1 Wednesday, 15 January 2003

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 2.19 p.m.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.

6 THE REGISTRAR: Case number IT-98-29-T, the Prosecutor versus

7 Stanislav Galic.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.

9 Before we continue to -- with the examination of Witness DP35, the

10 Chamber would like to give an opportunity to the Prosecution to raise the

11 issues it intended yesterday to raise.

12 Mr. Ierace, could you give us an impression on how much time you

13 need to address the Chamber, because we have to consider whether we'll

14 hear it all orally or that we would ask you to make a written submission.

15 If you could please organise your intervention in such a way that you

16 first indicate what issues you'd like to deal with, and we'll then see

17 whether full opportunity will be given now or whether we'll ask you to

18 submit any written filing.

19 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, there are two issues I would seek to

20 raise immediately. They would take only a few minutes. We have not as a

21 team completed our assessment of the impact of the course taken by the

22 Defence, and therefore any remaining matters, I would be grateful if I

23 could leave until perhaps Friday to address the Trial Chamber.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think if you need more time, you'll find

25 the -- a moment in due course when to address the Chamber on this issue

1 once the Prosecution has made up its mind as to its position. Yes.

2 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, might I then at this stage raise those

3 two matters which I anticipate should take only a few minutes.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please do so.

5 MR. IERACE: Perhaps that should be done in closed session.

6 JUDGE ORIE: We'll then -- would private session be --

7 MR. IERACE: It would be sufficient, yes.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then we'll turn into private session.

9 [Private session]

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Page 17546 – redacted – private session

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 [Open session]

24 JUDGE ORIE: And we could then continue the examination of the

25 present witness, DP35.

1 Madam Usher, could you please escort the witness into the

2 courtroom.

3 Do the curtains have to be pulled down? Is that for the

4 video -- is there anyone in the -- if it's just for the passage, then ...

5 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

6 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, before escorting the witness into the

7 courtroom, would you please check that the public gallery is still empty.

8 Also, if you escort the witness into the courtroom. So would you please

9 then escort the witness into the courtroom.

10 May I invite both parties to check whether there is an empty

11 public gallery. Yes. This asks for a close cooperation between the two

12 parties, one of them having an overview of half of the public gallery, the

13 other party having an overview of the other part.

14 MR. IERACE: In fact, there is very little shared area,

15 Mr. President.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

17 [The witness entered court]

18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. DP35, may I remind you that you're still bound by

19 the solemn declaration you've given at the beginning of your testimony.

20 Yes? Thank you.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, please proceed.

23 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President.

24 Thank you, Mr. President. I ask the witness be shown document --

25 it is P3771. We have copies for the Trial Chamber and for the Defence.

1 WITNESS: WITNESS DP35 [Resumed]

2 [Witness answered through interpreter]

3 Cross-examined by Mr. Ierace: [Continued]

4 Q. Sir, would you please place the document on the device to your

5 right.

6 MR. IERACE: If the ELMO may be panned back slightly so we can see

7 the writing at the top left-hand corner.

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. All right. Now, you have in front of you a bundle of photocopies

10 of photographs. We see now on the screen the first of those images. Was

11 this weapon one of those under your control; in other words, this type of

12 weapon?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. What did you refer to this weapon as?

15 A. An anti-aircraft gun, 30 millimetres. M53 through 59, or rather,

16 M59 through 63. It had certain modifications on the aiming device, and it

17 was popularly called a Praga, because it was on a Praga vehicle. The

18 vehicle that the weapon is mounted on is a Praga.

19 Q. All right. Now, did you say that it was 30 millimetres?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And was this type of weapon positioned around Sarajevo where you

22 have indicated 30-millimetre anti-aircraft weapons?

23 A. Yes. At the Ilinjaca position, there's a sports airport position.

24 At Klanac, and at position Y1, near the Slobodan Princip-Seljo barracks.

25 Q. All right. We note from the image that it appears to be a

1 self-propelled vehicle. In other words, it has an engine and a driver.

2 Is that correct?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. In other words, it's a highly mobile weapon. It simply can be

5 driven to the positions where it is required to fire from; is that so?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. I take it it has four-wheel drive, or perhaps one might say

8 six-wheel drive.

9 A. That's correct.

10 Q. Please turn to the next photograph -- I withdraw that. Before we

11 leave that photograph, how many of these units were in the SRK at, say,

12 December 1993?

13 A. About 42, I think, in the entire Sarajevo Romanija Corps.

14 Q. All right. Now, was this weapon able to operate in various modes?

15 For instance, was it able to operate with the barrel kept pointing in the

16 same direction, and was it also able to operate with the barrel moving as

17 it fired successive shots?

18 A. The barrel can rotate around its axis and it can be elevated. It

19 can rotate by 360 degrees, regardless of the direction it rotates in.

20 Q. I'm asking you more particularly if it was able to rotate as it

21 fired so as to project --

22 A. No.

23 Q. All right. Do you mean by that --

24 A. When firing, it moves to a minimal extent. As it opens fire,

25 there is minimal movement. It depends how firmly the operator is holding

1 onto the mechanism. But it doesn't move to a significant extent when it

2 is being fired from.

3 Q. The primary purpose of a anti-aircraft weapon is to put up a wall

4 of exploding rounds that an aircraft flies into; isn't that correct?

5 A. That's correct.

6 Q. To achieve that purpose, isn't every anti-aircraft gun capable of

7 firing rounds in quick succession on a number of different -- slightly

8 different trajectories?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Was this weapon capable of doing that?

11 A. It was.

12 Q. All right. Now, what types of rounds was this weapon able to

13 fire? You mentioned yesterday, for instance, that there were rounds fired

14 by your weapons that would explode on impact. Is that a type of round

15 that was fired from this weapon?

16 A. Yes. The main projectile was a momentary projectile. And out of

17 100 projectiles, only 10 per cent -- or rather, 8 per cent were not

18 momentary ones, but they would explode only upon impact, or they would

19 pierce armour that wasn't very thick, such as the armour on this weapon

20 itself. I can point out that we used such armoured bullets in the course

21 of combat action but not to a great extent, or rather, for most of the

22 weapons we didn't even have such ammunition. We used so-called momentary

23 projectiles, projectiles that would explode at the time of firing.

24 Q. As the transcript reads, you just said "we used so-called

25 momentary projectiles, projectiles that would explode at the time of

1 firing." Do you mean the time of firing or some other time that they

2 would explode?

3 A. No. When they would hit the target or, rather, the obstacle. As

4 I said yesterday, if it hit a curtain, it would explode because these were

5 very -- this was a very sensitive type of ammunition.

6 Q. All right. And were they initially intended to explode on impact

7 with an aircraft?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Now, what about the other 90 per cent of the shells? I take it

10 they were not designed to explode on impact. Is that correct?

11 A. Not 90 but up to 10 per cent of the armoured bullets, they

12 wouldn't explode. They would only pierce armour that wasn't very thick.

13 And they didn't explode upon impact.

14 Q. I'm sorry, perhaps I misunderstood your figures. Are you saying

15 that 90 per cent were exploding projectiles? Is that correct?

16 A. That's correct.

17 Q. Thank you for that. And the remaining 10 per cent would not

18 explode on impact; is that so?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Tell us about the remaining 10 per cent. What would they do?

21 A. Just as a rifle bullet, it's an ordinary bullet. It resembles a

22 rifle bullet. When it hits an obstacle, if its force is sufficient, it

23 will penetrate the obstacle. If the armour is thick or if there is a

24 thick obstacle, a thick wall, then it couldn't do this. It could only

25 inflict superficial damage on the obstacle.

1 Q. Now, did you also have available to you incendiary rounds?

2 A. These so-called momentary projectiles are incendiary ones. They

3 are at the same time incendiary.

4 Q. All right. Do you know what the ingredient is in the rounds that

5 makes them incendiary? Is it a phosphorous?

6 A. No. It's a Trotil.

7 Q. All right. So if the round explodes on impact, then it also

8 generates a lot of heat; is that correct?

9 A. The heat is not -- it's not so hot, so it can't melt a metal

10 obstacle. For example, if it hit a wall or stone or a brick, it wouldn't

11 cause any damage apart from the damage resulting from the impact and the

12 explosion. So the damage done to a wall is about this size, and it's

13 about 2 or 3 centimetres deep. It doesn't destroy brick. It doesn't

14 break through brick. It can only break through brick if there are

15 successive shots at the same target. In theory this is possible, but in

16 practice it's very difficult to inflict such damage.

17 Q. Are you saying that the round would only cause a fire if it hit

18 something that was inflammable? Not brick, but perhaps wood?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Did you also have available to you for these weapons tracer

21 rounds?

22 A. No.

23 Q. Did -- I think the answer was no. Did you have available to you

24 for any of the anti-aircraft weapons tracer rounds?

25 A. Yes. For 20-millimetre guns, yes. For the other smaller calibre

1 that we will talk about later, it had tracer rounds, and you can see its

2 trace which marks its trajectory when a series of bullets is fired,

3 because it had an incendiary tracer at the rear end of the projectile.

4 But the 30-millimetre projectiles, their traces can only be seen at night

5 and not very well. They aren't visible during the day. You can only see

6 the point that the projectile hits during the day, but you can't see its

7 trajectory.

8 Q. Now, was there another type of round that could be fired by that

9 weapon, a round that was designed to explode in mid-flight even though it

10 did not make contact with an object?

11 A. No. In fact, all bullets can explode -- all projectiles can

12 explode during the trajectory after they've covered part of its

13 trajectory, the peak of its trajectory. And when the speed of the bullet

14 starts diminishing, then the so-called self-liquidator is activated and

15 the interior ignition is released to activate the projectile and to make

16 it explode so that it's prevented from falling as armour-piercing

17 [Realtime transcript read in error "armour pierces"] rounds on the

18 ground. If you're firing above over your units, this is when one is

19 applying a system to protect [Realtime transcript read in error "project"]

20 one's own units.

21 Q. And did that apply to all of the ammunition that your

22 anti-aircraft weapons fired; that is, all of the what you call momentary

23 weaponry?

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. I'm not

1 quite sure, but I have to say it. I think we have to be very careful in

2 terms of interpretation. And the answer as it was given by the witness in

3 interpretation, on page 11, line 11, doesn't seem to be full. And I think

4 tonight we have to look at it particularly carefully. Thank you.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Unfortunately my laptop computer started a bit

6 later, so I have to find the spot, page 11, 9/10. I have on page 11,

7 lines 9 to 10 a question, rather than an answer. Line 11. Yes.

8 Mr. DP35, I'll read to you a previous answer. And if it's not

9 complete, would you please then complete. The answer you gave on a

10 question whether there was a type of round that could be fired, a type of

11 round that was designed to explode in mid-flight even though it did not

12 make contact with an object, your answer was, "No. In fact, all bullets

13 can explode -- all projectiles can explode during the trajectory after

14 they've covered part of its trajectory, the peak of its trajectory. And

15 when the speed of the bullet starts diminishing, then the so-called

16 self --" I -- that's -- self-liquid, I think the translation was, "is

17 activated and the interior ignition is released to activate the projectile

18 and to make it explode so that its --

19 THE INTERPRETER: Mr. President, could you slow down, please.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I will. "So that it is prevented from falling

21 as an armour pierces rounds on the ground if you're firing above your

22 units. This is when one is applying a system to project one's own units."

23 Does what I just read to you reflect the whole of your answer, or

24 is there any part missing?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Everything is fine, what you have

1 read. Just what you can take out, the "no" at the beginning. Because

2 what I understood the question to be was that -- the question was

3 referring to the answer whether we were able to create a fire wall that we

4 were talking about, the kind of barrage fire, with that self-liquidation,

5 and we cannot do that. That's impossible. So there's no point to include

6 "no" in the answer, because the self-liquidation is not happening at the

7 same time because the barrage fire would be further away and further in

8 depth. So I think the whole answer is fine except for the word "no."

9 Thank you.

10 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand.

11 Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.

12 MR. IERACE:

13 Q. So if I understand your evidence correctly, this characteristic

14 applied to the rounds that were fired by your weapons that exploded on

15 impact. In other words, if they didn't hit something and kept on

16 travelling, then after the apex of their trajectory, they would explode in

17 the air; is that correct?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. All right.

20 A. Yes. In air. So it doesn't fall to the ground. The bullets

21 cannot reach the ground.

22 Q. All right. Now, when you say that 90 per cent of the ammunition

23 fired was of this type, was there a mixture of these sorts of rounds and

24 non-exploding rounds in a burst of fire, or would the weapons fire a burst

25 of the exploding rounds and later a burst of the non-exploding rounds?

1 Were they mixed up or separate?

2 A. The question is clear. It is not allowed to mix the ammunition.

3 Precisely because of their different characteristics of the different

4 rounds doing different trajectories in the air. So it is possible to have

5 a magazine in some weapons with separate charges only in the case if there

6 was a direct attack on the firing position with armoured weapons. That is

7 why there were so few of that kind of ammunition. So, for instance, if I

8 am being approached by armoured weapons directly to the firing position,

9 then you take off the magazine with a momentary ammunition, and then you

10 put on the armour-piecing ammunition in the magazine in order to repel the

11 attack.

12 Q. All right. And the armour-piercing ammunition is the -- was the

13 non-exploding ammunition; is that correct?

14 A. Yes. Yes.

15 Q. Would you now move to the second photograph. Was this weapon --

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. -- That was used by the SRK in September 1992 and August 1994?

18 A. No.

19 Q. All right.

20 A. This is a cannon 32/2 millimetres. We didn't have those kind of

21 field guns, not in the JNA, not in the Republika Srpska army. That was

22 probably used in some other countries. I, in fact, have never seen them

23 in real life. I've only seen them like this, on a photograph.

24 Q. Thank you for that. Please move to the next photograph.

25 So to save time during my questioning of you, I will

1 refer -- you'll hear me refer to the relevant period. By that I mean the

2 period between September 1992 and August 1994. Was this weapon ever in

3 the SRK in the relevant period?

4 A. No, it didn't exist before or after. This 40-millimetre or

5 70-millimetre weapon was only as part of the weapons of the airport. We

6 didn't have that either in Butmir or in the area of Butmir airport such

7 weapons. The closest such weapon could have been in Tuzla.

8 Q. All right. So the weapon did exist in the VRS but not in the SRK;

9 is that the position?

10 A. No -- yes.

11 Q. All right. Now, please go to the next photograph. Was this

12 weapon in the SRK in the relevant period for the --

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. I'm referring --

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. All right. Please wait. For the transcript, I'm referring to the

17 photograph which has in the top left-hand corner "20-3mm M55 AA gun."

18 What type of weapon was this?

19 A. It's an anti-aircraft weapon. Our sign wasn't "AA gun." It's A4.

20 We can see that it has magazines. This is where rounds are, twice

21 60 -- three magazines, 60 rounds each. It's got a calculation target

22 device. It's more efficient to target targets in the air space. But when

23 it is targeting targets on the ground, which it can be used for, then you

24 do not use this calculating target device but you use a kind of binoculars

25 or a telescope, an optical device which is used for also older kinds of

1 weapons. It has a very high velocity of firing. It's a kind of weapon

2 that we banned from using with all the three barrels that it had. But it

3 was only used -- only the middle barrel was used in short bursts of fire

4 in order to save ammunition. And its reach, successful, was up to 1500

5 metres.

6 Q. All right. Now, in the image we see some wheels and an axle in

7 the background. Was it a gun that could be easily towed?

8 A. Yes. That was the axle, which is the -- with the bottom half of

9 the axle. This is the combat position, but when it is a marching

10 position, it will be towed by a PAM 110, and then it would be towed in

11 such a way it would move position.

12 Q. How long would it take to transfer the weapon from its combat

13 position to a mobile position ready to be towed away by --

14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I apologise. I

15 have to say it now. But I think that there was a problem in the French

16 booth. Something didn't appear. So that's what we should pay attention

17 to. Thank you.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps if the French and the English compared

19 while working on the transcript, proper attention will be paid to it.

20 Is the English transcript complete in this respect,

21 Mr. Piletta-Zanin? I didn't follow the French.

22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the English

23 transcript seems complete, but what was said afterwards by the witness

24 regarding the towing by PAM 110, that word that was said by the witness

25 did not appear in the French transcript.

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So it has been clarified now at least.

2 Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.

3 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President.

4 Q. Incidentally, you told me earlier that in December 1993 there were

5 approximately 42 of the 30-millimetre weapon, which is in the first image.

6 Did that number remain constant between September 1992 and August 1994, or

7 were there some changes? That's for the 30-millimetre, the Praga.

8 A. The number didn't change significantly during this period except

9 that during combat two weapons, I believe, during this period were

10 destroyed.

11 Q. All right. Now, what about the 20-millimetre that we see on the

12 screen at the moment? How many of those did you have in the relevant

13 period?

14 A. Twenty-four.

15 Q. All right. Now, is that just in the regiment, that is, the corps

16 weaponry, or does that number include the weapons in the brigades as well?

17 A. In the regiment, there were 16 of these weapons, and 8 of them

18 were in the 1st Sarajevo Brigade.

19 Q. So throughout the entire SRK, there were a total of -- there were

20 a total of 24 of these weapons; is that correct?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. All right. Did this weapon have the same range of rounds as the

23 30-millimetre that you told us about earlier?

24 A. I said that this weapon was successful within the range of 1500

25 metres, and the other weapon, Praga, its successful range was up to 2.000

1 metres.

2 Q. But it could fire the explosive rounds, the non-explosive rounds;

3 is that correct?

4 A. These weapons you would fire ammunition of three kinds: First the

5 armour-piercing rounds. They were in a magazine of 12. Then there were

6 the momentary rounds, so they would be 7 out of 12. And then 4 of 12,

7 that is, one-third, would be the momentary incendiary tracer rounds. The

8 armour-piercing, just like in Praga, were used only for immediate

9 defensive tasks, and we had fewer than this amount, while these mixed

10 rounds were such so that every fifth round was incendiary tracer

11 momentary. The others were only incendiary. And the rest would depend on

12 the circumstances. Sometimes these proportions would change, depending on

13 the conditions, on the situation with the ammunition, et cetera.

14 Q. All right. Now, these tracer rounds, could they be seen in

15 daylight?

16 A. Yes. If we had at our disposal those incendiary momentary tracer

17 ammunition, normally every battery should have that, depending on the

18 levels of ammunition, but it would depend whether we had it at the time.

19 Q. Please turn now to the last photograph, that is, the next one.

20 For the transcript, in the bottom left-hand corner, we see "40mm L60 AA

21 gun."

22 JUDGE ORIE: I take it the top corner, Mr. Ierace?

23 MR. IERACE: Yes. Sorry. Top left-hand corner.

24 Q. Did the SRK at any level possess this weapon in the relevant

25 period?

1 A. No. This weapon is the same type as L70, which belonged only to

2 the airport units, except that that was the new modification, and that's

3 why it had "L70," and this has the code of L60.

4 Q. All right. So in this bundle of photographs, you have identified

5 a 30-millimetre weapon and a 20-millimetre weapon as being in the SRK.

6 You've told us also about a 40-millimetre weapon. I appreciate it is not

7 the weapon in the photograph. Did it -- was it able to fire the same

8 range of shells as the 30-millimetre weapon?

9 A. No. It wasn't even possible for this ammunition L60/L70 to be

10 fired. The weapon that we had, the 40-millimetre M1 weapon that we had,

11 which is the production type and model M40, that is the model from 1940.

12 It's an old type of ammunition with an optical sight and a specific -- its

13 own specific type of ammunition. But as it happened, it happened to be

14 there and it was there and it was one of the weapons that we had and we

15 used, but we never used to fire the targets in the air but only

16 exclusively targets on the ground.

17 Q. Did it have -- I'll withdraw that. Did it fire what you have

18 called momentary rounds, that is, explosive rounds?

19 A. From that weapon, M1, 40 millimetres, you did fire explosive

20 rounds, momentary rounds. The magazine had eight rounds. That's how the

21 field gun was loaded. And it normally had a lower velocity of firing

22 compared to the other types of weapons that only used single firing,

23 single mode, while the others only used bursts, burst mode.

24 Q. Do you know whether the M40 was sometimes referred to as a Bofors

25 gun?

1 A. Yes. It's called Bofors because the producer is Bofors, and

2 that's how the name stayed on both officially and popularly called Bofors.

3 This weapon that we can see and the previous one is also made by Bofors,

4 but this one was called Bofi as a more modern type of weapon.

5 Q. When you say "this one," do you mean the one which appears on your

6 screen at the moment or do you mean the M40 that you had in the SRK?

7 A. No. The other one we called Bofors, the M1. While this one, L60,

8 and what you also showed, the armoured vehicle -- the armoured weapon,

9 L70, that's the Bofi, which has some modern modifications, particularly on

10 the targeting device.

11 Q. Thank you for that. Now, do you know of weapons -- sorry. I

12 apologise. I have the flu. Do you know of weapons referred to as PAMs,

13 P-A-M?

14 A. Yes. I mentioned it yesterday. PAM machine-gun, Browning type.

15 I mentioned that Mojmilo had these weapons. As part of my units, we did

16 not have a PAM because that is an infantry weapon which is used by the

17 units of infantry for direct defence from air attacks. It is used and it

18 can be used for firing targets on the ground, which I mentioned for the

19 case of Mojmilo. But as I said, we didn't have it as part of our unit's

20 weapons because it doesn't belong to the anti-air force weapons because

21 it's a 12.7-millimetre calibre, while the anti-air force weapons should

22 have a calibre of 20 millimetres upwards.

23 Q. Nevertheless, do you understand that some military people do

24 regard 12.7-calibre machine-guns, in particular the PAM, as being

25 anti-aircraft machine-guns?

1 A. Anti-aircraft machine-guns, yes. I always corrected my

2 colleagues, saying that this was not an anti-aircraft weapon from the

3 anti-air force defence but that it was an infantry weapon.

4 Q. All right. Now, coming back to the 40-millimetre weapon that you

5 possessed. When that was firing repeatedly, can you give us some idea of

6 the sound that it would produce. Could you describe that sound.

7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I object, Mr. President.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. On what basis, Mr. Piletta-Zanin?

9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I believe that the witness

10 should take off his headphones.

11 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, we don't know whether he understands

12 any English.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Then he can put his headphones

15 back on.

16 MR. IERACE: It would be appropriate in my respectful submission

17 for the witness to leave the court.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

19 [Trial Chamber confers]

20 JUDGE ORIE: If the -- may I ask you, Mr. DP35, do you understand

21 any English and/or French?

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Then I think it would be sufficient if the witness

24 takes off his earphones.

25 And if you'd -- let me just confer for one moment.

1 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

2 JUDGE ORIE: Could perhaps the monitor of the witness be put on

3 video rather than on the transcript.

4 [Interpretation] Mr. Piletta-Zanin, could you continue, please.

5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. Gladly, Mr. President.

6 Now, the testimony of the witness was regarding the 40-millimetre field

7 guns, saying that they could not be firing in bursts of fire. That was in

8 the transcript on the previous page, line 19. And now the question being

9 asked is in contradiction of the testimony by the witness. I'm just

10 looking for the page. But considering that we don't have the same

11 pagination --

12 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ...

13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] That's what he said, yes.

14 The witness was speaking of single shots, not of bursts of fire.

15 JUDGE ORIE: [Interpretation] But Mr. Piletta-Zanin, in my opinion

16 the question was not regarding the bursts of fire but only about the noise

17 that could be heard when this weapon was used. Perhaps this is a question

18 of interpretation. But can you look at the English transcript.

19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I will just have a look at the

20 screen. I was listening to the other channel. And perhaps I wasn't

21 particularly careful regarding the transcript.

22 What is the page?

23 JUDGE ORIE: [Interpretation] I cannot tell you.

24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. I can see it. Thank

25 you. It seems to me, as usual, Mr. President, that you are right. In

1 this case, I withdraw the objection, Mr. President. No, no, no,

2 Mr. President. What's being said -- I don't know whether the question as

3 it was put was the firing repeatedly, whether it's to do with the bursts

4 of fire.

5 JUDGE ORIE: [Interpretation] [Previous interpretation

6 continues]...

7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.

8 JUDGE ORIE: [Interpretation] Listen to the answer.

9 [In English] Yes. Could, please, the headphones -- yes. Thank

10 you.

11 MR. IERACE:

12 Q. The 40-millimetre anti-aircraft gun that was in the SRK when fired

13 repeatedly made what type of sound? Could you describe the sound that it

14 made.

15 A. It's difficult to describe sound. I can distinguish between

16 different types of sounds when I hear them. A 20-millimetre gun when it

17 is firing repeatedly has somewhat smaller sound, if we're talking about

18 the nature of the sound. A 30-millimetre Praga fires in such a way that

19 you hear the fire being opened and you hear a series of two projectiles

20 being fired, and this isn't the case for a 20-millimetre gun. As far as a

21 40-millimetre gun is concerned, you can hear the fire being shot, like

22 this, tup, tup, tup. Eight times in succession, if it fires all eight

23 projectiles. It's louder than the noise made by the other guns and the

24 sound is characteristic. I can recognise the guns when I hear these

25 sounds.

1 Q. All right. Thank you for that. Now, apart from --

2 JUDGE ORIE: Just for the sake of the transcript, Mr. Ierace, and

3 I'm also addressing the Defence, the tup, tup, tup sounds seem to me in a

4 frequency of a little bit over one tup a second.

5 MR. IERACE: I agree with that, Mr. President.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

7 MR. IERACE:

8 Q. Now, apart from the three weapons that you've told us were in the

9 SRK, that is, anti-aircraft weapons, were there any others? For example,

10 you have identified the 30-millimetre anti-aircraft gun that appears on

11 the first image in the bundle. Were there any other 30-millimetre

12 anti-aircraft guns in the SRK in the relevant period apart from that one?

13 A. The 30-millimetre gun was only of this kind. There weren't any

14 others. The 40-millimetre gun, there was only one type of this gun, of

15 such a gun, and I've mentioned it. It's the M1. There were several types

16 of 20-millimetre guns, in addition to the 20 through 3 millimetre guns,

17 the A4s that we were able to see on the second photograph - not on this

18 one - we had the 20 through 3 millimetre version in A3. It didn't have a

19 targeting device, a calculating device, but it had an optical targeting

20 device. And they belonged to the class of 20 through 3 weapons.

21 In addition to those weapons, there were 20-millimetre M38 guns,

22 one-barreled guns, two-barreled guns, and four-barreled guns. These were

23 guns which were produced in Germany and remained on from the Second World

24 War as trophies. They were popularly called Flak, F-L-A-K. The velocity

25 of fire was not that high, and these are some of the weapons that remained

1 in certain batteries.

2 There were some 37-millimetre guns which resembled the M41 guns,

3 and they belonged to the various batteries that were present there, and

4 they were used to defend the positions of infantry units.

5 Q. The 37-millimetre guns, did you regard them as anti-aircraft guns?

6 A. Well, they were categorised in that way, and the ammunition, if we

7 had any ammunition, if we found any ammunition - but we couldn't gain

8 supplies - I took control of 37-millimetre guns and Flaks and weapons that

9 we took over from JNA units.

10 Q. Well, I take it from your earlier answer that you did find some

11 ammunition for the 37-millimetre guns. Is that correct?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. All right. And you say that they were used -- I'm sorry, you say

14 that they belonged to the various batteries and were used to defend the

15 positions of infantry units. Do I take it that you had 37-millimetre guns

16 at each of the positions that you marked on the map yesterday?

17 A. No. There was a total of 16 such guns in the entire corps. In

18 the north-western part, in the brigade -- in the four brigades, it was

19 possible to find three or four such weapons in one brigade. I apologise.

20 Q. When you say "the north-western part," did you mark that position

21 on the map?

22 A. Yes. I mentioned the part of the Igman Brigade and the 3rd

23 Sarajevo Brigade. I didn't mention the Ilijas Brigade, because it was

24 further to the north on that map. So the part that I -- where I marked

25 the positions with the letter "Y", the three or four or five positions

1 that I marked, I think that you could find ten such weapons, ten such

2 37-millimetre guns at the most.

3 Q. All right. Now, earlier I asked you how many 20-millimetre guns

4 of the type that appeared on the screen were in the SRK, and you said

5 "24." How many 20-millimetre guns of whatever type --

6 A. That's right.

7 Q. -- Were in the SRK? Not just the A4s, but the various others you

8 mentioned. How many in total 20-millimetre?

9 A. As I said, there were 24 A4 ones, 30 A3 guns, and I can't be

10 precise but I think there were 15 or 16 20-millimetre guns of other types,

11 one-barreled guns, two-barreled guns, and four-barreled guns, the

12 so-called trophy guns.

13 Q. All right. Now, incidentally, did the SRK have machine-guns - I'm

14 not talking about anti-aircraft machine-guns - with optical sights?

15 A. I don't know about machine-guns with optical sights. I never saw

16 such machine-guns. I only saw machine-guns with ordinary targeting

17 devices.

18 Q. Do I take your answer to be that you don't know? You never saw

19 any, but you don't know; is that correct?

20 A. Yes, I don't know.

21 Q. All right. Now, yesterday you were asked whether there was a

22 sniper unit within the SRK army corps, and you replied "no. Such unit did

23 not exist, as far as I know." So were there any sniper units at any part

24 of the structure of the SRK? I'm not asking just about the corps level.

25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Objection, Mr. President.

1 First of all, the Prosecution should seek to establish what the foundation

2 of any knowledge that the witness might have is.

3 JUDGE ORIE: The objection is denied. The knowledge of the

4 witness has been shown sufficiently.

5 Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.

6 MR. IERACE:

7 Q. Would you like me to repeat the question, or do you remember it?

8 A. I remember the question. Yesterday I said that I wasn't familiar

9 with this and that I never saw any sniper units. And similarly, I have

10 now said that I never saw any machine-guns with optical sights. And I can

11 state this because in the establishment of any of the units in the corps,

12 within the corps brigades, there were no sniper units which existed.

13 There were special units; that's the first thing I'd like to say.

14 And secondly, when visiting the units and teams, I had the

15 opportunity of seeing other units apart from the anti-aircraft defence

16 equipment that they had. And in those units, too, I didn't see any

17 weapons with optical sights and I didn't see any special units there

18 either.

19 And secondly, not at a single meeting when action was being

20 prepared or not in a single report which I saw, I never found out that

21 some sort of sniper unit was being used or that ammunition had been

22 requested in order to arm such a unit. I know that as part of the

23 establishment of sniping detachments there is one targetman who can be a

24 sniper, but usually he wasn't a sniper if he didn't have a weapon with an

25 optical device. It was usually the best marksman, and it was his duty to

1 pay attention to some of the critical points because he was a better shot

2 than others.

3 Q. So are you telling us that you were aware that within the SRK --

4 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: The witness did not

5 say a sniper detachment. It was a firing detachment.

6 MR. IERACE: All right. Thank you for that.

7 Q. So are you telling us that as far as you are aware, there was no

8 unit of snipers anywhere within the structure of the SRK in the relevant

9 period? Is that correct?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. I suppose given your responsibilities, your daily tasks,

12 occasionally fulfilling the role of operational duty officer, your

13 high-level meetings with the corps commander over an extended period, if

14 there had been such a unit, you would certainly know about it. Is that

15 correct?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. So do you confidently tell us that there was no such unit in the

18 SRK in the relevant period?

19 A. Yes, I do make such a claim under oath and even if I'm not under

20 oath.

21 Q. All right. So you say that there may have been individuals, not

22 snipers but the best marksmen in other units but not snipers; is that

23 correct?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And you say -- do you tell us that you never saw what might be

1 called a sniper's rifle in the relevant period in the SRK?

2 A. I was able to see a sniper rifle.

3 Q. All right.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. I wanted to object to

6 this question before the witness answered it. It has to do with the fact

7 that the Prosecution itself often states as its position that it's not

8 necessary to talk about sniper weapons, in particular in order to talk

9 about the issue of snipers.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It has become irrelevant because of the answer

11 of the witness, I would say.

12 Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.

13 MR. IERACE:

14 Q. Do you remember saying a few moments ago, in relation to your

15 visits to units and teams, "and in those units, too, I didn't see any

16 weapons with optical sights and I didn't see any special units there

17 either"? Do you remember saying that?

18 A. Yes. That's correct. I did say that.

19 Q. Did you see in the relevant period in the SRK what you understood

20 to be an SRK specialist sniper weapon?

21 A. No. I saw a captured one.

22 Q. Yesterday you said also that General Galic spent as much time in

23 the operational headquarters as he did outside the operational

24 headquarters. Firstly, were the operational headquarters at the Lukavica

25 barracks?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. I think you said that he spent time also at the forward command

3 positions. Where were the forward command positions?

4 A. Yes. Depending on need, in Butile, Nisici, in the surroundings of

5 Trnovo.

6 Q. If I could stop you there for a moment. Were the headquarters of

7 each brigade effectively a forward command position?

8 A. Well, the brigades also had their permanent command positions and

9 forward command positions. It depended on the task.

10 Q. All right.

11 A. A forward command position has a temporary nature. It's a

12 temporary position.

13 Q. Well, temporary in terms of the command position for the corps

14 commander, but it may fulfil some other purpose in his absence from that

15 position; correct?

16 A. If the focus of combat action is in the direction of Nisici, then

17 it would be normal to expect there to be a forward command post there

18 where part of the command or the staff would be located. Whether

19 General Galic would be there or his deputy, that depended on the

20 commander's decision. So the forward command post did not exist

21 throughout the period. On the Nisici plateau, the forward command post

22 was established in 1993, not before, and it was there until 1994, until

23 General Galic -- sometime after General Galic left his duties. So it

24 wasn't a matter of a tactical direction for the corps for the use of the

25 units of the corps. That command post didn't even exist up until that

1 day, up until that time.

2 Q. That particular forward command post on the Nisici plateau, how

3 far approximately, and in which position --

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. -- From Lukavica was that forward command post?

6 A. It was to the north of Lukavica, north of Vogosca. And the map

7 that was here -- it's the northern part of the Sarajevo corps zone. In

8 the map that we had a look at yesterday, it's up there, but it's difficult

9 to explain now because we went in a round-about way. The route we took

10 resembled the shape of an S to get there. Through Pale --

11 Q. Let me stop you there. Approximately how far north of Vogosca was

12 this particular forward command post?

13 A. 20-odd kilometres to the north-west.

14 Q. All right. Were there any forward command posts in the immediate

15 vicinity of any part of the confrontation line around Sarajevo, apart from

16 Lukavica itself?

17 A. I mentioned Butile, which is near Rajlovac. They were there as

18 command posts because -- they could be there before forward command posts

19 in Nisici to control the activities and the combat of units such as the

20 Ilijas or the 3rd Sarajevsko or the Igman Brigade, because it was cut off

21 from Lukavica, or rather, Lukavica was cut off from that part of the

22 battlefield, that zone. That was the closest location.

23 Q. All right. Now, if you were required to do so by Mr. President,

24 during the break could you mark on the map that you marked yesterday the

25 forward command positions which were on territory included in that map?

1 JUDGE ORIE: Before the witness answers the question, may I ask

2 him to slow down a bit, because when answering the questions, you're

3 speaking too quickly for the transcribers to catch all your words.

4 MR. IERACE:

5 Q. Would you be able to do that?

6 A. Yes, obviously.

7 Q. All right. Now, again in relation to these daily meetings that

8 took place at Lukavica that you attended, at which either General Galic

9 himself led the meetings or a person, as I understand it, appointed by the

10 chief of staff, did you ever see General Mladic present?

11 A. At those meetings of ours, which took place on a daily basis, no,

12 General Mladic did not appear. But I did see General Mladic at meetings

13 when there were reports from all commanders of the brigades and regiments.

14 General Mladic would come to some of those meetings or some of the

15 officers from the main staff.

16 Q. Where were those meetings held in the relevant period? Pale, at

17 Lukavica, at different places? Where?

18 A. In Lukavica, one was held. On Jahorina, at that time we didn't

19 have such meetings in Pale. Mainly in Lukavica, the majority of meetings

20 took place in Lukavica.

21 Q. At those meetings, would General Mladic be briefed directly by the

22 brigade commanders and relevant regiment commanders on the current

23 situation?

24 A. No. The brigade commanders would report to General Galic, but

25 General Mladic would follow the reporting at those meetings, and if

1 necessary, if he so decided, he would ask a question if it seemed relevant

2 to discuss this on the spot. So this would be in the course of a report

3 or at the end he would assess the meeting and he would assign certain

4 tasks to General Galic and to subordinated officers from the corps.

5 Q. How many such meetings were there in the relevant period that you

6 attended?

7 A. I am sure about one meeting, in September 1992, which was attended

8 by General Mladic.

9 Q. How long after General Galic was appointed as corps commander was

10 that particular meeting?

11 A. That was when General Galic was assuming the position as corps

12 commander. I think it was the 6th of September, 1992.

13 Q. Was it more --

14 A. On Jahorina.

15 Q. Was it more or less an introductory meeting? Did General Mladic

16 introduce General Galic to the corps staff and the brigade commanders?

17 A. It was a meeting at which he did introduce General Galic to us,

18 those who were part of the corps. Politicians also participated in that

19 meeting.

20 Q. Was President Karadzic present?

21 A. Well, I can't remember now. I know someone called Djeric was

22 there from the government, a government representative.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A prime minister called Djeric.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I don't see the

2 relevance of this matter, and this is why I'm objecting.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps -- it's a quarter to 4.00. Could I

4 please ask the usher to escort the witness out of the courtroom so that we

5 could further hear the argument of the parties on --

6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Before this is done, with your

9 permission, the witness is going to be asked to mark positions on the map.

10 What we want to suggest is that the witness traces the routes that were

11 necessary in order to accede to these places from Lukavica base, so that

12 we can see what difficulties their encountered and so that the witness can

13 trace this on the map. If there are no objections, of course, on the part

14 of the Prosecution and if this is something that is possible.

15 JUDGE ORIE: I would expect usually to have asked this in

16 redirect. But perhaps, Mr. Ierace, it would be -- since the witness

17 mentioned it in cross-examination, would it be any objection if the

18 witness would mark that as well?

19 MR. IERACE: No, Mr. President.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then Mr. DP35, we'll first grant you a short

21 break because yesterday I think we put you to work on the break without

22 even giving you an opportunity to go to the bathroom. So I'll first give

23 you a short break. And would you then please mark during the rest of the

24 time available, to mark the forward command positions on the map. And

25 that should be done with a blue marker and then with a black marker to

1 mark the routes to get to these forward command positions from Lukavica on

2 that map. But I'll first give you an opportunity -- if at least the

3 public gallery is empty, and may I instruct the technical booth not to put

4 the witness on the video when he's leaving the courtroom.

5 Madam Usher, may I ask you to escort the witness out of the

6 courtroom.

7 [The witness stands down]

8 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, please express the position

9 of the Defence in relation to the relevance of the last objection about

10 the presence of Mr. Karadzic during such meetings.

11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. I am

12 under the impression that we are not adhering to the military framework.

13 If we are asking questions about General Mladic, who was his superior in

14 the military structure, we can understand that. But when we ask questions

15 about other parties who weren't part of the military structure as such, so

16 questions asked about civilians and about their role, this seems to be a

17 different matter to me.

18 JUDGE ORIE: It certainly is a different matter.

19 But, Mr. Ierace, could you explain what the relevance of this

20 question would be.

21 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, the Prosecution case has always been

22 that in carrying out the campaign against the civilians of Sarajevo, the

23 accused was acting on orders from his immediate superiors, principally

24 General Mladic. President Karadzic is part of that chain of command. You

25 may also recall that we have heard evidence that the chief of staff of the

1 VRS made a threat to a senior UN military official to attack civilian

2 targets, namely trams, to shoot them. Given his position in relation to

3 General Mladic and ultimately President Karadzic, it's certainly

4 appropriate, in my respectful submission, to ask this witness whether

5 those individuals were present at this key meeting where the accused is

6 introduced for the first time to the senior -- his soon to be senior

7 subordinates in the SRK and what was said.

8 Mr. President, might I add to that, of course, the pre-existing

9 nature of the campaign, which is alleged by the Prosecution, also makes it

10 relevant.

11 [Trial Chamber confers]

12 JUDGE ORIE: The objection is denied. It cannot be said that the

13 question is without relevance for the Prosecution's case.

14 Then we'll adjourn until twenty minutes past 4.00.

15 Could you indicate, Mr. Ierace, how much time you would still need

16 for the cross-examination of this witness.

17 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I would have some difficulty in doing

18 that. Excuse me. I imagine it would be at least another hour. If -- if

19 you, Mr. President, and Your Honours are troubled by cross-examination

20 going much longer than that, in view of the decision of the Defence to

21 truncate its witness list, I'd seek some latitude with this witness, given

22 his position in the corps; in other words, given the absence now of other

23 senior subordinates. Thank you.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll give it consideration.

25 We'll adjourn until twenty minutes past 4.00.

1 --- Recess taken at 3.51 p.m.

2 --- On resuming at 4.24 p.m.

3 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

4 JUDGE ORIE: I was informed that Mr. DP35 has marked the map

5 during the break. Is that correct, Mr. DP35?

6 THE WITNESS: [No audible response]

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I also was informed that not during the whole

8 period of the marking both parties have been present. But I take it that

9 there's no objection from any of the parties to accept that the markings

10 are made by the witness.

11 Then, Mr. Ierace, another issue about the time. You know that the

12 Chamber has always refused to accept the banking system as such, but we'll

13 apply some flexibility under the circumstances mentioned.

14 And I'm just receiving now the -- you said you would need

15 approximately one more hour. That would --

16 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, it may be an hour and a half. I find

17 it difficult to answer these questions with precision.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

19 MR. IERACE: That's the most helpful observation I can make.

20 [Defence counsel and accused confer]

21 [Trial Chamber confers]

22 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber will adjourn for a small moment in order

23 to give a decision, but we'll first give an opportunity to both parties to

24 further discuss the time they would think proper to grant to the

25 Prosecution -- the cross-examination.

1 MR. IERACE: Mr. President.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

3 MR. IERACE: Could that be done in the absence of the witness.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It could be done in the absence of the witness.

5 And I have -- I did not follow the Rules, Rules that are issued not by the

6 Chamber. But the protection of witnesses is under the supervision of the

7 Registry, and I am aware that the way I dealt with this as a Presiding

8 Judge might cause some problems for those who have to follow these orders.

9 So therefore, I would like to have the curtains be put down.

10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Before anything whatsoever,

13 General Galic has asked me to request if it was possible for him to have a

14 look at the marked map because he's the only who has not seen it, and I

15 believe that that's an omission.

16 JUDGE ORIE: He's not the only one. The Chamber has not seen it

17 either.

18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, he is the only one

19 on this side who has not seen the map.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We can do that, and the time could be used for

21 that.

22 Mr. DP35, may I ask you to leave the courtroom for a while.

23 [The witness stands down]

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If the Defence would have any contribution to

25 the matter of how much time would be granted for cross-examination to the

1 Prosecution, please address the Chamber.

2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. Certainly. If I can

3 just do it now in a few words.

4 The first thing is that we can see that -- this year what the

5 Defence allows itself to state. As far as we were concerned, there were

6 fewer technical observations from the side of the Defence, and I hope that

7 we are trying to be more selective and briefer in external manifestation

8 of the objections that we have. That's the first thing.

9 So today there was no time whatsoever that was lost.

10 The second thing, the Prosecution took a lot of time to find out

11 if the noise of the field gun did tup tup tup or put put put, et cetera,

12 et cetera. But if it's this kind of questions, Mr. President, it seems to

13 us that it doesn't have any kind of relevance on the question that we're

14 interested in, which is the possible responsibility of General Galic. We

15 have to -- here the questions are whether weapons were from the time of

16 the Third Reich. That's the questions we were asked about. And these

17 kinds of questions seem to be going too far. And if the Prosecution

18 wishes to waste time in this way, they can do it, but they shouldn't ask

19 any more time to have, because then we can just ask for another witness to

20 come and testify. And if there is more of a delay, then we will have more

21 problems with the witnesses. And the Defence would like to avoid that if

22 possible.

23 If additional time needs to be given, that is fine, but the

24 Prosecution should be brief. This time should be used properly and

25 concisely. Thank you.

1 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand that the Defence takes the view that

2 the level of relevance of the questions put to the witness until now do

3 not justify additional time to be spent by the Prosecution on

4 cross-examining the witness. That is a summary in three lines.

5 Mr. Ierace, any ...?

6 MR. IERACE: Yes. Mr. President, might I respond in private

7 session?

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll turn into private session.

9 [Private session]

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Page 17584 – redacted – private session

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Page 17585 – redacted – private session

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 [Open session]

16 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber grants one hour and 15 minutes for the

17 Prosecution. We'll keep a close look on the clock for that.

18 Madam Usher, could the witness be escorted into the courtroom and

19 then the curtains be lifted again.

20 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, whilst that's being done, in order to

21 save time, might the map be placed on the ELMO, that is, the map marked by

22 the witness. In particular, the area of Dobrinja on the map.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But could we perhaps first have a look at it

24 and that solves the problem that the usher is not there to put the map on

25 the ELMO.

1 [The witness entered court]

2 JUDGE ORIE: You may proceed, Mr. Ierace.

3 MR. IERACE:

4 Q. Sir, during the break you marked some of the forward positions,

5 that is, forward command posts. On the map on the screen at the moment we

6 see one of those being a triangle with the initials "KM," to the

7 south-west of Dobrinja. Would you please point to it on the map.

8 A. That's the command post. So that's without the "I" for the

9 forward post.

10 Q. Please wait for the question. If you can concentrate on answering

11 just the question, I'd be very grateful. What was that command post in?

12 Was it a building?

13 A. That's right.

14 Q. What type of building?

15 A. A building in the barracks, in the building of the barracks.

16 Before the war, that was the command, but not the corps command.

17 Q. Did you ever go to that forward command post?

18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I object. I

19 object. That is not --

20 JUDGE ORIE: -- Just testified that this was not a forward command

21 post but a command post. It's -- the witness said, "That's the command

22 post. So that's without the 'I' for the forward post."

23 MR. IERACE:

24 Q. Did you ever go to that command post?

25 A. I carried out my duty there, my basic task was there. That's

1 where it was located.

2 Q. And was that throughout the relevant period?

3 A. That's right.

4 Q. How many storeys did the building have? Ground plus how many?

5 A. It had another floor.

6 Q. From that building, did you have a view of Dobrinja or any part of

7 Dobrinja?

8 A. Towards Dobrinja, what could be seen -- as you can see here, you

9 can see Dobrinja I and Dobrinja IV.

10 Q. All right. And from that building, could you see the Dobrinja

11 River?

12 A. No.

13 MR. IERACE: Could the map be moved further to the right so that

14 we can see more of the airport, please -- other direction.

15 JUDGE ORIE: That is to the left.

16 MR. IERACE: Thank you. And slightly up, if the map could be

17 moved -- other direction.

18 Q. Yesterday you marked two positions for anti-aircraft weaponry on a

19 secondary runway which now appears on the map, is that correct, being X4

20 and X5?

21 A. That's right.

22 Q. Yesterday also you gave us some evidence about an order that

23 required SRK forces to open fire in certain circumstances at persons

24 attempting to cross the airport in daytime or night-time. You told us

25 that you never fired, that is --

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank pages inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts. Pages 17589 to 17592

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

2 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour -- Your Honour, I'd

3 just ask Mr. Ierace to be more precise as to where and when the witness

4 said this.

5 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that Mr. Ierace is referring to an order

6 which was shown to the witness. So the witness didn't say this, but the

7 witness has answered questions in respect of such an order.

8 Unfortunately, I haven't got the transcript of yesterday with me, but

9 that's my clear recollection. It's one of the documents shown to him. So

10 whether questions were put to him in that respect is a different matter,

11 but a order was shown to him in which appears what Mr. Ierace just said.

12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Exhibit 14 - as far as I can read - 91.

14 It's number 3 on this one-page document.

15 But perhaps you could confront the witness with that part which

16 has not been part of the testimony of the witness, although the witness

17 has testified, I think, that he was aware of this order. But I don't

18 think that specific part has been the subject of questioning, Mr. Ierace.

19 Therefore, perhaps you could assist the witness in --

20 MR. IERACE: Well, Mr. President, the question I asked the witness

21 was: Yesterday also you gave us some evidence about an order, and then

22 went on to describe that order.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

24 MR. IERACE: In relation to the time on my transcript, it's around

25 11.54.12 seconds. Mr. Piletta-Zanin showed him the order.

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think there's no discussion as to whether it

2 was shown to him, but sometimes orders are rather lengthy and not all

3 aspects of an order -- at least it's not my recollection that this

4 specific part of the order and the way you described that order was part

5 of the questioning, of the examination of the witness. It was, rather,

6 the other parts of the order.

7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. As I am

10 not certain that the transcript reflects exactly the range of the order

11 and item 3, I think it will be prudent, in fact even necessary, that

12 Mr. Ierace read that or puts it on the ELMO so that we can all see what

13 this is about. I do not think that there is a perfect reflection of what

14 Mr. Ierace said, what's in the transcript, and the order as it was

15 submitted by the Defence.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, could the -- if you'd need to go into the

17 content of that order, could perhaps the order be shown to the witness and

18 that you put questions in respect of that order, unless you'd prefer not

19 to do so for whatever reason, but -- it's not my recollection that the way

20 you described the order was the subject of questioning and the testimony

21 of the witness, so it might cause confusion.

22 MR. IERACE: As you please, Mr. President.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

24 MR. IERACE: Might the witness be shown D1991.

25 THE REGISTRAR: D1491?

1 MR. IERACE: 1491. Thank you.

2 That should be the B/C/S version.

3 Q. Sir, do you remember that yesterday the Defence counsel through

4 the court orderly gave you this document and asked you to read it. He

5 said to you, "Witness, would you please be so kind to read this document."

6 Do you remember you were asked that question?

7 A. I do remember that, yes.

8 Q. All right. Please look at paragraph 3. In particular --

9 A. Yes. I read it.

10 Q. In particular, the last sentence. Did the order require SRK

11 forces in certain circumstances to open fire on persons crossing or

12 attempting to cross the airport in the daytime or the night-time?

13 A. I read it, and I don't interpret it in this way.

14 Q. Would you please read the last sentence slowly, on paragraph 3.

15 THE INTERPRETER: I'm sorry. We are trying to find --

16 THE WITNESS: "After discovering the same, as well as the

17 citizens, individuals, motor vehicles and similar, who are intending to

18 cross over the area of airport, especially if they are opening fire toward

19 our positions, send immediately oral protest to the UNPROFOR and command

20 of the UN forces at the airport, with the request to prevent it. In this

21 case, open fire and decisively prevent such actions."

22 Q. What do you disagree about what I suggested to you that order

23 said?

24 A. I disagree with what you said, that we are supposed to open fire

25 on anyone who's going across the airport. Here it says that we are

1 supposed to open fire but that the first thing we have to do is to address

2 a protest to UNPROFOR before we do anything, and if we can't cross the

3 airport, then obviously the Muslims shouldn't cross the airport either.

4 Q. All right. I said to you that the order --

5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Considering the text that we

8 have now and considering the fact that the Prosecution did not clearly

9 indicate that this order was about responding to fire, I believe that the

10 way that the question --

11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, the question to the witness was

12 whether this order contains an instruction to open fire under certain

13 circumstances. The witness ignored that part of the question in his

14 answer. And I think it's not proper to enter into a debate between the

15 parties as to the content of this document at this moment, and the

16 Prosecution should be allowed to put questions to the witness in that

17 respect.

18 Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.

19 MR. IERACE:

20 Q. Sir, the order sets out the circumstances in which fire is to be

21 opened, those circumstances being where the SRK receives fire from those

22 crossing the runway; isn't that correct?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Thank you. Now, yesterday did you also tell us that anti-aircraft

25 weapons were never used on persons crossing the airport?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. All right. Did you partake in the drafting of this order?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Who with?

5 A. I can't remember who it was, but the order was submitted and

6 Dragan Marcetic signed it, who was at the time the deputy of the

7 commander, that is, the chief of staff.

8 Q. Is it possible that Colonel Marcetic assisted you with the

9 drafting of the order?

10 A. It is possible. He submitted it to me, he showed it to me -- I

11 can't quite remember now. But it's almost ten years that have passed. I

12 can't remember the details. It is possible that I -- that was written on

13 the basis of the orders that we received.

14 Q. All right. Incidentally, was he the chief of staff of the SRK

15 until the 20th of June, 1993?

16 A. At this time he was. Whether he was chief of staff until June, I

17 don't remember that.

18 Q. And as chief of staff, was he also the deputy commander?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Now, when you drafted this order, with whoever, which weapons did

21 you contemplate would open fire on persons crossing the airport? If not

22 anti-aircraft weapons, then which weapons?

23 A. Fire can be opened on the airport runway only from the weapons

24 that can have visibility towards the airport runway. The positions that I

25 have marked, they do not have the conditions to open fire towards the

1 airport runway across which the civilians were passing, were going across.

2 MR. IERACE: Could the map please be placed back on the ELMO so

3 that we can see the airport runway and its vicinity.

4 Q. Sir, would you please take a pen - I think it's a blue pen - and

5 mark the positions held by the SRK from which you expected fire could be

6 directed onto the runway, in particular at persons crossing it in certain

7 circumstances.

8 A. The units that I have marked on the sports airport, they were not

9 in a position to do this, because they couldn't see the runway because --

10 Q. Just a moment. I understand that, and you've told us that, you --

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President. Mr. President,

13 I believe that there is a rule that when the witness is explaining

14 something specific, he should not be interrupted. And if he is trying to

15 tell us about the line of fire, then he should finish his answer.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just see.

17 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter correction: If he's trying to tell

18 us about the impossibility of the existence of the line of fire, then he

19 should finish his answer.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The witness may finish his answer.

21 MR. IERACE: But Mr. President, may I respond to that?

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I should have given you an opportunity to

23 respond to that, Mr. Ierace.

24 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, if you read my question.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

1 MR. IERACE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin has misunderstood it. I have asked

2 the witness to indicate the positions of the SRK.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

4 MR. IERACE: From which he contemplated fire would be directed at

5 the airport. I have not suggested that those positions include the

6 anti-aircraft positions.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then would you please then clarify your

8 question to the witness. And if the witness deems fit to add something to

9 his answer, we'll hear from him.

10 MR. IERACE: Yes. Mr. President, that was the only reason I

11 interrupted him.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.

13 MR. IERACE:

14 Q. Sir, I'm not asking you to consider only the anti-aircraft

15 positions. You've told us that there was no line of sight. When you

16 drafted that order in which you required fire to be opened on the airport

17 in certain circumstances, where did you contemplate that fire would come

18 from? With your pen, would you please mark those positions.

19 A. It was stressed in item 3 of the order that all measures of

20 observation should be undertaken first of all. From the position I6, and

21 here it can be seen --

22 Q. -- Again. Please listen to the question. I'm not asking you

23 whether observations were to be made from. I'm asking you where the fire

24 would come from. Where were the places around the airport that you

25 expected SRK fire would be opened from?

1 A. Only from Dobrinja I, here. This is where the line -- this is the

2 line I'm placing now. And from the Novakovica houses, which is part of

3 Donji Kotorac, towards the airport, so only with infantry weapons. And I

4 have answered about this part because it's linked in this one point and

5 because the members of my unit were able to observe from here and that a

6 report that something could be seen on the runway.

7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] For clarification purposes,

10 since the witness who was not stopped now was marking something on the

11 map, perhaps we could say what these positions are so that it can be clear

12 later.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You may ask the witness if you want to in

14 redirect, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

15 For the transcript, it's at this moment sufficient, I would say,

16 that the witness marked blue lines - they are not very good visible - on

17 both sides of the end or the beginning of the runway - it depends on where

18 you start - at the south-eastern side, and he also circled a name --

19 Mr. DP35, would you not mark anything on the map unless being

20 instructed to do so. Otherwise, I need another minute to tell what you've

21 marked and explained.

22 And he circled a name just left to a position he indicated before

23 as X6/30/2.

24 Yes. That's enough.

25 Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.

1 MR. IERACE: All right.

2 Q. Now, did you have in mind that the weapons --

3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I'm sorry. The general has

5 asked to confer with me. And with your permission, may I do so for half a

6 minute.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

9 [Defence counsel and accused confer]

10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace.

12 MR. IERACE:

13 Q. Did you contemplate that machine-guns would be used; yes or no?

14 A. They could have been used.

15 Q. Did you contemplate that rifles would be used?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. With specialist equipment enabling the shooters to detect the

18 targets at night?

19 A. No.

20 Q. All right. The terms of the order suggest that you understood

21 that civilians were crossing the airport, perhaps, as well as soldiers; is

22 that correct?

23 A. That was the assumption.

24 Q. All right. What did you expect your troops to do if they were

25 fired upon at night by one or more individuals from a group that may

1 include civilians?

2 A. I couldn't have expected what they would do because the soldiers

3 at the two lines are indicated at Dobrinja I and at Donji Kotorac, the

4 units there were from a brigade whose commander was to tell his

5 subordinates on the basis of this what they -- what parts of the units

6 should do, the units that were in the immediate vicinity of the airport,

7 near the runway. This is why I couldn't say what they would state,

8 because this was their responsibility. I couldn't say what they would

9 instruct.

10 Q. All right. Now, especially before the tunnel came into operation

11 under the airstrip --

12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I'm not sure if

13 the witness said whether he knew exactly when the tunnel became

14 functional. I don't think that this was part of his testimony. I think

15 the right question should first of all be put to him.

16 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, the question and the issue doesn't

17 require a date. It's a sequence of events.

18 JUDGE ORIE: The witness talked about the tunnel being operative,

19 and a question could be put to him about the tunnel, when it was

20 operative, even if he would know perfectly about some --

21 Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.

22 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I'd also be grateful if these

23 interjections did not detract from the limited time that I have.

24 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber will give this proper consideration.

25 And as I did before, I would urge the parties not to intervene if

1 not necessary and leave additional questions for the opportunity given to

2 each of the parties -- to the Defence at a later stage.

3 Please proceed.

4 MR. IERACE:

5 Q. Sir, before the tunnel was opened, there were, I suggest to you,

6 almost nightly numbers of individuals crossing the runway, both coming

7 into Sarajevo and departing Sarajevo. Do you agree with that?

8 A. I do agree with that.

9 Q. And did the SRK command receive protests from the UN that

10 civilians were being shot by SRK forces at the runway at night in

11 particular?

12 A. I don't remember.

13 Q. Well, you say you don't remember. Do you mean that perhaps that

14 happened and you've forgotten?

15 A. That could have happened too. I mean, there could have been a

16 protest.

17 Q. Why would you not remember that?

18 A. I can't remember that period. Yesterday when I mentioned

19 protests, I mentioned the time period that I was certain of. But whether

20 or not protests were made about crossing the runway at night and about

21 fire being opened, I can't remember. I don't remember whether there were

22 any protests.

23 Q. Now --

24 A. I'd like to emphasise that.

25 Q. Now, the situation was essentially that each night civilians and

1 military would attempt to cross the runway under the cover of night

2 without being detected; is that correct?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. So I suggest to you that the last thing that individuals in that

5 position would do is open fire at the enemy, because by so doing they

6 indicate where they are and they contradict their objective, which is

7 simply to cross the runway. What do you say to that?

8 A. I accept what you said. I accept the fact that they would reveal

9 their position, the fact that they were crossing the runway. Similarly,

10 if anyone was detected crossing the runway, this would have been possible

11 on the basis of some visible sign. Perhaps a battery, a torch, or

12 something. Fire from our side could only have been opened in a

13 discriminate way, because we didn't have a device for firing at night,

14 whether this regards the infantry or the units that had certain technical

15 equipment such as my units.

16 Q. Sir, the troops of the SRK overlooking the runway had night-vision

17 binoculars, didn't they?

18 A. No. I said that a minute ago.

19 Q. Are you sure about that?

20 A. I'm sure about that because I didn't control those units because

21 they weren't from my formation. Even the ones from my formations and

22 observed part of the runway, they didn't have such a device. I am certain

23 of this. They could have only observed the movement of vehicles, and when

24 they're driving without their lights on, they could observe them if they

25 stopped at lights.

1 Q. All right. Now, I'll take you back to something you said a few

2 minutes ago. "Fire from our side could only have been opened in a

3 discriminate way, because we didn't have a device for firing at night."

4 Let me get this clear. Was this order to the effect that fire was only to

5 be opened in response to fire received? Was that the only circumstance in

6 which SRK troops were to open fire on persons crossing the runway?

7 A. Yes, that goes without saying, because opening fire -- and if you

8 hear fire being opened, that will certainly prevent someone from crossing

9 territory that is prohibited. It will encourage someone to stop crossing

10 the runway.

11 Q. Listen carefully to the question. I'm not asking you whether the

12 order contemplated that SRK troops could shoot into the air to scare

13 persons from not crossing the runway, but is that your evidence, that you

14 contemplated that the troops would do that if they saw persons crossing

15 the runway, fire above them? Was that contemplated by you?

16 A. If movement is detected, opening fire could prevent such movement.

17 This was expected. Especially if one was heading towards the town. We

18 assumed that ammunition would be brought in via that runway and that this

19 would be the primary activity.

20 Q. All right. You say "if movement is detected, opening fire could

21 prevent such movement. This was expected." Do you mean opening fire at

22 the movement?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. How were the persons shooting to know if they were soldiers or

25 civilians? According to you, they had no night vision.

1 A. Well, they couldn't know whether the person in question was a

2 soldier or civilian.

3 Q. All right. You see, sir, this order is a sham. This order

4 suggests that the only time that fire could be opened at persons crossing

5 the airport is when fire was first received from persons crossing the

6 airport. But what you tell us is something quite different to that, that

7 fire, you expected, would be opened at movement, even when the shooters

8 didn't know for sure if it was civilians or soldiers they were shooting

9 at. So I'm putting to you, sir, that this order is a sham. What do you

10 say to that?

11 A. That's how the order was issued.

12 Q. All right. Now, where did that order come from? Did you provide

13 that order to an investigator of the Defence team?

14 A. No, I didn't.

15 Q. Did you provide any orders to an investigator of the Defence team?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Did you show a Defence investigator where documents of the SRK

18 were located?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Have you ever met Milenko Radovic?

21 A. Milenko Radovic?

22 Q. Yes.

23 A. No.

24 Q. What is your current position? In this sense, so as not to offend

25 the protective measures rules, are you a member of the defence forces of

1 Republika Srpska, sir? Yes or no?

2 A. No.

3 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, might we go into closed session or

4 private session?

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps we can go into private session, if that

6 would be sufficient.

7 MR. IERACE: Yes.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Apart from that, Mr. Ierace, I'd like you perhaps in

9 due course to clarify an issue which is troubling me a bit about the

10 possibility of opening discriminate or, as I thought I understood,

11 indiscriminate fire, because there were no -- there were no sights

12 available. I had some difficulty understanding that. And since you

13 repeated in one of your next questions the answer the witness had given as

14 to the discriminate character of the possibility of discriminate character

15 of the firing, I would like to make sure that there's no problem in

16 respect of translation or transcript.

17 MR. IERACE: Would it be convenient, Mr. President, if we did that

18 just before the end of tonight's session?

19 JUDGE ORIE: That's fine. That's fine. It's just at a certain

20 moment.

21 MR. IERACE: Yes.

22 [Private session]

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Page 17608 – redacted – private session

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Page 17609 – redacted – private session

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 [Open session]

7 JUDGE ORIE: We are in open session again.

8 Could you please answer the question, witness, Mr. DP35. The

9 question is whether you've ever seen since December 1995 any orders of the

10 Sarajevo Romanija Corps. So since the end of the war, whether you've ever

11 seen before starting to give your testimony yesterday, whether you've ever

12 seen any document -- any order of the Sarajevo Romanija Corps.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, I think it's time for -- would it be a

15 suitable time for a break, Mr. Ierace?

16 MR. IERACE: Yes, Mr. President.

17 JUDGE ORIE: We'll then adjourn until 6.00.

18 --- Recess taken at 5.39 p.m.

19 --- On resuming at 6.06 p.m.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, could you please escort the witness into

21 the courtroom.

22 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, before the witness is brought in,

23 would this be a convenient time to return to the -- the concern that you

24 had -- that you expressed earlier --

25 JUDGE ORIE: On discriminate and indiscriminate, yes.

1 MR. IERACE: Yes. Mr. President, I would be grateful if you could

2 indicate the concern that you have in that regard.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Well, it was my recollection and for my better

4 understanding I thought that the witness said -- at least what I heard

5 from the translation was that they're only able to indiscriminately fire.

6 That's how I understood it. It appears in the transcript - and which is

7 difficult for me to understand, that they're only able to - for

8 discriminate fire, which is difficult for me to understand in the context

9 of the answer. That was my major concern.

10 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, perhaps the way to avoid that is by

11 having regard to the -- perhaps the witness could remove his headphones.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

13 MR. IERACE: Is to have regard to the response of the witness to

14 the particular scenario of movement that might clarify any

15 misunderstanding.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But I just wanted to make sure that -- to make

17 clear that there could be some doubts as to the correctness of that --

18 MR. IERACE: That term.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Of the term used.

20 MR. IERACE: Yes.

21 JUDGE ORIE: And as it appears in the transcript. I just wanted

22 to draw your attention to that to see whether any clarification was

23 needed. But of course, the other parts of the answers give some clues to

24 interpret what he meant to say.

25 MR. IERACE: Yes. Thank you, Mr. President.

1 Might the witness be shown Exhibit D1492. And would that be

2 placed on the -- perhaps the English could be placed on the ELMO and the

3 B/C/S given to the witness.

4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, it seems that

5 General Galic told me that he couldn't see anything. I don't know whether

6 he can see something now.

7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No. I apologise, Your Honour.

8 Mr. President, you said that the document in English should be put on the

9 ELMO. I don't have the other document, and I don't understand English, so

10 that's what I was wondering about.

11 JUDGE ORIE: If the B/C/S could be put on the ELMO so -- other

12 otherwise, that General Galic is provided with a B/C/S copy of the

13 document so that --

14 MR. IERACE: Or perhaps the Defence's copy.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Otherwise, I will be glad to give my B/C/S copy

16 for -- yes. I see that the matter is -- if you'd give the B/C/S copy to

17 General Galic.

18 Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.

19 MR. IERACE:

20 Q. Sir, yesterday you were shown this order, and you read it, and you

21 commented upon it. And then you were asked by Mr. Piletta-Zanin if you

22 had anything in particular to say about item 3, and you replied, "No, I

23 wouldn't be able to comment on item 3." Why not?

24 A. Because I can comment only on the last sentence, "Make sure that

25 all units and all personnel of SRK army be familiar and observe this

1 order." That's clear. But I cannot comment on the positions and dates in

2 relation to the Geneva Conventions, because its contents is not discussed

3 here, debated here, and I thought that through items 1 and 2 - this is in

4 relation to those - so I didn't think that I would need to offer any

5 comment in relation to item 3. This is in reference to the actual

6 positions of the Geneva Conventions.

7 Q. Do you mean by that that you don't know what the specific

8 provisions are of each of the protocols and the convention which is

9 mentioned in the order, the conventions which are mentioned in the order?

10 A. I cannot know -- I cannot know that by heart. I presumed that in

11 the introductory part where the directive of the Presidency of Republika

12 Srpska has been given - and this was referred to it - that somebody from

13 the superior command wrote this and this colleague who processed this

14 order, together with the commander, referred to that and that this was

15 enough.

16 Q. The order is signed by General Galic, is that correct, as you

17 understand it?

18 A. Yes, that's right.

19 Q. Did you go to General Galic and say "I cannot comply with the

20 order because I don't know what the specific provisions are"? Did you do

21 that?

22 A. Well, I didn't receive this order.

23 Q. Well, when was the first time you saw this order?

24 A. I probably saw it then, when I was in the corps. And there was no

25 need for me to comment on it. And here I saw it yesterday, and there's

1 nothing I can comment. I believe that this is one of the documents which

2 actually and properly has been written correctly, and it was forwarded to

3 all the units. It wasn't forwarded to me as a unit. It was forwarded to

4 all the superiors of the units, and it was in relation to the commander.

5 It was for the soldiers to know, and the commander had to make sure

6 that -- make sure for the soldiers not to get sick if they are using

7 certain items.

8 Q. My question was simply: When was the first time that you saw this

9 order? Now, you say, "I probably saw it then." Do you mean by that you

10 have no recollection of seeing it then but you assume that you may have

11 seen it then? Is that what you mean?

12 A. That's correct.

13 Q. Well, when was the first time that you remember seeing this

14 document or this order?

15 A. Yesterday, here in court.

16 Q. Was it shown to you by anyone between yesterday and when you

17 arrived in The Hague?

18 A. Well, there was no need for that to be shown to me.

19 Q. But sir, you tell us you have no recollection of seeing this

20 document before. You now offer an opinion as to why it wasn't shown to

21 you. The question is: Was it shown to you between when you arrived at

22 The Hague and yesterday; yes or no?

23 A. I don't know. I don't know what to answer. I don't wish to

24 answer something offhand. Perhaps I may have seen it in the last few

25 days, but I don't know what's the purpose of that, whether I know it or

1 not.

2 Q. When did you arrive in The Hague?

3 A. Saturday.

4 Q. Would you please repeat your answer.

5 A. On Saturday.

6 Q. On Saturday. All right. So you were here Saturday, Sunday,

7 Monday, and then gave your evidence yesterday for the first time; is that

8 correct?

9 A. That's right.

10 Q. Why are you not able to tell us clearly if you were shown this

11 document between Saturday when you arrived and yesterday when you entered

12 the witness box?

13 A. It was probably shown to me.

14 Q. Well, were you shown any documents between Saturday when you

15 arrived and when you entered the witness box yesterday?

16 A. The previous one was shown to me because I took part in making the

17 previous document. It is obvious in the previous document that I took

18 part in making it.

19 Q. When before last Saturday did you last see D1491, that is, the

20 order I showed you before the break, the one that you took part in

21 writing?

22 A. At the time when it was compiled. Perhaps later on, before

23 leaving Lukavica, when the documents were put away for the purpose of

24 making up the archive.

25 Q. Why do you say it is obvious that you took a part in making that

1 previous document? Your name is not on it, so why is it obvious to

2 someone who might read that document that you contributed to it?

3 A(redacted)

4 Q. All right. If you had received this order at the time that it was

5 issued apparently by General Galic on the 15th of September, 1993, and if

6 it had been directed to you, I take it from what you've told us you would

7 not be able to carry the order out because you didn't have a sufficient

8 knowledge of the relevant legal provisions. Is that correct?

9 A. The item 3 in relation to legal provisions, to me like a soldier

10 and a superior doesn't speak in any specific way. What speaks to me

11 specifically is item 1 and item 2, which says, "To enable free passage and

12 protection of deliveries," and item 2, which says that we should "prohibit

13 misuse for military purposes" of such and such items.

14 Q. If you would keep your answers as brief as possible, I'd be

15 grateful.

16 And you were a senior officer, a member of the corps command. You

17 did not know what was meant. Would you expect company commanders,

18 battalion commanders, brigade commanders to read item 3 and know what was

19 required?

20 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we have no

21 interpretation.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Would there be a problem in respect of the

23 interpretation? Does it function again? You're looking to --

24 General Galic, from your gestures, I take it that -- do you

25 receive interpretation now?

1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, thank you very much.

2 I have it now.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you. Please be seated, General Galic.

4 So could you please answer, Mr. DP35, the last question, whether

5 you expected company commanders to understand the third part of this

6 order, where you say that your knowledge would be insufficient to

7 understand what it specifically meant.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] According to my personal assessment,

9 in combat documents I would not have written item 3. I would have

10 referred to the document in the introductory part to say that I am

11 referring to the directive or instructions of the president of

12 Serbia -- I'm sorry, I apologise. I meant the president of Republika

13 Srpska. And what is in relation to the truth, and I would have written

14 the items 1 and 2, which to my subordinates would explain clearly what

15 they're supposed to do. So item 3 is practically -- is also taking in

16 account what's in the other points --

17 JUDGE ORIE: May I stop you here. There is a problem in respect

18 of the French translation. Yes? It does function again?

19 Since everyone is now smiling, I take it that all the problems

20 have been solved.

21 So please continue your answer, Mr. DP35.

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know whether I need to

23 repeat my comment, whether there was a problem with the interpretation.

24 MR. IERACE:

25 Q. Sir, put simply, you would not expect a company commander to know

1 what to do in relation to item 3, would you?

2 A. I wouldn't even think about it. That's what I said. Because we

3 have no time to read Geneva Convention. If it is not clearly explained in

4 items 1 and 2. We couldn't take with us during combat our bag carrying

5 all the instructions and orders and rules. What I'm saying is that items

6 1 and 2 are clear to me.

7 Q. Now, who is the order directed specifically to? Is it, "all SRK

8 units"?

9 A. That's correct, yes.

10 Q. Is that not the entirety of the SRK?

11 A. That's correct. The entire, yes.

12 Q. Sir, I suggest to you this order is also a sham. By that I mean

13 in spite of the way it is addressed and directed, it could not have been

14 genuinely intended for the internal consumption of the SRK. What do you

15 say to that?

16 A. I cannot agree with you because I have already said that I agree

17 with the contents of items 1 and 2. To my subordinate units I could have

18 offered more details for certain directions, part of positions where

19 certain routes are where this kind of movement is possible, but this had

20 to be written in general terms from the corps to the brigades. Every

21 brigade had the possibility for lower units, lower echelon units. They

22 could have expanded on items 1 and 2.

23 Q. My question is directed specifically to item 3. In other words,

24 it is apparent from the face of the document, I suggest to you, that the

25 intention behind the document was to make it look as if the SRK was

1 complying with those provisions but in fact the document was incapable of

2 being followed out, given a reasonable expectation of the level of

3 education and training of SRK officers such as yourself. What do you say

4 to that?

5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I object. I

6 object. I believe that this question has been asked in a tendentious way.

7 We cannot ask one person to speak on behalf of the whole corps of an army.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace.

9 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, the Defence chose to tender this

10 document through this witness. This witness is put forward as a member of

11 the command, the corps command of the Sarajevo Romanija Corps. As a

12 senior officer, if he cannot understand the document - and he said he

13 can't, in terms of paragraph 3 - then this is a fair question to put to

14 him in respect of his fellow officers, in terms of his expectation.

15 [Trial Chamber confers]

16 JUDGE ORIE: I'll put a question to the witness in this respect.

17 Mr. DP35, concerning the third paragraph of this order, in your

18 opinion would it be of any use to distribute this in respect of your

19 opinion that you yourself at your level could not even understand the

20 details of what it says and, therefore, would you think it of any use to

21 distribute it in an expectation that lower level would understand?

22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I apologise,

23 but I believe that there has been no French interpretation. I have

24 received desperate signs. I didn't want to interrupt you, but my worry

25 was that you would have to start your question from the beginning.

1 Was there French interpretation? There was no French

2 interpretation.

3 Has it been restored by now? Yes.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Just for the sake of the transcript, Mr. DP35,

5 I have to repeat my question. Did you think that the distribution of this

6 document, specifically the third paragraph of any use if you did not

7 understand the details of the Geneva Conventions and where you, as you

8 testified, did not expect the lower level to have a better understanding

9 of these regulations.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In relation to item 3 I said that I

11 would not have put it in there. Not because of understanding, but because

12 during combat operations, when document is received, there is no point,

13 there is no time for a document to be studied, to study certain rules,

14 because we had no opportunity to carry with us or put away or let alone

15 study them. He would have meant that several thousands of soldiers would

16 need to study this, to have a seminar in the corps, to study certain items

17 of the protocol from the conventions.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Ierace, I think the issue has been dealt

19 with.

20 MR. IERACE: Mr. President --

21 JUDGE ORIE: Sufficiently.

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 MR. IERACE: -- And whilst that's being done, I ask that the

15 witness be shown a document.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, could I please see the document that

17 was -- oh, yes, after Mr. -- Would the marked document be returned,

18 Mr. Ierace.

19 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President.

20 And I ask that the witness be shown a document -- a two-page

21 document, but in particular be shown page 2. I have copies of a document

22 in B/C/S and English for distribution. Exhibit number is P3770 in B/C/S

23 and .1 in English.

24 Q. Sir, would you look at the document in front of you, just the page

25 at which it's opened.

1 MR. IERACE: Perhaps that could be placed on the ELMO.

2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I'm not sure that we have the

3 right numbers in the transcript. I think I heard something through the

4 headphones. I don't know what's happening any more. I don't think the

5 numbers were entered into the transcript correctly, both for the B/C/S

6 version and for the other version.

7 MR. IERACE: There is a query marked on the transcript. I don't

8 know that we're going to correct that at the moment, Mr. President.

9 THE REGISTRAR: Document P3770 and P3770.1.

10 MR. IERACE: Might the B/C/S at the page at which it is opened be

11 placed on the ELMO.

12 Q. Please don't turn the page, sir.

13 All right. Now, do you recognise the two stamps which appear in

14 this document?

15 A. Yes, I do.

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll turn into private session and the

4 document, the first page, should not be shown on the ELMO.

5 And could, please, the Defence provide a copy of the document or

6 could an extra copy be provided to General Galic.

7 MR. IERACE: Yes. It's a Prosecution document, Mr. President.

8 [Private session]

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Page 17625 – redacted – private session

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Page 17626 – redacted – private session

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Page 17627 – redacted – private session

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Page 17628 – redacted – private session

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 [Open session]

12 MR. IERACE:

13 Q. Earlier I asked you did General Galic discuss with you your

14 alcohol consumption unofficially or officially and in your answer you said

15 perhaps General Galic on occasion and not officially but as a friend said

16 certain things. When did he become a friend?

17 A. When did we become friends? Well, we had to be friends, all of us

18 who worked together in a single command. We went through the same

19 hardships, if I may put it like this.

20 Q. Do you mean that you developed a friendship with him after

21 September 1992?

22 A. Just as I did with all members of the corps command.

23 Q. Did you maintain any contact with General Galic after August of

24 1994?

25 A. We spoke to each other over the phone on one occasion. That was

1 later, when General Galic had already gone to Banja Luka. I phoned him.

2 We greeted each other. We spoke for a while. We asked each other about

3 our health. I think the general can remember that too. We didn't have

4 the occasion to meet in some other way after that event.

5 Q. You told us yesterday that you became aware of an allegation which

6 required, you thought, an investigation by the Sarajevo Romanija Corps,

7 and you then carried out that investigation. You said to us that you

8 became aware of the allegation through the media. Do you remember saying

9 that?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. What media did you listen to or watch or read?

12 A. The BH radio, the Sarajevo radio, the Muslim radio, which we

13 listened to in order to be able to hear what they were saying about

14 events, and then we found out that there were media provocations and that

15 falsehoods were being disseminated.

16 Q. -- You also mentioned a number of times yesterday a liaison

17 officer. Was that Major or Colonel Indjic?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And would he tell you from time to time what the English/French

20 press were reporting?

21 A. I don't remember that.

22 Q. Did General Galic understand any English at all?

23 A. I am not aware of that. I don't know.

24 Q. In 1993, word was getting around that there might be a United

25 Nations tribunal set up. Is that correct? Did you hear that at the time?

1 A. I heard that the establishment of the tribunal was being

2 discussed. But whether it was in 1993 or at a later date, I couldn't say

3 right now.

4 Q. Whenever it was that you became aware of it, did you become

5 concerned that some senior officers of the Sarajevo Romanija Corps might

6 be investigated in relation to the campaign in Sarajevo?

7 A. It wasn't necessary for us to be concerned because we didn't

8 consider that that --

9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I object.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] -- To the manner of putting

12 this question. The question simply refers to the subjective aspect of

13 this witness with regard to questions which, as such, don't concern him.

14 They relate to what his feelings were, what his concerns were, et cetera.

15 JUDGE ORIE: The next question could be did he ever express these

16 concerns, a question which is not in any need to be put to the witness if

17 the concerns did not exist. So it's not totally irrelevant.

18 Mr. Ierace, we're close to 7.00. So apart from the objections

19 just made, I had some difficulties in keeping a very precise time track

20 because of both the difficulties with the translation and some

21 interventions where we had to reread certain documents because they were

22 not able to be translated. But I'd like to finish with the witness today.

23 I think you certainly had your 75 minutes that were granted. Would you

24 please keep that in mind.

25 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I appreciate this is a very highly

1 unusual submission, but given the disparity between the Prosecution and

2 Defence in both the Prosecution case and the Defence case, and I would

3 hope that I have been seen to not be wasting time, and given that I have a

4 considerable area still to go in cross-examination, I'd be grateful if the

5 Trial Chamber would reconsider its decision in relation to the time

6 permitted for cross-examination.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll not do that at this very moment. If

8 you'd please use your time as efficiently as possible for the next four

9 minutes, and then perhaps when the witness has left the courtroom or that

10 you tell us what area still has to be covered.

11 MR. IERACE: Yes.

12 JUDGE ORIE: And then we'll consider the matter overnight.

13 MR. IERACE: Thank you for that, Mr. President.

14 Q. Sir, you mentioned yesterday circumstances in which vehicles would

15 be targeted by anti-aircraft weapons. At one point you referred to

16 anti-aircraft fire from your units being directed at target points, and

17 you said, "So this mostly had to do with fire points, with combat or not

18 combat vehicles that could be discerned, for movement, and for which we

19 could assume that they either transported deadly weapons or explosive

20 material." And then at a later point you referred to "targeting cars of

21 olive-drab colour or camouflage colour for which we could assume they were

22 transporting ammunition and other explosive devices."

23 Now, firstly, do I understand your evidence to be that you

24 regarded vehicles as being legitimate targets when there was reason to

25 believe that they were transporting ammunition or explosive material? Is

1 that correct?

2 Sir, do you have a problem with the question? I think you've

3 taken some 15 seconds so far.

4 A. I'm not waiting for anything. I'm just waiting for you to finish

5 your question. The target that --

6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I apologise. I

7 think that the tone is becoming very direct. I even heard the translation

8 in Serb, and that took a long time. But this manner of almost aggressing

9 the witness doesn't seem to be admissible to us.

10 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, that's not my intention at all. I had

11 not discerned such a long break between previous questions and answers by

12 the witness. If it is the case that the question was still being

13 translated, then I certainly apologise.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's then accept in case that would have

15 caused the problem then I hope that the witness will accept the apologies

16 of Mr. Ierace.

17 So could you please answer to the last question put to you, which

18 was whether you did -- whether Mr. Ierace did understand your evidence

19 well, that it was that you regarded vehicles as being legitimate targets

20 where there was reason to believe that they were transporting ammunition

21 or explosive material. Is that a correct understanding?

22 MR. IERACE: Yes, Mr. President. That's my question.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. All right. And in circumstances where they were clearly coloured

25 in military colours; correct?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. A civilian-coloured vehicle, say, white vehicles or yellow

3 vehicles, say, Golfs, driving around Sarajevo. Just the fact that they

4 would be driving around Sarajevo, would that be reason to target them, do

5 you think?

6 A. I mentioned the vehicles moving around the area. We couldn't see

7 them from our positions. In the zone of movement, the road towards Igman,

8 above Hrasnica, Golfs didn't take that route. Lorries did. And the

9 lorries weren't white but they were yellow or of some other colour. There

10 was no reason for them to be there. They weren't driving tourists to

11 Igman. They were transporting ammunition or something else. So it was a

12 military target, regardless of the colour of the vehicle.

13 Q. All right. I'll rephrase the question.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace.

15 MR. IERACE: Yes.

16 JUDGE ORIE: It's 7.00 now. We have to keep in mind not only that

17 you'd like to put additional questions to the witness but also that those

18 supporting us are entitled to a break now.

19 Madam Usher, could I first ask you to escort the witness out of

20 the courtroom. And I take it that the curtains have to be pulled down for

21 that reason.

22 Mr. DP35, meanwhile I inform you that you're expected to come

23 back -- I meanwhile expect you that you are expected to come back tomorrow

24 morning, 9.00, not in the same courtroom but in Courtroom II.

25 Madam Usher, could you please escort the witness out of the

1 courtroom, since there is facial distortion, and I think there's no

2 specific protection as far as the legs of the witness are concerned.

3 Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

4 [The witness stands down]

5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

6 Mr. President, since you are going to take this decision this night, or

7 rather, deliver it tomorrow, and we won't be aware of it until then, I

8 thought it might be useful to say in a few words that the Defence is

9 completely opposed to opening a new -- to granting more time to the

10 Prosecution. The Prosecution has benefitted to a large extent from your

11 decision and they had all the time they needed to do what they had to do.

12 Our position is clear and firm, I hope. Thank you.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, I first wanted to invite

14 Mr. Ierace, as I said before, to give us an indication what subjects are

15 still to be covered, and I hope that your -- the remark you just made is

16 not an invitation to me to compare all those instances where the Defence

17 took considerable more time in cross-examining the witnesses. I think

18 that would not be of great use.

19 But Mr. Ierace, could you please inform us.

20 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, under the topic of protests, I wish to

21 question the witness about the following subareas: Whether he received

22 information of protests from Colonel Indjic; specifically of civilians

23 being deliberately or indiscriminately made targets; whether General Galic

24 ever informed him or other persons in his presence that he, that is,

25 General Galic, had received protests personally from UNPROFOR senior

1 officers, because we've heard much evidence from senior UNPROFOR officers

2 that they conveyed protests to General Galic personally, so that question

3 goes to what was done about those protests, were they passed on down the

4 chain.

5 He said that experts were used to investigate allegations in

6 protests. I wish to explore that area. Who were the experts? How

7 independent were they? Were any military police ever involved in the

8 investigation or professional investigators? Was anyone ever charged to

9 his knowledge as a result of any of those investigations? And what

10 response was given to UNPROFOR? Does he say that the UN were given

11 written reports or verbal reports or any feedback as to the results of

12 those investigations.

13 In examination-in-chief, he was asked whether the terms of the

14 protests included the names of the victims or the precise positions. I

15 want to explore in cross-examination whether that information would have

16 been helpful to him and if he thought it was helpful and it wasn't given,

17 why did he not - or others - not simply go back to the UN and seek that

18 information.

19 The further -- in relation to the reports which were generated by

20 those investigations, what happened to them? He's told us that they went

21 to the main staff of the VRS. I wish to explore where those reports are

22 now, what records were kept of those records. He said that the liaison

23 officer made records of the protests. Presumably that's Colonel Indjic,

24 what he knows about that.

25 Leaving that topic, I wish to question him, not lengthily, about

1 Christmas and New Year 1992, that is, the barrage at midnight on both

2 those dates, where he was at that time. And I have some further questions

3 in relation to the issues of cars.

4 The Defence has repeatedly suggested during its case that any car

5 was a legitimate military target. This witness's evidence seems to

6 suggest otherwise. I wish to explore that further.

7 Finally, I want to put some fundamental propositions to the

8 witness in accordance with Rule 90. That should not take long. And

9 referring to some particular incidents of use of anti-aircraft fire in

10 particularly the state hospital and having regard to the positions that he

11 marked on the map, especially the position at Vrace, how close that was to

12 a commanding view over Sarajevo, and that being named as a source in the

13 Prosecution case of anti-aircraft fire that was discriminately and

14 deliberately targeting civilians.

15 Thank you, Mr. President.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Whether I understand you well, Mr. Ierace you're

17 asking for three more hours, if I am -- well, don't -- don't respond to

18 seriously as that, but it's quite a list you are mentioning. That's what

19 I said.

20 MR. IERACE: Perhaps an hour, Mr. President.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

22 MR. IERACE: But Mr. President, can I say this: If you take the

23 view -- if the Trial Chamber takes the view that there is an unfairness

24 occasioned to the Prosecution by the gross discrepancy in times consumed

25 by the Prosecution and the Defence; and secondly, if you take the view

1 that we are unfairly -- we have unfairly been dealt with by the decision

2 of the Defence with no prior warning to drop all of its senior witnesses,

3 then in my respectful submission it follows there must be some redress to

4 that. And against that background, to seek an extra hour or so for this

5 witness and perhaps (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 Thank you, Mr. President.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.

9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, very briefly.

10 Objectively I believe that five hours was enough to deal with these

11 subjects. We've had the archives dealt with, the boom boom boom boom

12 dealt with, et cetera, and I don't think that we can continue like this.

13 We cannot accept this. I believe that the game was very clear. The

14 Prosecution had it's chance. It missed the train. Well, tough luck,

15 because I believe that we cannot go on like this when the Prosecution is

16 unable to respect the constraints of time.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll consider the matter and give you a

18 decision by tomorrow morning. And as both parties are aware of, the

19 Chamber is not in the position to use the legal terms, as used by the

20 Defence that someone missed the train, well, tough luck. But we'll

21 consider the matter. That's for certain. Mr. Ierace.

22 MR. IERACE: There is a mea culpa. I apologise to Madam Registrar

23 as well. I mentioned a name that should be redacted. I notice we're in

24 open session. That's -- in the current page on the -- on the monitors.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

1 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] I just wanted to clarify

2 something. Because of the comment of the Prosecution that the Defence

3 decided not to call witnesses in senior positions, I never said that. The

4 only thing that's said is that I was not in a position to get in touch

5 with these witnesses. Perhaps the Prosecution is able to. But certainly

6 the Defence has not been able to contact these witnesses.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand.

8 We'll adjourn until tomorrow morning, 9.00, Courtroom II.

9 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned

10 at 7.10 p.m., to be reconvened on Thursday,

11 the 16th day of January, 2003, at 9.00 a.m.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25