 arguments presented to the Court. This was the reason why we always --
14 when I say "we," I mean we, the Defence, we always question the
15 authenticity of the document. And now we are at the point, so many months
16 after the beginning of the trial, that we are discussing the authenticity
17 of these documents. I think that my learned colleague, Mr. Stamp, was
18 present when I said that the Defence cannot do its work properly with the
19 documents in this state, illegible as they are. So I am quite surprised
20 to hear that this is the first time that the Defence lodged this type of
21 objection. I think that I raised this issue of authenticity of the
22 documents once before during the examination of one of the previous
23 witnesses. This objection still stands, and if we receive this type of
24 documents now, so many months after the beginning of the trial, I have to
25 say that this raises quite a few concerns with the Defence.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of course, I was not present during the
2 meetings between the Prosecution and the Defence so, of course, I cannot
3 verify it, but I am quite unhappy that, first of all, that no better
4 copies have been provided to the Defence. That be sure, since there are
5 better copies available. That is apart from a creating problems for the
6 Defence. I am not saying intentionally creating problems, but at least
7 creating problems for the Defence. It is also a waste of paper and ink.
8 So that is the first thing I am unhappy with.
9 The second thing I am unhappy with is that it could not be solved,
10 let me put it that way, and I am just at this moment not saying that the
11 Chamber at this very moment would not be able, is not willing to pay too
12 much time on that, who is to blame that the problem could not be solved.
13 I also do understand that if you get a lot of bad copies that you start
14 hating yourself if every morning, when getting up, you have to complain
15 about bad copies. Nevertheless, if there is any problem with illegibility
16 of documents that appear on the list of documents that will be tendered, I
17 want the Defence - that is the only way the Chamber can deal with it - I
18 want the Defence to inform the Court within 48 hours after they received a
19 new list and the potential exhibits, whether there is any problem with
20 illegibility of the documents appearing on that list. That at least
21 enables us to send you back to the meeting room and solve the problem and
22 not spend half an hour on it in court. So, therefore, the Chamber has
23 full understanding for your position as Defence, but the Chamber wants to
24 promote other ways of solving these kind of problems than to spend a lot
25 of time in court on it. So, therefore, within 48 hours, from the new
1 list, any illegible documents to be reported. Yes.
2 Mr. Stamp, please proceed.
3 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much, Mr. President.
4 Q. Now, you have had a long opportunity to peruse those documents,
5 Mr. Suljic. The documents numbers 0026-8534 to 0026-8596.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. At this
8 stage, I must make another observation which is the consequence of the
9 partial or total illegibility of these documents. The Defence deems that
10 when documents are notified or served on us and we cannot read them, they
11 are not prepared according to Article 65 ter. So there is an objection
12 to the communication of documents when it comes to communicate documents
13 in black and white with which we cannot see anything, that is not to carry
14 out its obligation of communication.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stamp.
16 MR. STAMP:
17 Q. Mr. Suljic, are the documents 0026-8534 to 0026-8596 copies of
18 post-mortem reports signed by Dr. Dobraca?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Firstly, could you look at the document with the numbers ending
21 6861. I beg your pardon, 0026-8561. Have a look at that document.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Do you see a stamp on it?
24 A. Yes, I do.
25 Q. Could you please read, if you can, the words in that stamp or of
1 that stamp.
2 A. Bosnia and Herzegovina University of Sarajevo medical school,
3 Sarajevo. It is written both in the Cyrillic and in the Roman script.
4 Q. Thank you. Could you -- did you compare the names on these
5 documents to the names on your list of deceased from the Markale incident?
6 A. When we were drafting our report about the incidents at the
7 Markale market --
8 Q. We can get to that later. Just if you could, could we deal with
9 this specific end of it, and we can move on to whatever you were saying.
10 Did you compare these post-mortem reports and the names on them to the
11 names on the list of deceased from the Markale market incident of February
13 A. At the time of the drafting of the report, we did not have these
14 documents. We looked at the protocol which was done by the chair for
15 forensic medicine.
16 Q. Thank you. At any time, did you compare the names, any time at
17 all, did you compare the names on these post-mortem reports with the names
18 on the list of deceased from the Markale market incident?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Thank you. Could you please look at the document numbered
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Was that name on this document, Azem Huric, one of the names on
24 the list of the deceased from the Markale market incident?
25 A. I don't remember all the names from the list of those killed, and
1 I stand by the report that I had done at the time.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I am not quite
4 certain if I got the right document number. Would Mr. Stamp be kind
5 enough to give us the information regarding this -- what is the document
6 number. I can read 6853, but apparently numbers that are missing --
7 JUDGE ORIE: It was 8537, didn't you say, Mr. Stamp? In the
8 transcript, the last digit is missing. 537, yes.
9 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
10 MR. STAMP:
11 Q. Mr. Suljic, are you looking at the document 0026-8537?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Can you say if that name appeared on the list of deceased and
15 A. I would like to ask you to give me the list, the list of the dead
16 and injured, before I can give you my answer.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Could, please, Exhibit P2366 be given to the witness.
18 MR. STAMP:
19 Q. I would ask you, Mr. Suljic, to look at the final criminal report,
20 which is -- on which the list of dead and injured are 0087 -- I beg your
21 pardon, 0026-8628 to 0026-8629.
22 Can you tell us now whether or not that name appears on your list
23 of deceased?
24 A. No, this name is not on the list of the deceased.
25 MR. STAMP: With your leave, Mr. President, Your Honours, may I be
1 allowed to ask the witness to take a pen and put a mark across that page.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, thank you.
4 This is an example of what the Defence was not able to do, and must do at
5 the last minute. We were talking about the Document 8537, so if we talk
6 about this document, I must note the following, under item 2, in the
7 original language, we can read as follows: [B/S/C phrase]. We have right
8 in front of it, in the space to be completed, we can see elements that are
9 legible which correspond to the examination date, whereas in the space to
10 be completed, we see them. But we only see them in the translation that
11 you have which is produced under the number 877721. So we can see that
12 there is absolutely nothing in front of the examination date and autopsy
13 date, whereas it is perfectly legible in the original document ending by
14 the numbers 537, that there is a date, a date does appear and the date is
15 there. Whereas in the translation, nothing appears.
16 So even if every time we have a typical form which is true, we
17 must have information that we can examine on every document. I am saying
18 this because, not having had this information in its translated form, we
19 see that the translation, the original date exists. We cannot ask the
20 question of the witness. On top of it, we see a date which is 1994. It
21 might be 1995. I am talking about the examination date, of course.
22 But in one case, like in the other, it all seems more and more
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stamp, looking to document, last three digits
25 537, it appears that apart from on item 3, also on item 2, which asks for
1 a date, some explanation is needed as to the entry which is there or has
2 been there or seems to be there. So I think that we when we are talking
3 about dates on the documents, it is not just in line three but in line
5 Yes. Please proceed.
6 MR. STAMP:
7 Q. Could you take a blue pen and put a line across that document
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, so that the
11 Defence may at least try to prepare, would Mr. Stamp be able to give us
12 now the information pertinent to this document. The Defence is willing to
13 make the effort, but we have to know what is the information. Is
14 Mr. Stamp able to give us the information right now?
15 JUDGE ORIE: If Mr. Stamp would have an explanation, I think I
16 asked him for it. I asked whether he could give it right away or not. Is
17 that the same for the document last three digits 537? C.
18 MR. STAMP: Indeed.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, so may we take
21 a break, ask Mr. Stamp to peruse through his file to figure out what is
22 going on exactly, because we are taken back by this and we were not able
23 to prepare fully. We cannot work this way. We cannot cross-examine this
24 witness. Thank you.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I'll take care that you will have an opportunity
1 before starting cross-examination of the witness. So that you are able
2 either to put additional questions to Mr. Stamp -- let's now proceed with
3 the examination of the witness.
4 Mr. Stamp.
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well.
6 MR. STAMP: Thank you, Mr. President.
7 Q. Have you put a line across it, Mr. Suljic?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Thank you. Now, Witness, apart from that document, do the other
10 post-mortem reports reflect names which are on your list of deceased from
11 the Markale market incident of 1994?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. So there are 62 post-mortem reports that you have in respect to
14 deceased persons from the Markale market incident of 1994? That is
15 0026-8534 to 0026-8596, which would be 63, and there is one which is not
16 relevant. It would be 62.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. You said that these documents were not available at the time when
19 you did your report on the 17th of February, 1994. Could you have a look
20 at the date of the document which is towards the top left-hand corner of
21 the document.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. I beg your pardon. You are looking at the document 0026-8534, are
24 you? Please, look at that one.
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. On that post-mortem report, the date is the 10th of February,
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. One or two questions on a different issue. In your original
5 report, you said that tail-fin and fragments of a mortar shell were found
6 on the scene of Markale market?
7 I am sorry, I didn't hear your answer.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Do you know if during the war, while you were a crime inspector of
10 police, lab reports or lab analysis were done on these fragments?
11 A. As far as I remember no lab analysis were done because there was
12 no lab in the wartime conditions. I don't recall having seen any lab
14 Q. And just in case -- this is not on the record -- is it correct to
15 say that the document, the criminal report signed by Munir Alibabic is a
16 confirmed report with the numbers, names and addresses of the casualties
17 of the Markale market incident of 1994?
18 A. Yes, that is the final report and it verifies the actual state of
19 the affair.
20 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much, Mr. President, Your Honours. I
21 have no further questions in examination-in-chief. May it please you.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Stamp.
23 [Trial Chamber confers].
24 JUDGE ORIE: Since I promised the Defence that they would have an
25 opportunity at least during the break to the extent possible to prepare
1 for cross-examination, we will have a break now until five minutes -- 25
2 minutes to 1.00, so that -- yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I believe that
4 this will not be necessary. It is not possible to read in detail these
5 documents in just a few minutes. And I think that the witness should come
6 back tomorrow because the Defence is definitely not ready, and will not be
7 ready after the break either.
8 JUDGE ORIE: The testimony in chief, I would say for some 70 per
9 cent, was not about the documents. Could the Defence not start to
10 cross-examine the witness and we will see where it ends? If we come at a
11 point where you could not proceed, then, of course, please indicate so.
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, absolutely,
13 Mr. President. This suggestion is welcome. The Defence of course, wishes
14 to tell you that after the examination of these documents, if we wish to
15 re-examine this witness, we would like to have the possibility to do so.
16 Thank you.
17 JUDGE ORIE: We will then have a break until 12.35.
18 --- Recess taken at 1212 p.m.
19 --- On resuming at 12.41 p.m.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Pilipovic, I usually ask if the Defence is ready
21 to cross-examine the witness, but I will change my question slightly and
22 say, is the Defence ready to start the cross-examination of the witness?
23 Please proceed.
24 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, the Defence is
25 ready to start with the cross-examination, but we expect you to show your
1 usual understanding and to allow us, both myself and my colleague, to
2 complete the cross-examination. That is, for my colleague to complete the
3 examination after we have studied documents.
4 Cross-examined by Ms. Pilipovic:
5 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Suljic, good afternoon.
6 A. Good afternoon.
7 Q. Can you please confirm to us that on the 29th of November, 2001,
8 and on the 3rd of December, 2001, you gave a statement to the
9 investigators of the Office of the Prosecutor?
10 A. No. It wasn't in the year 2001. I didn't give any statements on
11 that date.
12 Q. Can you tell us when you gave statements to the investigators of
13 the OTP?
14 A. It was in year 2002.
15 Q. When in 2002?
16 A. I believe that it was perhaps in late February, early March.
17 Q. Mr. Suljic, when you say "late February, early March," you're
18 referring to the year 2002, so that would be this time period?
19 A. Yes.
20 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence has a
21 statement that has been disclosed to the Defence by our learned colleagues
22 of the Prosecution. The statement is dated 29th of November, 2001 and the
23 3rd of December, 2001. We would like to show this statement to the
24 witness and we would like to get an answer from this witness whether it is
25 right that he gave a statement in 2001 or in 2002.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could I please be shown the
3 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, since the statement
4 is in the English language, and since it is signed, we know that the
5 statement is signed in English but we do have also the translation. I
6 would like to hand it to the usher so that he may show it to the witness.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
8 You did show him the English-signed copy at this moment, or all
9 the copies?
10 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Mr. Suljic --
12 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] In fact, Your Honours, we have
13 shown the statement in English. There is a signature on the front page,
14 and also the personal details of the witness. I would now like the
15 witness to state whether this is indeed his signature or whether this is
16 the statement that he gave.
17 A. Yes, I'm sorry, I do apologise. This is my statement, and the
18 dates on the statement are correct.
19 Q. So you confirm to us that you did give a statement on the 29th of
20 November, 2001, and on the 3rd December, 2001?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. When you said that you had given a statement in late February 2002
23 and in early March 2002, can you please tell us, did you also sign any
24 statements on that occasion?
25 A. No. I was talking about this statement. But since I live life on
1 the fast lane and I lost track of time, and I wasn't really thinking
2 about the correct dates.
3 Q. Mr. Suljic, when my learned colleague was asking questions --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic, do you want the witness to read the
5 statements or would you rather have them back at this moment? We usually
6 do not have statements of the witnesses in front of them when being
8 So Mr. Usher, would you please.
9 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the statement is in
10 English. Yes, yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Some lawyers do understand English; others do not.
12 But I've got no idea --
13 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] I just wanted to check with the
14 witness whether he speaks English and whether he gave the statement in
15 English or in Serbian.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't understand English, and I
17 gave my statement in the Bosnian language.
18 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Thank you. Can you please confirm that the statement that you
20 gave in, as you say, Bosnian language, that it was stated for the record
21 in English and that you confirmed with your signature that the information
22 contained in the statement that we have shown you are indeed correct, and
23 that everything that you have said has been included in the statement?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Thank you. Mr. Suljic, you told us today that you are working
1 in -- that you work for the Sipad company?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Can you please tell us, before the outbreak of the conflict, that
4 is, before 1992, where were you employed?
5 A. I worked in a trading company called Sarajevo Promet. For a
6 certain period of time, it was in fact a representative office of a firm
7 in Belgrade, and later on it became an independent company with its seat
8 in Sarajevo.
9 Q. Thank you. Today, when you told us that you worked in Sipad, can
10 you please tell us, where did you start working for the Sipad company?
11 A. I think that I started working for the Sipad company in 1998 or
12 1999. I'm not quite sure.
13 Q. Mr. Suljic, the reason why I ask you these questions is because in
14 your statement that you gave to the investigators of the Office of the
15 Prosecutor, it is stated that your occupation is a lawyer and that before
16 the outbreak of the war, that you were also a lawyer. Can you please
17 clarify this?
18 On the basis of which information is it stated here that you were
19 a lawyer and you are a lawyer?
20 A. Well, obviously, it was a mistake in interpretation, because when
21 they asked me what my occupation, what my profession was, I said that I
22 was a lawyer, that I had a degree in law.
23 Q. Thank you, Mr. Suljic. Today, when my learned colleague asked you
24 a question about your employment in the beginning of 1992, that is, at the
25 time when the conflict broke out, you said that in June 1992, you were
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Can you please tell us, when did the conflict break out in
4 Sarajevo, in your opinion?
5 A. I don't know the exact date, but I do know that it began when the
6 road blocks were set up in some parts of the city. That is when the first
7 casualties occurred.
8 Q. Will you agree with the Defence if we told us that it was in early
9 March 1992 when the first casualties fell and when the first road blocks
10 were put up in Sarajevo?
11 A. I don't know the exact date.
12 Q. The setting up of the road blocks in Sarajevo and the beginning of
13 the outbreak of the conflict in Sarajevo, do you connect it any way with
14 the declaration of independence and the murder -- the killing of a person
15 at a wedding, at a Serbian wedding at Bascarsija?
16 A. I'm not and have been not been politically active at any time, so
17 I can't give you an answer to your question because I do not have the
18 appropriate information.
19 Q. Can you confirm that in that period, in March, in Sarajevo, that
20 the road blocks were put up after these events?
21 A. As far as I can remember, it was in March, or perhaps not. I'm
22 not quite sure, but I do know that the road blocks were put up in Sarajevo
23 sometime in the spring of 1992.
24 Q. When you told us that in June 1992 you were mobilised, can you
25 please tell us in which municipality you lived at the time and where did
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 you go to respond to the call-up?
2 A. I lived in the municipality of Novo Sarajevo, and I reported to
3 the regional staff of the Territorial Defence of the city of Sarajevo.
4 Q. Can you please tell us, where was the Territorial Defence staff
5 where you went to respond to the call-up? I mean, the premises, where
6 were they located? Where was the building?
7 A. It was in the settlement of Ciglane, which is in the city centre,
8 municipality of Centar.
9 Q. Can you tell us, what kind of premises were those of the
10 Territorial Defence staff for that part of the city?
11 A. It was a new building that had been built right before the war. I
12 heard that, before the war, it was used by the Ministry of the Defence or
13 for some similar purpose.
14 Q. Can you tell us on what street it was?
15 A. I don't remember what the name of the street was.
16 Q. When you say that you cannot recall the name of the street at the
17 time where the Territorial Defence staff was, can you tell us what the
18 name of the street is now?
19 A. I think it's -- the name is Husref Redzic Street. I don't know
20 whether that was the name before.
21 Q. Can you tell us in what period of time the names of the streets in
22 Sarajevo were changed?
23 A. I'm not quite sure. I don't know when the street names were
25 Q. When you say that you responded to the call-up, can you please
1 tell us which organ called the mobilisation?
2 A. I think that the mobilisation was proclaimed in June, but I don't
3 know who proclaimed it.
4 Q. You told us that you had reported to the Territorial Defence
5 staff. Can you please tell us what formation within the Territorial
6 Defence you belonged to?
7 A. Right at the beginning, in the first two or three months, I was in
8 the unit providing security to buildings and persons. And later on, I was
9 transferred to the logistics battalion.
10 Q. When you say that the first two or three months you were in the
11 security, can you please tell us which buildings did you provide security
13 A. These were mostly regional staff buildings and facilities.
14 Q. When you say the regional staff buildings or facilities, do you
15 mean to say that there were some other premises where the regional staff
16 was located?
17 A. No. That was the building where I reported for the call-up, and
18 mostly we provided security to that building. We were at the reception
19 desk and did tasks of that nature.
20 Q. You told us that after two or three months, you were tasked to
21 join the logistics battalion, if I understood you correctly?
22 A. Yes, you did.
23 Q. Can you please tell us, this logistics battalion, what formation
24 as it a part of, what formation it belonged to?
25 A. I think it was in September 1992, that is when the brigades were
1 established or setup. At that time, I was a member of the 3rd Motorised
2 Brigade, and there was this logistics battalion which was a part of the
4 Q. So in September 1992, you, as a member of the logistics battalion
5 of the 3rd Motorised Brigade, can you please tell us, where was the
6 headquarters of the 3rd Motorised Brigade and where was the headquarters
7 of the logistics battalion?
8 A. Both the headquarters of the battalion and of the brigade were
9 located in the part of the town called Stup, which belonged to the Ilidza
11 Q. So you tell us that both the headquarters of the brigade and of
12 the logistics battalion were in Stup. Can you please tell us how many
13 battalions were there in the 3rd Motorised Brigade?
14 A. I don't know exactly because the figure changed.
15 Q. Can you tell us how many soldiers were there in the 3rd Motorised
17 A. No, I don't have that information.
18 Q. Can you tell us what kind of clothes did the members of the 3rd
19 Motorised Brigade wear? Did they have uniforms or what?
20 A. At the beginning, we did not have any uniforms. And later on,
21 some of the soldiers were issued uniforms that were made of some kind of
22 fabric. I don't know what kind of fabric it was, but some of the soldiers
23 were issued a type of uniform.
24 Q. When you say that "some of the soldiers were issued uniforms," are
25 you in fact confirming that the other members of the 3rd Motorised Brigade
1 were soldiers that were not wearing uniforms?
2 A. A certain number of soldiers did not have uniforms.
3 Q. Can you please tell us, what kind of arms did the members of the
4 3rd Motorised Brigade have? What kind of weapons?
5 A. I don't know much about armaments. I know that soldiers had
6 Kalashnikov rifles and automatic rifles which were used before in the
7 former JNA. As for any other types of armaments, I don't know what they
8 were called. I'm just not very familiar with this.
9 Q. You told us that you were a member of the army BiH, the 3rd
10 Motorised Brigade, until December 1993. Is that correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Can you tell us, in the Stup area where the 3rd Motorised Brigade
13 was stationed, was an HVO unit named Kralj Tvrtko also stationed there?
14 A. I think so.
15 Q. Can you please confirm whether the headquarters of the HVO unit
16 named Kralj Tvrtko was located in the Alija Alijagic elementary school?
17 A. No, I cannot confirm that.
18 Q. Apart from the members of the Kralj Tvrtko unit of the HVO that
19 you confirmed was stationed in Stup, can you please confirm whether the
20 unit commanded by Juka Prazina was also active in the Stup area?
21 A. I believe that this unit did not have a permanent station -- was
22 not permanently stationed on that line. They would come there
23 occasionally if there were any major combat operations going on.
24 Q. You told us that on that line, and by that I take it you mean the
25 line of the 3rd Motorised Brigade, that there were major combat operations
1 going on there on that line, and that on that occasions, the unit
2 commanded by Juka Prazina would come in to help. Can you please tell us,
3 the armed combat, who took part in it, and what was the line that you were
4 referring to when you say that combat operations were going on there?
5 A. I did not go to the line of where the fighting was going on, so I
6 don't know what the lines were. But the fighting was going on between the
7 army of BiH and the members of the Serbian armed forces, and the units of
8 the former JNA.
9 Q. Can you please tell us, how much time did you spend on the line,
10 on the front line? When I say "the line," I mean your command post, the
11 command post of the logistics battalion.
12 A. I was in the rear of the front lines, because we were providing
13 supplies to the units on the line, and I did not go to the line itself.
14 Q. Can you please tell us the combat operations involving the two
15 armies that you have just described for us, how often did they take place?
16 A. Shelling and sniping was an everyday occurrence. And as for the
17 attacks or attempts to break through, to breach some of the lines, I think
18 that they also occurred quite often, but I can't be more specific as to
19 the time interval how often it happened.
20 Q. When you say attempts to breach the line, the front line, are you
21 trying to tell us that the lines shifted, that their positions shifted as
22 the result of the fighting between the two armies?
23 A. Yes. Of course.
24 Q. Can you please tell us, in the 3rd Motorised Brigade, you said
25 that you were a member of the logistics battalion. But was there also a
1 snipers' platoon which belonged to the 3rd Motorised Brigade, according to
2 its establishment?
3 A. I don't know exactly what units were a part of the 3rd Motorised
4 Brigade. I was -- my task was the medical service, to take care of the
5 medical service, and of the quartermaster supplies for the units.
6 Q. Can you tell us in general terms whether snipers' units were
7 operating within brigades? Was there such a unit at all?
8 A. I don't know whether the 3rd Motorised Brigade had such a unit.
9 Q. When you say that you don't know whether the 3rd Motorised Brigade
10 had such a unit or not, do you have any knowledge of any such units
11 existing as part of the BH army?
12 A. I met some members of the BH army who had the sniper sights on
13 their rifles, but I do not know whether they actually belonged to the
14 snipers platoon or any other unit of that kind.
15 Q. When you say that you would come across members of the BH army
16 with sniper rifles, can you tell us whether they had any characteristic
17 uniform, apart from the rifles that they had, which would immediately
18 label them as members of a sniper unit?
19 A. I think that they wore uniforms. I mostly came across them on the
20 lines or in the area of operations of the 3rd Motorised Brigade.
21 Q. When you say that you came across such people in the area of
22 operations of the 3rd Motorised Brigade, can you please be more specific
23 as to the actual positions and locations where you met them? Did they
24 have their positions from which they were operating, did they have the
25 snipers in placements, as they are called?
1 A. No, I never came across them in their -- on their positions, but
2 mostly in the area where they had their meals and where they rested.
3 Q. When you say that you came across them in the areas where they had
4 their meals and where they rested, are you trying to tell us that the
5 members of the 3rd Motorised Brigade had their own kitchen where they had
6 meals, and premises where they rested, their quarters?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Can you tell us, please, in the area where the 3rd Motorised
9 Brigade had its positions, which buildings are we talking about? Were
10 there several buildings where the members of that unit took their meals
11 and rested?
12 A. It was just one building. It was the Elektro Privada, the
13 electricity supply company building, which at the time was abandoned. It
14 was an empty building.
15 Q. Can you tell us on what street was this electricity supply
16 building, in what part of the town, of the city?
17 A. It was also in Stup, but I don't know the name of the street.
18 Q. Please tell us, how much time would the members of the 3rd
19 Motorised Brigade spend on the positions, and was this Elektro Privada
20 building in fact sort of a barracks where the soldiers were quartered?
21 A. I don't know how much time the soldiers would spend on the line.
22 And in the basement of that building, they had the premises where they
23 could sleep and take their meals.
24 Q. So on that street where the Elektro Privada building was, the
25 electricity supply company building was where the members of the 3rd
1 Motorised Brigade were located, were there any other buildings or
2 locations where the members of the 3rd Motorised Brigade were located,
3 apart from this building?
4 A. No.
5 Q. On that street where the Elektro Privada building is located, was
6 the front line running through that street, the front line manned by the
7 3rd Motorised Brigade?
8 A. The front line ran in front of the Elektro Privada building.
9 Q. When you say that the front line ran in front of this building,
10 can you please tell us how far away from each other were the positions of
11 the two armies?
12 A. I don't know exactly where the front line went because it was not
13 a straight line. But I do know that the first trenches were located
14 approximately 200 metres away from the building where the soldiers were
16 Q. Can you please tell us -- you say that the trenches were 200
17 metres away from the building where the soldiers were staying. Can you
18 please tell us how far away from the areas where the inhabitants of the
19 city dwelled? How far away from these areas were the trenches?
20 A. There were no inhabitants there because it was the front line and
21 there were no civilians there.
22 Q. Can you please tell us, where were the closest areas where
23 civilians were located? In other words, how far were the civilian
24 facilities and buildings away from the front line and the Elektro Privada
1 A. The headquarters of the 3rd Motorised Brigade were located in the
2 part of town that was mainly an industrial area, and around the building
3 where the headquarters of the 3rd Motorised Brigade was located, you had
4 mainly commercial offices. And behind the electrical distribution
5 building on the one side, at approximately maybe 1.000 metres, maybe more,
6 you had apartment buildings.
7 Q. Can you tell us, what was that settlement called where these
8 apartment buildings were?
9 A. It was called Alipasino Polje.
10 Q. Can you confirm to us that on the line situated at a thousand
11 metres from there, where Alipasino Polje was located, were there buildings
12 where the logistics battalions were quartered, and the centre, the
13 communications centre, of the 3rd Motorised Brigade?
14 A. Where they were stationed, I believe that the 3rd Motorised
15 Brigade was quartered at Stup; whereas for the centres of the other
16 brigades, I couldn't tell you.
17 Q. Do you know, when we talk about Alipasino Polje, what brigade had
18 its positions on the area called Alipasino Polje?
19 A. I really don't know.
20 Q. When you told us that in the month of September 1993 you left the
21 army of BiH and you started working in the CSB at the time, can you
22 confirm to us that the CSB was operating within the Minister for the
23 Interior Affairs of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
24 A. The centre functioned within the Ministry of Interior Affairs at
25 the level of the republic.
1 Q. Can you tell us when we talk about the Ministry of Interior of
2 BiH, were there special units of the police that took part in the armed
3 conflict during the period of the years of 1993, 1994, and 1995 in
5 A. I do not know how the MUP at the republic level was organised.
6 Q. Do you know if there was a special unit within the MUP called the
7 Vikic unit which took part in the armed conflict in combat operations
8 that -- which took place in Sarajevo?
9 A. I do know that a unit under the command of Mr. Vikic existed, but
10 I do not know which unit it belonged to.
11 Q. Since you told us that you do know that there was a special unit
12 under Vikic, but you don't know under whom they worked exactly, could you
13 tell us if members of the Vikic unit wore some special uniforms? And if
14 so, could you tell us how they were armed as well.
15 A. I did not have any contacts with members of that unit, so I could
16 not really give you an answer to this question.
17 Q. Do you know if during the period of the armed conflict in
18 Sarajevo, was there a special unit called Seva? It was a sniping unit.
19 A. I never heard about that unit during the war. I only heard about
20 the existence of this unit after the war.
21 Q. When you told us that you only heard about the existence of this
22 unit after the war, would you be able to indicate to us where you got this
23 information? And do you also know where they operated, members of this
25 A. All the information linked to the existence of the unit
1 called Seva I got through the newspapers.
2 Q. During your examination-in-chief, you said that within the CSB, a
3 department was created in order to investigate war crimes and genocide.
4 Is that correct?
5 A. I do not know when this department was formed, but I know that in
6 the month of January 1993, I was transferred from the breaking and
7 entering department. I was transferred to this service which investigates
8 war crimes and genocide.
9 Q. When you told us that up until the month of January 1993, that is,
10 as of the month of September 1993 up until the month of January, you
11 worked for the department which investigated breaking and entering
12 offences, can you tell us if during that period of time there were
13 incidents of that sort, rather, breaking and entry incidents and also
14 murders while you were working there?
15 A. There was a service for crime offences which took care of murders
16 and other situations of the sort. But we took care of the breaking and
17 entry that would have occurred on the territory.
18 Q. When in the month of January 1994 you started working for that
19 department, this war crimes department, can you tell us who -- which --
20 who created this department?
21 A. I really don't know who created this department.
22 Q. After you started working there, were you told why this department
23 was created? And if there was a special method of work and if you
24 proceeded in a special way to establish war crimes, did you receive some
25 instructions? Did you receive -- any explanations whatsoever as to the
1 formation of this department?
2 A. When I arrived in the department, I was given instructions. I was
3 told what the inspector of such a department would do, and since those
4 were different crimes, they are not just simple murders like in the other
5 departments, they are not just crime-related offences and breaking and
6 entering, as inspectors of that department, us inspectors, we were only to
7 investigate that type of offences. We didn't have any particular powers;
8 we didn't get any special instructions. We investigated crime the usual
9 way like one investigates crimes in any other department of the police
10 services and within the elements that we had.
11 Q. So you started your work in the month of January of 1994. Would
12 you be able to tell us what were the offences that you investigated as an
13 inspector while you were working there in Sarajevo?
14 A. From what I can remember, I carried out an on-site investigation
15 in Livanjska Street, where five children had died. I don't remember the
16 exact date. Also, I also took part in a few on-site investigations where
17 some civilians were killed from a sniping activity coming from Grbavica,
18 and I also investigated some other cases.
19 Q. You told us that you investigated a few cases in which civilians
20 were injured after a sniping incident. Can you tell us in what part of
21 Sarajevo did that occur, and did you carry out an on-site investigation
22 after those incidents?
23 A. On-site investigations were carried out mainly in the area of
24 Marin Dvor, Pofalici. And also every time we carried out such an
25 investigation, we made records of what went on. The team that took part
1 in the on-site investigation proceeded and applied the methodology that
2 exists already, that we knew of. And each inspector proceeded the usual
3 way. We investigated according to our competence.
4 Q. Can you give us names of casualties, of these victims, that died
5 after the investigation you carried out?
6 A. I could not tell you the names. I do not remember them.
7 Q. When you told us that a shelling incident took place in Livanjska
8 Street where five children perished, can you tell us in what part of the
9 city was this?
10 A. It's a settlement situated -- I don't really know exactly.
11 Livanjska Street is at the end of the settlement. And I believe that
12 we're talking about the settlement of Ciglane, or perhaps the beginning
13 of -- actually, I believe that it's at the end of this settlement called
15 Q. You told us that it took part in the month of January.
16 A. No, I didn't tell you what month it was in.
17 Q. I asked you to tell us about the month of January and to tell us
18 if before you went out to carry out your on-site investigation regarding
19 the Markale market incident, as an inspector of the department for the war
20 crimes and genocide, did you also take part in on-site investigations
21 regarding shelling? You also told us that you were a member of the team
22 which was to protect civilians from sniping fire. Could you tell us if
23 you were a member of a team in January as well?
24 A. Yes, I was a member of a team. I don't know which case we
25 investigated at the time. But almost every shift was linked to one
1 on-site investigation, if not more than one.
2 Q. When you tell us that in the month of January, you went on a daily
3 basis to carry out on-site investigations, can you tell us how many
4 on-site investigations did you investigate? How many civilians died, and
5 where did they occur?
6 A. The on-site investigations were carried out by the inspector who
7 was on duty that day. And you were on duty twice a week approximately.
8 While I was on duty, I also went to the premises. I could not remember
9 now what on-site investigations I carried out.
10 Q. You told us that you were on duty twice a week. Right?
11 A. The chief of the department was making the schedule, and he then
12 was he was taking into account the number of inspectors that worked for
13 that department. We would then change shifts. Another inspector was on
14 duty the day after me, for instance. But if one of the inspectors was
15 absent or if the shift was such, it would often happen that I was on duty
16 twice a week.
17 Q. Can you tell us who would give you an information telling you that
18 a sniping incident took place or that there was a shelling incident?
19 A. During our normal day, up until 1600 hours, the information would
20 come to us from our immediate superior, so the chief. And after those
21 hours, after working hours, the inspector would receive the information
22 from the on-duty operations officer who was on duty with regards to the
24 Q. Can you tell us who would give the information to the on-duty
25 officer or to your superior? What is the name of the department that was
1 transmitting the information, that was telling you that there was either a
2 shelling incident or a sniping incident and that some civilians had
3 perished in a certain part of town?
4 A. Within the CSB, there was the communications department, and that
5 communications department was linked to all the police stations in town.
6 And then the on-duty police officer would receive this information, and
7 then he would get information from the CSB. And the CSB would receive
8 this information and would further give it to the on-duty inspector.
9 Q. Those informations, did they come only orally or in writing, or
10 how did you get it?
11 A. I don't know. I don't remember.
12 Q. So you cannot confirm to us that you would receive information in
13 writing when it comes to information telling you that a civilian had
14 perished after a shelling or a sniping incident?
15 A. I would get the information from an immediate superior officer or
16 from the on-duty officer. Now, I don't know where they got their
17 information and how exactly.
18 Q. On the 5th of February, 1994, you told us that you were on duty,
19 so to speak. Can you tell us who informed you of the Markale incident?
20 A. Since this was an incident that took part while I was on duty,
21 during normal working hours, I got the information from the chief of the
23 Q. Would you be able to tell us what time it was, what time of the
24 day, and who made up the team that went out to carry out the on-site
1 A. In the Department for War Crimes and Genocide, the chief of the
2 department, aside from myself, who had to go out to the premises, he also
3 told the Inspector Curevac, Nedim, to accompany me on site. And members
4 of the other departments were chosen from their own chiefs. It's
5 according to the schedule, according to the people who were on duty that
6 day. And they were selected to go out and carry out the on-site
8 Q. So you told us that you and Mr. Nedim Curevac were there
9 representing the service for the investigation of war crimes and genocide?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. The other members of the team, who were they?
12 A. They were appointed by their immediate superiors, and these were
13 mainly inspectors who were on duty in their own services.
14 Q. Can you please tell us, how did you organise your work? Were you
15 all in the same building? Did you go there together, to the site, to the
17 A. At that time, all the departments of the criminal investigations
18 division were located in another building separate from the building where
19 the communications system and the crime scene technicians were located. I
20 think that we came to the scene in two cars and that I, together with
21 Nedim Curevac, had to go by the courthouse where the duty investigating
22 judge waited for us. His name was Asim Kanlic. So the three of us went
23 to the scene in one car, and the rest of the team was already there
24 waiting for us.
25 Q. Can you tell us, that day, at what time did you receive this
1 notification, and how far is your building from the scene, and how long it
2 took you to get from the building to the market?
3 A. I don't know exactly when it was that we received the notification
4 and when we arrived at the scene. But a certain period of time was
5 necessary for us to consult each other, to see who was going to be there
6 representing what service, and we also had to call the courthouse to check
7 who the investigating judge was. Because after all, the investigating
8 judges who were on duty were not actually sitting there in the courthouse,
9 but they were staying in their own place, in their home, waiting for the
10 call. So it took us a while to set up the team.
11 Q. When you say that it took you some time to set up the team, how
12 much time are we talking about, half an hour, an hour?
13 A. I think it was between half an hour and an hour. That's how much
14 time it took us to prepare for the on-site investigation.
15 Q. Can you tell us when you started the on-site investigation?
16 A. I believe that this information is noted down in the report. I
17 can't tell you exactly what time it was.
18 Q. How much time had passed between the time when the incident
19 actually took place until the time when you started with your
21 A. I can't really tell you that either.
22 Q. Can you tell us, what was the weather like on that day, the 5th of
23 February, 1994?
24 A. As far as I can remember, it was a nice, serene day, and the
25 weather was nice.
1 Q. When you say that the weather was nice, are you saying that it was
2 sunny or what?
3 A. I believe that it was sunny.
4 Q. When you arrived at the scene, apart from your colleagues who, as
5 you say, had come from the crime scene investigations section, were there
6 any other people there at the scene, at the market itself?
7 A. There were no people at the market itself. But the people were
8 gathered around the market, around the Markale market. The market itself
9 was secured by the police officers from the Stari Grad Police Station.
10 There were also two or three members of the UN. They were also at the
11 market, in addition to our personnel.
12 Q. So you confirm that you did find UN members there at the market.
13 Can you please tell us, do you know if they were carrying out any kind of
14 investigation on the site?
15 A. I don't know exactly why they were there, but in the course of the
16 on-site investigation, UN members, representatives of the UN, took part in
17 the on-site investigation.
18 Q. Do you know if the team members, the technicians and the
19 ballistics experts, who, as you say, arrived together with you and the
20 investigating judge, do you know whether they carried out any procedures
21 before the actual commencement of the investigation?
22 A. On that day, the on-site investigation was carried out. By that,
23 I mean the determination of the facts and circumstances pertaining to the
24 type of projectile, the direction from which the projectile had come, and
25 members of the team who were tasked with providing ballistics expertise
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 and those in charge of gathering evidence at the crime scene also took
2 part in the investigation.
3 Q. At the time when you arrived at the scene, apart from the
4 photographer, who you say was the member of -- a member of your team, were
5 there any other TV crews filming the events? Did you find any members of
6 the press there?
7 A. I can't really answer your question. I don't remember.
8 Q. Is it that you don't know or is it that you don't remember?
9 A. At that time, I didn't really pay any attention to that, who was
10 filming the scene and from where. Only the persons listed in the report
11 were members of the team.
12 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence would
13 now like to stop, to make a break in our cross-examination, since our time
14 is up. And with your kind permission, myself and my colleague will
15 continue our cross-examination tomorrow.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you very much, Ms. Pilipovic.
17 May I remind the Defence that -- well, let me put it a different
18 way. There is a tendency that when the cross-examination is split up,
19 that it takes more time than we would usually allow. That should not be a
20 consequence of splitting up cross-examination. So therefore, the
21 Prosecution took more time than they indicated before. Part of that was
22 due to some -- well, I would say some procedural incidents, but not all of
23 it. So I'll keep in mind whether there are any -- whether there will be
24 any procedural incidents tomorrow. If not, I would say that another hour
25 would be fair. If there are a few incidents, it might finally be one hour
1 and 15 minutes, but that's the limit approximately the Defence should keep
2 in mind.
3 Mr. Suljic, we were not able to finish your examination today, so
4 we'll continue tomorrow morning.
5 We'll adjourn until 9.00 tomorrow morning, same courtroom.
6 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at
7 1.47 p.m., to be reconvened on
8 Tuesday, the 9th day of April, 2002,
9 at 9.00 a.m.