1 Thursday, 24 April 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning to
7 everyone in the courtroom. This is case number IT-06-90-T, the
8 Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
10 Mr. Usher, could you escort the witness into the courtroom and
11 perhaps I'll meanwhile address the parties. Usually if this Chamber
12 wants to know something from a witness, we usually ask the witness;
13 however, the issue that was raised yesterday is one where the Chamber
14 might not have yet at this stage of the proceedings all the information
15 available which would make questioning of this witness on this subject
16 effective and that's the reason why the Chamber has sought the assistance
17 of the parties to get the information which appears to be relevant.
18 I was informed, but please correct me if I am wrong that the
19 conversation between the parties yesterday resulted in that you,
20 Mr. Kehoe, will elicit the evidence from this witness.
21 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour, and I reread yours comments last
22 night that you would look at the legitimate targets, that's the comment
23 that --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Well, what of course legitimate targets -- as I
25 said, I think I said object -- facilities, et cetera to make clear. I
1 did not -- I choose those words in order to emphasise that I'm not
2 seeking a long debate on what exactly is a legitimate target but about
3 structures and about factual matters.
4 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Which a knowledgeable person could link with
6 military targets, non-military targets, and whether legitimate or not, we
7 will final be able to decide that.
8 MR. KEHOE: Yes, sir.
9 JUDGE ORIE: We will read the information.
10 [The witness entered court]
11 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Leslie, my apologies for
12 continuing another matter when you came into the courtroom.
13 THE WITNESS: Yes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: I would like to remind you that I remember still
15 bound by the solemn declaration you've given at the beginning of your
16 testimony and as you may have noticed yesterday there are still a few
17 matters to be covered and you will for that reason now further be
18 examined, I would say -- I wouldn't say cross-examined, examined by
19 Mr. Kehoe.
20 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Kehoe.
22 WITNESS: ANDREW LESLIE [Resumed]
23 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Kehoe:
24 Q. Good morning, General, we would like to take off on some of the
25 issues that was brought up by the Chamber yesterday and I would like to
1 bring up on the screen 1D170390.
2 I think I said -- it says on the screen -- oh, this is it, yes.
3 General, can you just take a quick look and that and once you
4 orient yourself I would like to ask you a few items about that.
5 For point of reference, the UN compound is at the bottom of that
7 A. Thank you.
8 Q. Did you orient yourself?
9 A. Absolutely, I'm sorry.
10 Q. I just wanted to give you a little time to do that.
11 A. Thank you.
12 Q. Now, General, in your first statement that has come into evidence
13 in P84, you identified two locations as legitimate military targets. The
14 headquarters of the north Dalmatian corps and the RSK Ministry of Defence
15 and if we look at the designation as A1 and B1, you would agree with me
16 the northern barracks, the Dalmatian corps is what you were talking about
17 as A1 and the ARSK headquarters is B1, is that accurate?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Now, if we can go to the next slide.
20 Now, General, in your 1996 statement you gave us additional
21 targets which I will go through with here and for the sake of clarity,
22 General, the plus designation next to the description are those
23 designations that I've taken the liberty to add in this particular slide.
24 If it doesn't have a plus designation, that means it was covered by a
25 subsequent slide. So if you see by way of example, in the first issue
1 the first blue box, it has northern barracks. That's the one you pointed
2 out in your prior statement and in the prior slide.
3 Do you understand that methodology, sir?
4 A. I do.
5 Q. Now if we could just go through these particular items in your
6 statement, you identified several items as targets and if we can move
7 down to the B box and these would be in the bright circled areas, you
8 have the -- you identify the parliament building which is designated as
9 B8, you designated the Knin police station which is B10. That would be
10 up just towards the centre of the page. Likewise, you designated a fixed
11 the artillery position and if we're moving up to the red column here, the
12 fixed artillery position and that is in the lower left-hand corner next
13 to the green box which would be C3. As well as the supply depot that was
14 next to the rail yard which is D2.
15 Finally on these, you identified the railway station train yards,
16 et cetera, which is designated as E8. That would be an accurate
17 assessment of the targets that you mentioned in your statements to date;
18 is that right?
19 A. Yes, sir. Might I see so I can follow and make sure in my own
20 mind that I'm answering my questions to the best of my ability. Might I
21 be able to have a copy of my statement?
22 Q. Sure, this is a, if I may seek the assistance of the usher, Your
23 Honour, and just for the sake of clarity, if I can read this, this is
24 your 1 March 1996 statement, General. And I'm showing you page -- it
25 doesn't have a page here but it's -- the number on the top is 00527690.
1 A. Thank you. Thank you.
2 Q. You can check that, General, and cross-reference it with my
3 circles on the map to ensure that we have correctly put those in the
4 locations that you were thinking of when you gave this statement.
5 A. Thank you.
6 Q. Of this -- is it correct going through those particular
7 designations as to what you were contemplating?
8 A. Yes, sir, it is. The only reason why I asked for a little bit
9 more specificity is I can't recall if that's the exact location of C3,
10 the rebel Serb anti-aircraft facility, but yes.
11 Q. Okay, sir. Now, let us move to the next item and General, I will
12 tell you that this is series of items that we go through a question
13 about. It is not in your witness statement so just so you're not looking
14 through it. These are just some other issues.
15 Again, as we go through this going through the next slide, you'll
16 see the plus marks next to various designations and those are the items
17 that we're going to go through. I think we are -- yeah. Is that the
18 next one? Yeah, it is, okay. I apologise, I got ahead of myself. Yes,
19 it is.
20 Now, let us just go through. Now, A2 in the centre of this
21 slide. A2 has a circle around it. That was the barracks known as the
22 Senjak barracks for the ARSK, was it not?
23 A. Were those the facilities where the families of the officers
25 Q. It was a military barracks in -- run by the ARSK in, as you can
1 see, towards the centre of town. Are you familiar with that?
2 A. Yes, sir, but in that location, I believe that was -- I stand to
3 be corrected and I apologise if I'm wrong, I believe those were the
4 families residence of the ARSK officers.
5 Q. Now, let us move to A3. Now, that is down here you which is a
6 another ARSK facility that was next to you; is that right?
7 A. That is correct.
8 Q. And now up to A4, the high school, do you see that at the top?
9 A. I do.
10 Q. Now, there was an ARSK unit garrisoned at that high school,
11 wasn't it?
12 A. Sir, I spent five months living in Knin. I'm not aware of any
13 military activity taking place in that school and with the utmost
14 respect, I'd like to see such evidence before I either agree or disagree
15 with your contention.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Leslie, to judge upon the evidence which would
17 be presented would not -- we are just asking you whether you know.
18 Apparently, you do not know. But whether -- I can imagine in your
19 profession, you sometimes ask you to bring you the information and to
20 give a judgement on the matter but here, we are interested in what you
21 know and not, at this moment, in any judgement on the basis of evidence
22 presented to you.
23 THE WITNESS: Sir.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
25 THE WITNESS: No, I was not aware.
1 MR. KEHOE:
2 Q. And did you talk to Mr. Dreyer during the course of the day on
3 the 4th when he was going out to pick up UN personnel; do you recall?
4 A. I'm sorry, no, I don't recall. I'm sure I did, but I can't
5 recall any specifics.
6 Q. Did he tell you that the ARSK had a mortar in placement up by the
7 high school on the 4th?
8 A. I do not recall that conversation.
9 Q. If we go down to A5, the location for the ARSK special police.
10 If I may, before we go to that, sir, in the high school, you're familiar
11 with the concept of dual use, are you not, for a target?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And correct me if I am wrong, but when you look at a building or
14 target that would normally be -- can be civilian and can be military in
15 order to make a decision, on for instance this high school, you have to
16 know what it's used for at the time such as a mortar in placement?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Let's go down to A 5 which is the special police. Are you
19 familiar with that location as the location of the special police?
20 A. From what I can see on the map, there was a police office in that
22 Q. And the police in the former Yugoslavia often times had combat
23 functions as well, didn't they?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Let us go to the next page. I do believe I've covered everything
1 in that, which is the next one.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, in order to avoid whatever confusion
3 where I just said that we would like to know from the witness what he
4 remembers, what his memory tells him, of course this does not prevent you
5 from refreshing memory which is something different from giving evidence
6 and then asking for a judgement, but of course refreshment of memory is
7 of course admissible as it always is.
8 MR. KEHOE: Yes, sir.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
10 MR. KEHOE:
11 Q. General, this is, as you can see, the plus marks are down in the
12 B column, under command and control. B2 is known as the old hospital.
13 Do you recall that there was a part of the Ministry of Defence at that
15 A. No, I do not.
16 Q. B3 known as the senior's hotel. Do you know that was used as a
17 ARSK officers' accommodation?
18 A. No, I do not. I beg your pardon. I am aware that officers and
19 their families lived in a facility which approximates that of the circle
20 on the map so in part I knew it.
21 Q. And that would reflect B3?
22 A. Officers and their families, yes.
23 Q. You previously said that officers and their families were in A2?
24 A. Yes, there were quite a lot of accommodations that were used for
25 officers and their families.
1 Q. Okay. And B4, do you recall that was the residence of
2 President Martic?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Now, the B5 over to the right-hand side, did you recall that was
5 the republic of Serb -- the headquarters of the republic of Serb Krajina
6 State Security Service?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Now, that was also a depot or another rail yard there too, wasn't
10 A. There was a rail junction there.
11 Q. Okay. Now, B6, again, moving downtown, do you recall that that
12 was their communications centre?
13 A. No.
14 Q. And B7, their telegraph and post centre, right along the middle
15 of the road downtown?
16 A. To the best of my recollection, that was the location of the post
17 office, yes. So in part, yes.
18 Q. Now, the -- number 8, B8 which is part of the parliament complex,
19 that also included RSK television. Do you recall that?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And B9, if I may, B9 over to the right -- actually, just right of
22 centre, that would have been the power distribution centre, would it not?
23 If you recall.
24 A. No, I'm sorry, I don't recall that.
25 Q. General, that's fine.
1 A. No, sorry, I don't recall that.
2 Q. General, I think Chamber just wants you to say what you recall.
3 Now, we move to the next map which is designated ARSK
4 anti-aircraft unit.
5 General, I have attempted to put -- and we're going to talk about
6 the items that are on the red block to the right and you can see them
7 circled in bold starting with C1. The anti-aircraft artillery
8 headquarters; do you remember that, sir?
9 A. No.
10 Q. C2, another anti-artillery -- excuse me, anti-aircraft artillery
11 position; do you recall that?
12 A. I recall some anti-aircraft systems being in that rough area. I
13 will certainly accept the precision with which you've drawn it on the
14 map, yes.
15 Q. I believe we've discussed C3 towards the bottom and now C4.
16 A. I'm sorry, sir, I don't see C4.
17 Q. Actually it is, it should be down towards the bottom -- excuse
18 me, there it is. I knew I saw it last night. An anti-aircraft position
19 that was virtually behind your Sector South headquarters; right?
20 A. Absolutely and that was a very large anti-aircraft facility which
21 covered some ground, very complexed and lots of weapons systems in there.
22 Q. Now, if we can move to the next chart. The box that we will be
23 discussing is the pink-purplish box described RSK military industries and
24 depots. The D1 in the centre of the page, the Tvik factory, do you
25 recall that, sir?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. D3, the Kninjanka factory and depot, do you recall that?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And up in the bluff should be D4, and that is right along the
5 Krka river, if you may, do you see that large area that's circled to the
6 left. Do you recall that, sir?
7 A. I do.
8 Q. And there were a series of various military depots stretched
9 along that area that has been circled as D4; do you recall that?
10 A. I do.
11 Q. I believe we've covered that. Now, let us move to the next
12 chart: Transportation and movement infrastructure.
13 I think this is, frankly, General, this is going to take a little
14 patience to get through because the numbers are a little bit all over the
15 place. They are attempted to be sequentially on the box but if we take
16 our time going through this, I think we can get through it.
17 From the railway lines, we talk about E1 and that was a railroad
19 A. Sir, may I -- are you asking me if I remember these or are you
20 asking me if I'm aware that they were used by the military?
21 Q. I'm asking if you are aware of them.
22 A. I beg your pardon. Yes, I am aware of them.
23 Q. And that would have been a tunnel. Do you recall a tunnel in
24 that location?
25 A. To be honest, I never physically saw a tunnel, but we were aware
1 that there was a tunnel system which exited in that approximate region.
2 Q. E2, now of course -- let's just take this, if we go to E1, there
3 was a track in E3 and then a tunnel going down into E2; is that basically
4 your recollection?
5 A. I don't actually recall but I'm aware that there was a tunnel
6 system in that region.
7 Q. Staying with this, sir, there was track system -- if we look at
8 E4 just a little bit further, there were tracks, trail road tracks there
9 and yet further up in E5 as well?
10 A. Yes, to the best of my recollection, those were tracks.
11 Q. And likewise if we go to the bottom of the page, we see E6?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. More tracks. And E7 would have been, and that's next -- by E2
14 towards the centre of the page, there was a road and railway overpass
15 there, wasn't there? Do you recall that?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Now, E8 is the item that you discussed previously which is the
18 main railway station. And E9 -- excuse me, right next to E6 there was
19 a -- do you recall there being a railway maintenance area in that
21 A. No, I do not.
22 Q. Okay. And E10, do you recall there being a railway bridge at
23 that location?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And E11, likewise a railway bridge?
1 A. Well, yes. Yes, I do.
2 Q. Okay.
3 A. It was also used by non- -- it was used by things other than
4 trains but got it, yeah.
5 Q. Now, E12 was the ARSK helipad; do you recall them turning a
6 soccer field into a helipad?
7 A. No, I don't recall the ARSK turning the soccer field into a
8 helipad though I'm aware that helicopters would he occasionally land
9 either there or in what you have circled as E8.
10 Q. Okay. Moving into the E13 area, that was the main crossroad or
11 junction, the roundabout in the centre of Knin; do you remember that?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And that was the transit -- do you recall that as a transit road
14 in various directions going in and out of Knin?
15 A. I do.
16 Q. E14 --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, just for my understanding in the early
18 stages of your testimony, I think you referred -- I think two times to
19 roundabout or at least -- was it that location that you referred to at
20 that time? I would have to find your exact words, but I remember that
21 you did it twice.
22 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you, please proceed.
24 MR. KEHOE:
25 Q. E14, sir, that is the bridge, I guess, relatively close to the UN
1 barracks, there was, in fact, a bridge at that location?
2 A. Yes. Yes.
3 Q. And the last one that we have on this item is E15 and that was,
4 of course, another overpass. Do you recall that?
5 A. No, but I'm not disputing that there might well be an overpass
6 there. I understand.
7 Q. And again, General, this is just your recollection, I understand.
8 Just go to the next chart putting together the items that we've
9 looked at. Other than the items that we've said that you didn't recall,
10 would this basically correspond to the areas that you just pointed out in
11 these various charts that we discussed?
12 A. Yes.
13 MR. KEHOE: If I might have one moment, Your Honour.
14 [Defence counsel confer]
15 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, at this time, I have no further
16 questions of this witness on this score and I would like to move this
17 exhibit into evidence.
18 JUDGE ORIE: This series of pictures, and they are uploaded as a
19 series, I take it.
20 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Tieger, any objections?
22 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, I don't think so. I'd like an
23 opportunity to look at the captions if that's possible but in principle,
24 no, but I just haven't had a chance to study them in any detail.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So therefore, Mr. Tieger I take it that you
1 can do that before Monday.
2 MR. TIEGER: Oh, of course, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 Even if later today you could verify whether this overall picture
5 reflects because that's apparently your concern what we saw on the
6 earlier ones to verify whether this is an accurate total of what we've
7 seen before, if you could give us that today then we could immediately
8 deal with this exhibit.
9 Mr. Registrar, it would be marked for identification for the time
11 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D131 marked for identification, Your
13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very, Mr. Registrar.
14 Mr. Tieger, would you have any questions in addition to ...
15 MR. TIEGER: I would, Your Honour. Thank you.
16 Further Re-examination by Mr. Tieger:
17 Q. General Leslie, I'd like to craft my follow-up questions in a
18 manner which doesn't necessarily take us through each of the documents
19 that you just reviewed although we may be returning to those.
20 First of all, let me ask you, looking at the last document that
21 we saw, the last page of the exhibit. Did you observe corrected fire on
22 August 4th or August 5th that was located in areas not covered in -- or
23 not blocked out in red?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And can you point out where those would be?
1 A. May I have the centre block expanded? Sir, I'm not quite sure of
2 the appropriateness of my question, but when you say within the blocks in
3 red, for example, the block that covers the train yard, the train track
4 itself is about two metres wide. This block of ground is about 6 to 700
5 metres wide. Do I include targets inside that block or not?
6 Q. Well, you're correct that the manner in which I asked the
7 question would have precluded that but I appreciate the clarification and
8 I'm sure the Court does as well. So if --
9 JUDGE ORIE: You're not bound by the exact way in which Mr. Kehoe
10 shaped the area. I mean if you'd say, I consider the railway facilities
11 to be not exactly the shape that was given on this map, then you're free
12 to explain that and to include any targeting in your answer which, in
13 your view, would not be covered by the description you gave earlier.
14 THE WITNESS: Thank you, sir. Because most of the targets, of
15 course, are pinpoint, and these blocks of ground are red are not. So may
16 have this centre block expanded even more, please. Okay.
17 Might I suggest the colour of my instrument?
18 JUDGE ORIE: These colours were -- has meaning, blue is any
19 marking made on request of the Defence and I take it that you have now a
20 different colour in your -- if it's --
21 MR. TIEGER: If there's any trouble viewing it, I'm sure the
22 Court will -- we can fix that in some manner but as the Judge mentioned,
23 there is he's a protocol here for the colours used.
24 MR. KEHOE: Might I suggest we just move back to P62 which is the
25 map and that might be easier still.
1 MR. TIEGER: I think for purposes of this question, this is
2 probably more ...
3 MR. KEHOE: Whatever.
4 [Trial Chamber and the usher confer]
5 JUDGE ORIE: A bit against the protocol, the usher has changed
6 the colours slightly so as not to have it exactly the same red as we find
7 it on this map.
8 If we can't see it, we'll find another way of resolving this
10 THE WITNESS: Sir, these are indicative of areas. My memory is
11 not sufficiently robust to be able to give you a precise location of
12 where I saw what I believed to be adjusted fire.
13 Sir, that to the best of my recollection, they are the general
14 blocks where I saw what I believed to be adjusted fire which do not
15 necessarily correspond with the areas that were outlined by Defence
16 counsel. A word of explanation on the estimated, the visibility -- I'm
17 sorry, I'll stop there.
18 MR. TIEGER:
19 Q. Just to clarify, when you say adjusted fire or corrected fire,
20 does that mean corrected fire into the residential neighbourhood in
21 contrast to the process of correcting fire --
22 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
24 MR. KEHOE: I object to the leading. If they're asking a
25 particular question then obviously --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Of course the question could be: If it was adjusted
2 was it adjusted in the direction of what is depicted here as a potential
3 military target or was it not in that direction. That's -- I take it
4 that's more neutrally formulated. But I think it's clear what Mr. Tieger
5 and what the Chamber would like to know whether the adjustment could be
6 explained by you on the basis of your experience as moving towards any of
7 the red dots indicated here or any of the red areas or whether you could
8 not observe that it was done in that direction.
9 THE WITNESS: Sir, there were some instances when the fire that I
10 saw, which I believe to be adjusting or in the adjustment process was not
11 fire which would logically indicate that the fire was being shifted
12 towards those areas indicated by Defence.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I have still one puzzle. You added some
14 something in writing on the top and your handwriting appears to be as bad
15 as mine. Could you explain to me what it is.
16 THE WITNESS: Sir, "estimated" and the reason why I cannot be
17 more precise is there were two main vantage points from Sector South
18 headquarters, one of which was the balcony opposite my office and that of
19 my commander's office. The second is from the region of the helipad
20 which has got a greater elevation and the roof line that you can see from
21 both those locations obviously differed according to altitude.
22 From the helipad region, you could see the explosions breaking
23 the roof line in this region and a ball of greasy grey smoke, a plume of
24 debris would break the roof line, but it is difficult to be precise as to
25 where the round landed with any degree of certainty within a couple of
1 hundred metres. So I don't want to mislead the Court in trying to
2 portray that I know more information than I do.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
4 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, if I may, in conjunction with that
5 comment, I don't know it came across in the transcript, but the General
6 put a square -- added a square to that area as he was discussing, if I am
7 going to be accurate.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, he added the square to that.
9 One very technical question, Mr. Registrar, does the upper part
10 where some markings are, will that be included in the exhibit as it will
11 be finally stored? Yes. So it's the whole of the picture. Even if it
12 goes beyond the -- what seems to be an aerial photograph.
13 Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
14 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
15 Q. General, let me ask this question in order to determine the
16 extent to which we need to go through individual identified locations
17 that were depicted on the exhibit shown to you.
18 First of all, there were a number of locations that you were
19 shown about which you indicated you were unfamiliar. With respect to
20 those locations with which you were familiar, did all of those, to the
21 best of your recollection, were all of those used by the military
22 immediately prior to August 4th and did they in furtherance of the RSK
23 military effort and if not, perhaps we should go through those and see
24 which of them you were aware were being used by the military and if so in
25 what manner.
1 A. Sir, I'm not aware or I -- I'm not aware of the usage of the
2 facilities outlined by Defence vis-a-vis the contention that they were
3 used for military purposes.
4 MR. TIEGER: And Your Honour I may return to that after some
5 additional questions and I also wanted the Court to be aware of that
6 because the Court may wish to return, but I'm going to continue first and
7 then perhaps return to the individual sites.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps the previous answer is not entirely clear to
10 You said, "I'm not aware of the usage of the facilities outlined
11 by Defence vis-a-vis the contention that they were used for military
13 Now, we have a variety of facilities or -- for example, a railway
14 complex, if you've got a train even at a distance of 25 kilometres from
15 there, of course there is some potential of that facility to be used for
16 military purposes. Of course, if you're talking about barracks, well,
17 they are used or they are not used or they are used in a certain way as
18 you hinted at earlier, perhaps for accommodating staff and/or their
19 families. So your answer is not entirely clear. Where you say that
20 there was a, apparently, artillery battery, then when you described that,
21 it gave me at least the impression that it was an active battery so
22 therefore, that would be something that would be active to say so. Could
23 you try to give us a bit of a better impression than you gave in your
24 previous answer on what you actually are not, perhaps, for everything in
25 detail because you don't have to go to every part of the railway track
1 and this Chamber understands that if you demolish a railway track here,
2 that there might not be a great military need to demolish it at a
3 distance of 100 metres again unless there is any side track or something
4 like that.
5 So could you give us, perhaps without going into detail for all
6 of that, perhaps using categories saying -- to tell us what -- what your
7 awareness was as active military use of those facilities.
8 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. The -- what I call the headquarters
9 north Dalmatian corps which, if you could -- would you like me to
10 pinpoint these sites, sir?
11 JUDGE ORIE: I'm just wondering how much we get on this picture
12 if we go on. Perhaps if we would go back. If we store this one and have
13 another one to mark what you are telling us now.
14 Mr. Registrar, this one would then be ...
15 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will become Exhibit P85 marked
16 for identification.
17 JUDGE ORIE: P85. Is there any objection against P85?
18 MR. KEHOE: No, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then P85 is admitted into evidence. And then let's
20 then go back to the document as it was. And could you please -- we can't
21 change zooming in and zooming out anymore once you started marking. Is
22 this the picture you would like to have or would you like to have it
23 wider or more narrow.
24 THE WITNESS: Sir, if I might suggest if we go back to what
25 Defence put on the screen vis-a-vis the seven categories.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Categories.
2 THE WITNESS: Which I outlined in my statement of the 1st of
4 JUDGE ORIE: Then that would be the last -- no not necessarily
5 the last --
6 MR. KEHOE: It's the second.
7 JUDGE ORIE: The second --
8 MR. KEHOE: Slide.
9 JUDGE ORIE: The second slide in the series.
10 MR. KEHOE: That, Your Honours, for the sake of clarity is the
11 combination General of both the targets that you mentioned in the 12
12 April [sic] 1995 statement and the targets that are before you in the
13 witness statement.
14 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Here we have the categories. If you could
16 perhaps deal with them by category.
17 MR. KEHOE: Just one correction, Judge, I noted in my comment
18 that I said 12 April 1995, that's 12 August 1995. My apologies, General.
19 JUDGE ORIE: So we first then concentrate on troop bases and
21 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. With the addition of the special police
22 headquarters in this region here, those are the only facilities of which
23 I'm aware being used on or about the period immediately prior to the 4th
24 of August for military purposes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. A few slides further down, we get a more
1 complete picture of all the facilities in the different categories.
2 Could we perhaps move on to, I think, three or four slides further.
3 MR. KEHOE: If I may assist the Court, Judge.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MR. KEHOE: Are you looking at the -- we followed them in this
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but of course we're now looking back at the
8 totality. So if we would have the one with most of the details so that
9 we can -- if we're talking about two bases and barracks that we have all
10 the troops bases and barracks mentioned so that we know what we are
11 talking about.
12 MR. KEHOE: I believe that would be -- all the bases and
13 barracks, I believe, is in --
14 JUDGE ORIE: No, but for all of the categories.
15 MR. KEHOE: That would be the sheet that I think we had just
16 talked about. If we can just go through them and glance at them quickly
17 and, Your Honour, I can pick out the ones that you want.
18 JUDGE ORIE: It was the -- I think the semi last one because the
19 last one didn't give any text anymore.
20 MR. KEHOE: Yes. It is the one that's on the transport
21 infrastructure, it should be page 7.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Page 7, Mr. Registrar.
23 MR. KEHOE: It notes at the top transport and movement
24 infrastructure. I believe that's the one.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's the one that gives -- although it does
1 not highlight everything, but mainly the transport infrastructure, it
2 gives at least a listing of all the --
3 MR. KEHOE: It does highlight them, Your Honour. However, I --
4 we broke them into categories simply so we could designate them and
5 highlight them and it would be easier for points of reference. That
6 being said, I do believe that all of these circles in all of these charts
7 are set forth in this diagram. However, the ones that were not being
8 discussed under transport and infrastructure just have a lighter colour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes that's the difference between lighting and
10 highlighting. Please proceed.
11 Mr. Leslie, could you on the basis of these categories and having
12 now available to yourself also the detailed information further tell us
13 what you know about these facilities being active for military purposes.
14 THE WITNESS: Sir, A11 [sic], which was the headquarters of the
15 north Dalmatian corps was a barracks which obviously acted as the node
16 for the rebel Serb fighting organisation that was located in this part of
17 the Krajina.
18 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, I don't mean to interrupt, I believe the
19 General is talking about A1.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I had some difficulties in --
21 THE WITNESS: Yes, A1.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 THE WITNESS: In terms of the air Defence battery C4, that was a
24 large complex well fortified air defence command and control centre with
25 active radars and missiles occupied by several hundred Serbian
1 soldiers -- sorry, ARSK soldiers and its use was exclusive military.
2 The train yards which are indicated as a very large circle E8, of
3 course that is an area -- a large area, very large area indicated on the
4 map and of course train yards, train tracks and train yards themselves
5 are relatively pin point, so at what point does one wish to attack and
6 disrupt the train yards, it would not cover such area but as you
7 mentioned, sir, it does have potential to use.
8 The ministry of Defence is the ministry of defence complex which
9 is in the area of B1. That also includes what I call the ARSK
10 headquarters which is offset from the road and tucked in behind the
11 Ministry of Defence. That was in use as a command and control node as
12 offices and as -- well, the traditional functions of a nation's Ministry
13 of Defence.
14 The government house to which Defence referred, that was in use
15 by the leaders of the Krajina. The supply depot, which is in the area of
16 D2 and there was some military activity in that region. I never actually
17 got inside the gate, so I can't tell you what sort of activity but there
18 were soldiers in and around that facility, certainly on the last time I
19 saw which is roughly the 2nd or the 3rd.
20 The police headquarters which is at B10 was the centre for the
21 Knin localised police force which as Defence quite properly pointed out
22 in my opinion the police forces had a quasi role, both military and
23 civil. I also agree with Defence in that A5, the special police
24 headquarters was located in that region, if memory serves, and they
25 likewise had a quasi military role. And though it's not in Knin so not
1 necessarily part of my original testimony, the air defence facilities at
2 C1, C2 -- I mean we were aware there was something up there and I'm not
3 certainly not quibbling about the precise indication on the map.
4 As well, the bunker facilities in the region of D4, such bunker
5 facilities existed though, of course, they're outside the municipal
6 bounds or the built-up area of Knin.
7 Those are, to the best of my recollection, sir, the military
8 facilities of which I'm aware.
9 JUDGE ORIE: For example, the Tvik factory D1, did you have any
10 awareness of active military use of those -- of that facility?
11 THE WITNESS: Sir, I -- no, I do not. I cannot say what they
12 were used for. I never got inside, even though I would at times walk
13 right by that facility, I never got inside the compound. I hadn't -- it
14 was -- there were in that region, I would see occasionally on my walks to
15 work Serb males wearing fatigues, usually the bottom half of the fatigues
16 with a sort of a heavier jackets on top who would be occasionally coming
17 and going into that facility, but I never saw military equipments inside
18 there, either being delivered or exiting. That's the extent of my
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Mr. Tieger.
21 MR. TIEGER:
22 Q. General, with respect to the locations you've indicated had --
23 were either being used in some manner by the military or had some
24 potential military value, did you have an opportunity to see either
25 before you left Knin to take up your position in Zagreb or after you took
1 up your position in Zagreb the damage done to those facilities during the
2 course of the shelling on August 4th and August 5th?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And were you able to observe whether or not the damage to those
5 facilities was consistent with a -- with the fire intended to destroy or
6 neutralise each of those targets. That is, was it you see fire
7 consistent with corrected fire on to those targets.
8 A. I'm sorry, could you rephrase the question?
9 Q. Sure. You indicated that you had an chance to see what kind of
10 damage was done to those facilities?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Did that indicate to you based on your experience and back ground
13 whether or not those particular targets had been the subject of an effort
14 concerted effort to destroy or neutralise them?
15 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, Your Honour.
16 THE WITNESS: Some of them, yes.
17 MR. KEHOE: I think we're in an area of what did he see and I
18 just object to that score and ask if we stay in this particular location
19 as to what he observed at these targets when he had the opportunity to go
21 JUDGE ORIE: Of course I'm aware that asking for consistency in a
22 certain context is always a mixed issue, some facts, some assessment.
23 Let me ask you the following: When you looked at the damage, did it ever
24 come to your mind, did you say, on the basis of the damage I see, it
25 comes to my mind that this facility was targeted, on the basis of your
2 THE WITNESS: Sir, I would say the air defence battery located at
3 C4 was deliberately targeted and well and truly covered by Croatian army
4 indirect fire assets. It was effectively neutralised. And so there was
5 deliberate attempts to adjust the fire on to that battery, which were
6 successful and that put an end to that facility.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But you will not be surprised that of course
8 what interests us most is those facilities which are near to residential
9 areas, whether, there, on the basis of your observation, it ever came to
10 your mind, did you say, Well, the damage is the same for all of the town
11 or here, you see a type of damage which brought into your mind that this
12 was specifically targeted, at least on the basis of the damage it looked
13 as if it was specifically targeted.
14 THE WITNESS: Sir, throughout the shelling, we could not figure
15 out, as military professionals, what the Croatian army were shooting at.
16 We understood them shooting at the battery. We did not understand the
17 targeting criteria they were using to distribute fire across the rest of
18 the town, and I saw very little evidence of the military targets that I
19 outlined with the exception of the air defence battery actually being hit
20 in significant manner, neutralised or destroyed. So it was confusing and
21 puzzling to us what the Croatians were actually shooting at.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 Mr. Tieger.
24 MR. TIEGER:
25 Q. I'm going to ask a question that was the subject of some
1 discussion yesterday that I think the -- we couldn't reach accord on with
2 the Defence so they know in advance.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 MR. KEHOE: I mean is it dealing with this targeting issue
5 because I don't know if we had any other discussions to have an accord
6 on. I think the accord that was going to come as to who was going to
7 begin the questioning this morning and we elected to --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Then if it doesn't ring a bell to you then we'll see
9 whether that is still the case after Mr. Tieger has put his question to
10 the witness.
11 Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
12 MR. TIEGER: The discussion was with Mr. Misetic. I believe he
13 knows what I'm referring to.
14 Q. General Leslie, you've had an opportunity to see some of the --
15 well, to see the alleged military targets identified on the exhibit, some
16 of which you indicated in an earlier response to the Court were pinpoint
17 and some of which looked broader. And I want to ask you a question that
18 I tried to ask the other day. And that is whether the indirect weapons
19 systems, the rockets and howitzers were able to distinguish between the
20 pinpoint targets and the civilian structures around them.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Before you answer that question, Mr. Kehoe.
22 MR. KEHOE: If I may, Judge, this is what we objected to before
23 with regard to this weapons system and if we go back through this, I
24 would ask the Court for recross on this score.
25 On the first point this was part of the direct examination where
1 the witness offered a particular opinion but if we're going to go into
2 area targeting then I would ask to open up a recross and we'll get into
3 an actual area targeting history and the geometry of it. My
4 understanding for this morning's issue was an identification of the Court
5 as to what possible targets were in and around the Knin area.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, for your question to have a proper
7 factual basis, at least we would have to know what the knowledge of this
8 witness is exactly about the weapons that were available, the weapons
9 that were used and what weapons used -- what weapons caused what kind of
11 Another matter, of course, is what is the position of those
12 weapons, the position of those weapons isn't that true that that is
13 usually described in all kinds of documentary -- a lot of testing has
14 been done. Is there any need at this moment to go into any further
15 detail. We know distances.
16 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, the reason -- I think we addressed a
17 number of if not all of the issues the Court just raised earlier in the
18 witness 's testimony. I had asked this very question of the witness.
19 The Court indicated, as I recall, that it was in the context, at that
20 time, to theoretical or abstract because there might be, for example,
21 structures, military targets that were of great size. It wasn't linked
22 to the particular targets or particular locations and I deferred for that
24 Now that the witness has been presented with the alleged military
25 targets in the context of ...
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let me try to understand what I'd like to know
2 and ask Mr. Leslie.
3 Mr. Leslie, in view of the knowledge you have, and please explain
4 what your knowledge was of the weaponry used, is it your experience or
5 what would you find in your domestic instructions as to whether those
6 weapons would have such a position that they could be used for the
7 targets we find on this map -- the facilities that we find on this map.
9 THE WITNESS: Sir, as a soldier, there are two broad categories
10 of targets when it comes to size. One is pinpoint, and one is an area.
11 Pinpoint can be just as the name implies, relatively small, tens,
12 thirties in metres an area can be anywhere from 200 to 400 metres or even
13 larger. The area targets of A1, C4, and E8 were just that. Most other
14 targets were pinpoint.
15 The technology available to the Croatian army at that time of
16 which I have absolute confidence and certainty in my statement was not
17 capable of engaging pinpointing targets without a significant risk of
18 collateral damage and they would be extraordinarily fortunate to achieve
19 a first round hit at any range from any angle, at any elevation.
20 JUDGE ORIE: What does your military handbook tell you if, as
21 alternatives, for using the type of weaponry that apparently was used?
22 THE WITNESS: Sir, if you do not have a certain degree of
23 precision and a certain guarantee, though there are no absolutes in war,
24 that you can engage a military facility or a facility which is being used
25 for military purposes in an area which is full of civilian structures and
1 people, then you do not engage it using area or indiscriminate weapons
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer.
4 Mr. Tieger, any further questions.
5 MR. TIEGER: No, Your Honour. Thank you.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
7 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
8 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Kehoe:
9 Q. With regard to the weapons systems that you're talking about, in
10 order to give an assessment of those weapons systems, General, you need
11 to know the range of that weapon; correct?
12 A. No, sir.
13 Q. Well, would you say that it is -- indirect fire weapons system is
14 more accurate at 1.000 metres than -- excuse me, at say 5 kilometres as
15 opposed to 10?
16 A. That is not always the case, sir.
17 Q. Well, can it be the case?
18 A. It can.
19 Q. And so in order to assess whether or not something has been
20 firing accurately, you would have to know the range, wouldn't you?
21 A. No.
22 Q. No?
23 A. No.
24 Q. And in order to know the margin of error of an indirect fire
25 system, you have to know what was the actual weapon, don't you?
1 A. You do.
2 Q. And you don't know what weapons were fired on individual
3 locations, do you?
4 A. No, I do not.
5 Q. So if we go through this, sir, if I may. As we go through and we
6 enter into a particular area, is it your testimony that under no
7 circumstances is an area in and around Knin an area that can be hit with
8 indirect fire?
9 A. No, it is not.
10 MR. KEHOE: Okay. Let me go back to -- it's 1D170398.
11 JUDGE ORIE: You say you go back.
12 MR. KEHOE: I'm going to put another document on.
13 Q. Now, General, I put this document and I have reimposed the red
14 circles that we talked about previously as well as the green areas being
15 unpopulated areas.
16 If we should go to the next chart.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Should we give the witness at least a moment to look
18 at it because it's not very clear to me and I don't know whether he could
19 confirm or contest the -- what are populated and what are not populated
20 areas on the whole of this map.
21 THE WITNESS: Sir, there are some areas which are circled in red
22 which I believe had displaced persons in them in the period immediately
23 prior to the 4th of August. Most of the areas that you've circled in
24 green, though, were not heavily populated by civil personnel.
25 MR. KEHOE: If we can move to the next chart. Now, we're just
1 focussing on this particular location being in the general downtown area.
2 Q. Have you got that located, sir?
3 A. Yes, I see the yellow circle.
4 Q. If we can go to the next chart.
5 Now, I've given the dimensions of this particular locale and if
6 we can blow that up. I believe during the course of your testimony
7 previously, you gave us a margin of error on one location of 600 metres
8 by 420 metres, didn't you?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. I'm sorry --
11 A. I'm sorry.
12 Q. I may have those numbers incorrect. Sir, look at this particular
13 location. In this particular location, we have a -- from north to
14 south -- excuse me, from the top to the bottom, 360 metres and at one
15 point across, it is 1180 metres. Now, that is an area that includes
16 multiple circles that we talked about this morning, isn't it.
17 A. You referred to those circles, yes.
18 Q. And in those circles, sir, that is an area where an indirect fire
19 system can be used; isn't that right?
20 A. No.
21 Q. No.
22 A. Not in every location. Not in my opinion in every location,
23 because there were civilian structures and facilities within the probable
24 error of range no matter what the direction of fire was from no matter
25 what type of Croatian artillery system was employed.
1 Q. So let me just take you off on that with an issue that Judge Orie
2 just asked you with regard to alternatives.
3 Now, number one, sir, you know that the -- a military is or
4 combatant is prohibited from putting military targets in civilian areas;
5 isn't that right?
6 A. No, I don't believe it is.
7 Q. So is it your testimony, General, that you do not believe that it
8 is prohibited for a combatant to put a military facility in a civilian
10 A. Sir, my intent -- my reply is not meant to sound disrespectful or
11 flippant, but Canada's ministry of national defence is located in
12 downtown Ottawa, that is not an illegal act.
13 Q. Well, sir, does putting a military facility in a civilian area
14 make that target immune from attack?
15 A. Not -- no, it does not.
16 Q. And you are aware that during NATO strikes in Kosovo, that
17 significant collateral damage took place in the bombing campaign because
18 the Serbs put military facilities in civilian areas; isn't that right?
19 A. I take your contention for it, I was not personally involved in
20 the NATO air strikes in Kosovo, I wasn't on the ground, so yes, I -- I
21 take your point.
22 Q. And when does collateral damage as a result of the Serbs putting
23 those locations in military facilities in civilian locations, when the
24 bombing of those locations caused collateral damage to civilian
25 structures and personnel, there was no NATO person ever charged with any
1 type of indiscriminate attack --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, whether someone is charged or not is an
3 interesting issue but not something to be put to the witness with a clear
4 suggestion that if you are not charged, that you didn't commit a crime
5 which I take it from your professional experience you would not confirm
7 MR. KEHOE: I will move on, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The average student that's 16 years of age in
9 the Netherlands has committed 13.7 crimes, not all of them very serious,
10 and was not charged for that. Please proceed.
11 MR. KEHOE: That's an amazing statistic.
12 JUDGE ORIE: It's 30 years old, it might have improved or
13 degenerated since then.
14 Yes, please proceed.
15 MR. KEHOE:
16 Q. But when attacks takes place on military targets placed in
17 civilian areas, the NATO experience is that collateral damage takes
18 place, isn't it.
19 A. Not always. Rarely.
20 Q. Well if in fact there is a mistake or collateral damage, that
21 does not thereby mean that the actual firing on that location was
22 improper, does it?
23 A. It may.
24 Q. Does it necessarily?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. If there's a mistake involved or there is a collateral damage on
2 firing on a military target, are you saying that per se, there is fault
4 A. There are two types of mistakes in such categories. The first is
5 the choice of weapons system which, if it has an inherent indiscriminate
6 attributes which can't be directed precisely to a pinpoint target then it
7 is a mistake of the point of origin of fire. The second mistake is in
8 the target analysis in terms of attributing certain military or civilian
9 attributes to specific structures.
10 Q. I'm sorry go ahead?
11 A. The third type of mistake which can occur is a natural human
12 error either in the point of origin of the fire or from the observer who
13 is correcting the target grid procedure. Those are the three broad
14 categories of mistake in all professional armies.
15 Q. Now, in looking at these -- I'm sorry. When looking at these
16 particular targets and when NATO looks at a particular target, they look
17 at whether or not it is not of -- excuse me, let me rephrase that. NATO
18 makes the determination of this target not whether or not it is of
19 military use but one of it could be of military use, isn't it?
20 A. Not always.
21 THE INTERPRETER: Please make pauses, thank you.
22 MR. KEHOE:
23 Q. They do on occasion, don't they?
24 A. The potential military use of targets is part of any decision
25 cycle within most NATO nations.
1 Q. And as part of that particular decision cycle, NATO has made a
2 decision that often times strategic targets are items that should be
3 targeted even though they are not immediately involved in the military
4 usage; isn't that right?
5 A. I can't think of one at this time.
6 Q. Well, let's go back to the attack on Serbia. How about --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, let's -- I let you go for a while and I
8 do not mind if you think it's of great importance to analyse what
9 happened in attacks by other armed forces elsewhere in the world, but I'd
10 very much like to focus on this case.
11 One of the problems is that if you're talking about attacks by
12 the armed forces of country X against a city in country Y, that would
13 first have to receive all the information relevant for that and then we
14 could only further make sensible use of this information, but not in
15 general terms. Some of the questions, of course, whether if collateral
16 damage occurs, whether that's always wrong, I think that we have
17 sufficient case law already alone in this Tribunal that collateral damage
18 should be avoided by the weaponry you choose, et cetera, et cetera, but
19 these kind of sweeping statements, and that's of course the problems with
20 your questions at this moment is that they are of a very nature, whereas
21 usually decisions to be taken depend on five, six, seven, ten, fifteen
22 relevant aspects of the situation we're dealing with.
23 Therefore, again, the monocausal sweeping statement approach does
24 not always assist the Chamber.
25 MR. KEHOE: I do understand that, Judge. I was responding to the
1 rather sweeping statements presented by the Office of the Prosecutor by
2 not asking concerning particular targets being hit in these areas
3 designated by the General.
4 JUDGE ORIE: They at least stayed within the Krajina.
5 MR. KEHOE: Well, sir --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
7 MR. KEHOE:
8 Q. General, let me just go back to this and I will move on off the
9 strategic targets issue. It is not your position, is it, that by the RSK
10 putting, for instance, their military headquarters in a civilian area,
11 you're not saying that that makes the facility immune from shelling, does
13 A. It would not make it immune from shelling if the shelling system
14 had a certain degree of guarantee as to precision to minimise collateral
15 damage, otherwise, sir, if there is a high-risk of significant collateral
16 damage or of not hitting the target with the first couple of rounds, yes,
17 it has -- enjoys a certain degree of immunity considering the risk of
18 collateral damage.
19 Q. So your position with regard to and moving back into the Krajina,
20 your position with regard to the RSK headquarters and place yourself in
21 August 4, 1995 is your position by putting the RSK headquarters in a
22 civilian area it rendered it immune from shelling; is that right?
23 A. Sir, you -- when you -- I'm sorry, I just need a bit more
24 precision. When you say shelling, are you talking about the shelling
25 systems of the time or are you talking about the shelling systems of
2 Q. I'm --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, in order to avoid whatever confusion
4 earlier, page 35 line 4, your question was about immunity from attack.
5 We now have a new series of questions which talks about immunity from
6 shelling and, I think, Mr. Leslie rightfully seeks to know exactly what
7 your question is about. That is where he, Mr. Leslie, earlier referred
8 to the technological aspects.
9 We should be very precise on what you are asking him. Immunity,
10 it appears from the answers, that it depends.
11 MR. KEHOE: And Judge I -- in looking at the question and my
12 apologies, General. My question was not precise enough in the sense
13 that --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Then please put it.
15 MR. KEHOE:
16 Q. In the sense that, General, I was talking about the weapons
17 systems in 1995, I'm not talking about sophisticated weaponry that may be
18 available in 2008, so I stand corrected and I apologise.
19 So let me go back and re-ask that question.
20 So is it your position giving the weapons systems that were
21 available in August of 1995, did the placing by the RSK of their Ministry
22 of Defence in a civil -- an area populated by civilians, did that
23 immunise that facility from being shelled?
24 A. It depends.
25 Q. Sir, you -- and let me go back to one of your documents and I
1 forget what the P document was.
2 Mr. Monkhouse, it was the one with the square. Yes, the one that
3 he drew. I believe it's P85, I have been told by Ms. Katalinic.
4 A. Sir, would you like me to try to expand on my answer.
5 Q. Certainly.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
7 THE WITNESS: There are a variety of factors which any commander
8 must go through before deciding which weapons systems must be used to
9 engage what type of target. So the decision of the RSK to have their
10 Ministry of Defence where it was surrounded by civilian structures has
11 not rendered it immune. Immune is a very strong term, it's an absolute,
12 and I can think of circumstances wherein it would be more than, it would
13 be quite legitimate to engage the RSK Ministry of Defence with imprecise
14 indirect fire systems and that only -- that circumstance if there were no
15 civilians in the potential beaten zone of the weapons that were being
16 used to engage that target. So hopefully that clarifies my answer.
17 MR. KEHOE:
18 Q. So General, to -- taking this to its logical conclusion, in 1995,
19 the best way to secure your military facilities and render them virtually
20 immune from the shelling systems available to the HV at the time was to
21 place them in civilian areas; right?
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger.
23 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Your Honour. I mean the witness has been asked
24 this question twice. I didn't -- although I had some concerns about the
25 use of the term "immune" which has connotations that may not be precisely
1 relevant to the inquiry here, I didn't object. But now the witness has
2 already answered this question twice, explained it, and now this is --
3 we're moving into the area of argument.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Apart from that, Mr. Kehoe, you're asking for
5 logical conclusions from what we heard.
6 MR. KEHOE: Once again, Judge --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please rely on abilities to draw logical
8 conclusions on what we heard.
9 MR. KEHOE: I fall back on as Mr. Cayley always does, the fault
10 of our upbringing so I apologise.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Whether Mr. Cayley is guilty or not is still
12 to be seen.
13 MR. KEHOE: He's always guilty, Judge.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
15 MR. KEHOE:
16 Q. Mr. Leslie, you -- when you drew this square in, I believe, it's
17 P85, you were in the compound, weren't you?
18 A. Yes, I was. And sir, this square is not meant to be totally
19 restrictive. I mean there were other regions but it -- I'd have to think
20 about it deeply to give you more precise locations.
21 Q. I understand --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe. I don't know whether we are talking
23 about the same square, but it's my recollection that Mr. Leslie was in
24 this courtroom when he drew this square. Is that ...
25 MR. KEHOE: Once again it's imprecision when he observed the
1 locations of the impact in this square.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If that's what you asked him if that's what
3 Mr. Leslie understood your question to be, then we can move on.
4 MR. KEHOE:
5 Q. General I think you understood what I was talking about as
6 imprecise as my question was. You were drawing a square and you were
7 commenting on impacts in a particular area while you were observing them
8 from the UN compound; right?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And sir as you look at this, you have no idea what -- where these
11 shells actually landed, do you?
12 A. I have an idea in terms of we could see the dust cloud and the
13 ball breaking the roofline.
14 JUDGE ORIE: I'm stopping you Mr. Leslie.
15 Mr. Kehoe, has this not been talked about by the witness, the
16 roof line, et cetera, et cetera, several times and what he has seen from
17 the helicopter position, what he saw from the balcony. Unless there's
18 anything new what you specifically want to know about, that's my
19 recollection of what the witness told us two times at least.
20 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, I would finish just covering that he had
21 no why idea the point of impact and no idea of the point of origin and
22 the only thing he saw was the smoke.
23 Your Honour, it needs no further clarification on that. I will
24 simply tender P57 into evidence, and I will complete my examination.
25 Excuse me, did I tender it? Actually, it's not P57 it's 1D170398 the
1 chart that we talked about before going to 1D170400.
2 JUDGE ORIE: To be quite honest, I'm lost whether this was --
3 MR. KEHOE: It's the one that we were talking about previously
4 with the geometric lines going across that I had not tendered.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that one I think. Mr. Tieger any objection?
6 MR. TIEGER: Only that I -- well, if I could reserve that, Your
7 Honour, I recall there was some suggestion that it was -- may have been
8 grounded on incorrect information and in terms of specificity, again in
9 principle, no objection but I do want to --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we'd like to hear from you not later than by
12 Mr. Registrar, that would be ...
13 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D132 marked for identification, Your
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
16 Mr. Tieger, we have no fixed rules for examination of witnesses
17 on specific request of the Chamber. As I said before, usually the
18 Chamber would put questions to the witness itself. We might have a few
19 questions even for you after the break so therefore, we will have a break
20 for 25 minutes. We will resume at 11.00 and then we hope that we'll be
21 able to release you soon after that.
22 --- Recess taken at 10.35 a.m.
23 --- On resuming at 11.05 a.m.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Leslie, Judge Kinis would have a few questions
25 for you.
1 Questioned by the Court:
2 JUDGE KINIS: Mr. Leslie, could you please clarify the hierarchy
3 of the relationship between organisations which are operated based on
4 your mandate at that time in Knin?
5 A. Sir, the terms of the United Nations, United Nations protection
6 force headquarters in Zagreb was the superior headquarters to UNCRO, also
7 located in Zagreb which was the superior headquarters to United Nations
8 Sector South. In Sector South, there was detachments of UN civil
9 servants, United Nations military observers and United Nations civilian
11 Were you asking me about the United Nations structure, sir, or
12 the local Serb? I may have misunderstood?
13 JUDGE KINIS: Local -- in Knin directly.
14 A. I beg your pardon, sir. You had the Republika Srpska.
15 Subordinate to that, you had the ARSK which was the fighting arm of the
16 Republika Srpska. You also had special police which were much more
17 paramilitary than the normal police. You had the normal police who were
18 themselves paramilitary in the sense that they did military activities
19 and functions to a limited extent. There were elements of the Bosnian
20 Serb army that I believe were active in some measure in and amongst the
21 ARSK elements.
22 Sir, does that answer your question?
23 JUDGE KINIS: Not directly. Maybe I'm not correctly asking you
24 this question.
25 My question was there were UNMO, CIVPOL and HRAT and this chain
1 of hierarchy, how was, in your organisation directly and were their
2 headquarters were located at that time?
3 A. Within Sector South we had the normal Sector South troops there
4 was also an UNMO detachment which was supporting General Forand but their
5 chain of command went from the Sector South detachment directly to the
6 UNMO headquarters which was in Zagreb. There were detachments of UNMOs
7 which were down in the same terrain allocations of the line battalions in
8 the zone of separation, and they worked with them, but they did not work
9 for them. So they were independent.
10 In terms of UNCIVPOL, the exact same command and control
11 architecture was replicated so at Sector South headquarters, we had an
12 UNCIVPOL detachment which worked with us but not for us, and the UNCIVPOL
13 headquarters in turn in Zagreb would provide the command and control
14 architecture and guidance to the UNCIVPOL elements throughout UNCRO.
15 JUDGE KINIS: You mentioned in your statement that blockade of
16 compound start on the 5th of August. How long did it last and how it
17 affects the work of all these organisations?
18 A. Sir, the blockade essentially went into effect sometime around
19 11.30, 1100 hours on the 5th of August and I'm sorry I can't be more
20 precise on the times without referring to my notes. And it was certainly
21 in effect when I left Sector South and Knin on the 7th.
22 There were -- in terms of its effect, essentially it meant that
23 none of those organisations could leave the compound so in terms of what
24 they actually did outside work ground to a standstill.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I would also have a few questions for you.
1 First question: Did you ever have any personal dealings with one
2 of the accused in this case, that is Mr. Gotovina, Mr. Cermak or
3 Mr. Markac?
4 A. I had personal dealings, sir, with both Generals Gotovina and
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you tell us when that was?
7 A. Sir, I can't be precise on the dates, but I met General Gotovina
8 for the first time when I accompanied General Kutil the former sector
9 commander whom General Forand replaced sometime in the end of March/early
10 April time frame and there were or three or four, perhaps four other
11 occasions when I was accompanying either General Kutil or General Forand
12 when he had discussions with General Gotovina.
13 With regards to General Cermak I first met General Cermak when he
14 arrived at Sector South headquarters on or about the 6th of August to
15 indicate that he was assuming the post of the -- essentially the military
16 governor of the region and I subsequently had meetings with him, three,
17 fourish over the subsequent three months.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's when you had moved already to Zagreb,
19 so you met him only once when you were still in Knin, is that ...
20 A. That is correct, sir.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Now, as far as your meetings with General Gotovina,
22 as you said was concerned, that was -- could you tell us whether any of
23 the conversations you had at that time you considered to be of direct
24 relevance for what happened on the 4th and the 5th of August and the days
25 after that? If you tell us what the subject of the conversations were,
2 A. The initial conversation, sir, well, I didn't do much speaking
3 because --
4 JUDGE ORIE: No, no, but that followed that.
5 A. Yes. Had to do with -- the first meeting with General Gotovina,
6 General Kutil was responding to General Gotovina's actually legitimate
7 complaints that rebel Serbs had entered the zone of separation and which
8 was subsequently proven to be true.
9 On the second one, I believe it had to do with discussions on a
10 Sector South security commission which was a general conversation, and
11 then the subsequents to that had no -- subsequent meeting to that had no
12 relevance to the details of what I've testified to over the previous
13 three days.
14 With regards -- should I proceed to General Cermak, sir?
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but perhaps you start to focus on your first
16 meeting with Mr. Cermak which took place in the just of couple of days
17 where you were still there and he had just arrived, isn't it?
18 A. Yes, sir. That's when I started --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please tell us the circumstances under which
20 you met him and what the subject of why you are conversation was.
21 A. Sir, the first meeting had to do with General Cermak indicating
22 to go us -- he arrived at Sector South headquarters that he was the
23 military governor. He indicated that to the best of my knowledge, he was
24 very keen to work with us and to cooperate with us. He was asking about
25 food and water, did we have enough? Pleasant. Very pleasant, very
2 Once again, sir, I, as the Chief of Staff with my commander
3 present, my role was minimal. I did not actually engage with
4 face-to-face discussion with General Cermak until after the activities on
5 the 4th and 5th when I returned some weeks later.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Now, from this occasion, the other occasions where
7 you met him later, did you gain any impression on what actually was
8 within the competence of a -- I think you said military governor of the
9 area, both de facto and as we call it de jure, what were his formal
11 A. I understand, sir. May I go back to my impressions with
12 General Gotovina and blend the two together or no?
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you may do so, but we are especially
14 interested -- of course I asked you whether you gained an impression, of
15 course and we are primarily interested in -- on what basis you gained an
16 impression of who said what or if you would pay especially attention to
17 that and whether that would justify the impressions you gained is a
18 separate matter but tell us what impression you gained on the basis of
20 A. Sir, I, as I mentioned, my main role in interacting with
21 General Gotovina was as a supporting element to my commander. My
22 impression of General Gotovina is dynamic, charismatic, aggressive,
23 intelligent, very decisive. And he was -- there was no doubt that he was
24 in charge of the strike force of that zone located in the Sector South
25 region. He was the decisive element whenever we had interactions with
1 subordinate Croatian officers up the 4th and 5th. I, of course, did not
2 see him or interact much at all with him even in a subordinate position
3 with my commander sort of from roughly June onwards.
4 In terms of General Cermak --
5 JUDGE ORIE: I will ask you specifically to focus on what you
6 observed and I said what impression you finally gained, whether that's a
7 right one or -- and I invited you specifically to tell us also on the
8 basis of what observations you gained that impression. We have heard
9 about your impressions, we have not heard yet a lot about the details of
10 your observations which led you to gain these impressions.
11 A. Sir, vis-a-vis these impressions or opinions of what I formed of
12 General Gotovina, just observing him interact with my area commander, the
13 aura of command that permeated his headquarters, the obvious respect
14 which his subordinate commanders spoke of him and that sort of air of
15 crispness which existed amongst his staff when we arrived and departed.
16 I had one or two meetings with one of his subordinate officers whose
17 name, I believe, was Colonel Kotromanovic that is, I'm not certain of
18 that, who commanded one of General Gotovina's brigades. We met several
19 times and in part, that opinion that I formed of General Gotovina is
20 based on input from Colonel Kotromanovic.
21 Does that answer the questions, sir?
22 JUDGE ORIE: To some extent, yes but I'd like to go into some
24 Would it happen to you, and I'm trying to understand your answer
25 that in your dealings with subordinate officers that they would say, We
1 have to consult General Gotovina. Or would they say, We have to seek
2 instructions for this or we cannot decide these matters. Or in what way
3 did this impression emerge?
4 A. Sir, when dealing with the Croatian army elements or the Croatian
5 army liaison officer office, it was enormously rare to get a decision on
6 any issue without it being referred to superior headquarters.
7 I cannot recall, though, General Gotovina's name being mentioned
8 as the specific individual by subordinates to whom they'd have to seek a
9 decision but it was at times quite frustrating for the UN forces to try
10 and get issues resolved at a low level with the Croatian army because
11 almost all decisions involving even minor issues appeared to have to be
12 centralised by the Croatian army liaison officer staff or superior
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So that gave you the impression that there was
15 a rather strict hierarchy; is that ...
16 A. That is correct, sir.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, now, did it ever happen to you that when you
18 were observing or in any other way learned about any dealings with
19 Mr. Gotovina that he ever said, I have to seek instructions from a higher
20 command or ... if you don't remember tell us, but ...
21 A. Sir, I -- if you will just give me a second. There is one issue
22 but I'm just trying to remember if I was there. The issue had to do with
23 movement into the zone of -- up to the zone of separation by the Croatian
24 army in an operation called Lightening and the sector commander was
25 trying to get the Croatian forces to push back and we were told that no
1 such activity was possible without reference from General Gotovina's OP
2 zone to higher and of course that was never granted.
3 But I can't recall if I was there or not. That is the only
4 instance that I can speak of.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for this answer. I think I stopped you
6 when you wanted to move on to Mr. Cermak. Please proceed.
7 A. Sir. General Cermak was, as I mentioned, arrived, I believe on
8 the 6th at Sector south headquarters and I once again -- he was very
9 conciliatory. He was very concerned. He was very cooperative. He then
10 left after his initial meeting with General Forand and the next time I
11 saw him was a couple of weeks later when a team of us arrived from UNCRO
12 to commence the detailed discussions on how to move the hundreds of
13 Serbian displaced persons from our compound via Croatia into Serbia.
14 To be honest, General Cermak was very cooperative. He -- I
15 think, though I won't pretend to know him well, we got on well. He
16 appeared to be quite frustrated about his inability to make decisions to
17 make life easier for some of the Serbian displaced persons, but he was
18 not disloyal to his chain of command.
19 He was under an enormous amount of pressure always. He always
20 looked as if he had the entire weight of the world on his shoulders.
21 He -- there were occasions when we were trying to get an issue resolved
22 where one of the team that I was with would make a statement and
23 General Cermak would occasionally leave the room to see if the issue
24 could be resolved and then he'd come back and more times than not, it
25 could not be. I had no proof that he was checking with his higher
1 headquarters. That's an assumption on my part.
2 Sir, does that ...
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You said that he expressed frustration in
4 relation to his inability to make decisions. Were there other moments
5 where he showed ability to make decisions to you and then apart from the
6 situation you just described, that he would leave the room. So that in a
7 direct conversation he would say, okay, I'll arrange this or I'll do that
8 or I'll take care of that? I'm trying to get an impression on whether
9 apart from being frustrated and not being able to decide matters whether
10 there were other instances where he showed an ability.
11 A. Sir, I honestly believe General Cermak was trying to do all that
12 he could to help us with the issue that General Al Rodan had tasked me
13 with, which was to assist UNCRO and Sector South in moving the displaced
14 persons out of the compound.
15 On a variety of minor issues he was able to make decisions. On
16 any of the ones that had any sort of political implications or wider
17 implications, absolutely categorically not, and I could sense his
19 JUDGE ORIE: Could you give an example of these minor issues?
20 A. Allowing a variety of foodstuffs to be delivered to the Sector
21 South compound, expediting the movement of some of the United Nations
22 Human Rights Action officers, I may have that acronym slightly wrong, to
23 get in and out of Knin.
24 The final details of the very complicate move from Sector South
25 headquarters to Serbia via Sector East, setting up where the stop points
1 were going to be, arranging for medical support to the displaced persons
2 en route, feeding arrangements, he was quite decisive and able to resolve
3 those but that was sort of the level of which I got the sense of which
4 his decision making -- it's not fact, it's opinion -- where his
5 decision-making lay on that issue.
6 JUDGE ORIE: What you describe and I try to understand as good as
7 I can your testimony that all your dealings with Mr. Cermak were about or
8 were directly related to those in the compound leaving, moving in, but
9 nothing which happened outside the compound and unrelated to the presence
10 of UN and civilians in the compound.
11 A. Essentially, yes, sir.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you for that answer.
13 My next question would be: Have you any knowledge of which
14 troops on the Croatian side were involved in what happened in the morning
15 of the 4th of August, 1995, and the days following? I don't know whether
16 you have any knowledge about it but if so, please tell us about it.
17 A. Yes, sir, I do. I have personal knowledge in the sense that it
18 was the Puma Brigade which first showed up outside or was amongst the
19 elements that first showed up outside our headquarters on the 5th of
21 Secondly, there was a variety of documents published by the
22 Croatian military which showed the rough -- and actually in certain cases
23 quite precise lines of advance by the various units which participated in
24 Operation Storm in Sector South. And I believed I attached a copy of a
25 Croatian document as one of my witness statements --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, not all of your witness statements are in
2 evidence so we cannot rely on anything which is not in evidence. So I
3 haven't seen it during the past few days.
4 A. Sir, if you allow me to refer to my notes, that witness
5 statement, I can read it to you.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Well, if that's -- usually witnesses are testifying
7 but if that would refresh your memory and if you say this is an accurate
8 reflection of my observations at that time, then if there is no objection
9 by the parties, I would allow you to read that into the record.
10 A. Sir, if you will just give me a sec, I will find it.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And may I remind you that usually the speed of
12 speech goes up when reading.
13 A. Sir. Sir, from north to south, this Croatian government or
14 Croatian army map indicates the brigades and what routes they took on the
15 assault into the Krajina. And we had the 7th Brigade which was to the
16 north, we had the 134th which was slightly south of that. We had the
17 134th, the 113th, the 142nd, which was sweeping up from along the --
18 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, Your Honour, may I just interrupt one.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. KEHOE: It might be easier, I believe the General is
21 referring to a map attached to a statement.
22 THE WITNESS: Sir, that's it.
23 JUDGE ORIE: If the parties would agree that the witness uses
24 that and that this, then, would be called as a Chamber exhibit.
25 MR. KEHOE: Yes. I just figured it would be easier than ...
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's -- do we have more copies of it or ... if
2 not then we'll put it on the ELMO and then if ...
3 MR. KEHOE: It might be easier, here is a copy we can put on the
4 ELMO, Judge. It's a little dark.
5 Your Honour, I mean I -- I'm not saying that the map is accurate,
6 it's something that came out of the media. I do believe but I just -- at
7 the risk of just having the General read this through without any
8 reference point, I just figured it was easier.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Leslie, can you see on your screen at this
10 moment a map which apparently shows troops' movements, is that the ...
11 A. The number, sir, I believe indicate brigade-sized elements and
12 the ones in the centre of the screen were what we believed to be those
13 elements under command of General Gotovina.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Would there be any troops of this map that would not
15 be under the command of Mr. Gotovina.
16 A. Yes, sir.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 A. The troops essentially, I believe, sir, my memory is fading, but
19 I believe these elements here were not necessarily under the command of
20 General Gotovina. Oh, I beg your pardon, these elements here were a
21 parallel formation which, if memory serves, were under the command of
22 General Norac but I'd have to go back and check notes, which I do not
23 have readily available.
24 Essentially these elements here and this isn't inclusive or
25 restrictive were under the command of General Gotovina as the operational
1 commander. Subordinate to him were the various brigades which made up
2 his formation including the elements that came up the Livno Valley and
3 through Bosanska Grahovo and down which refers to where I saw what I
4 believe to have been a much more professional anti-tank company from the
5 Serb side pointing towards the Croats.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Tieger, may I take it that the Chamber
7 will receive further details of evidence on these matters which will --
9 Yes, we have -- then just for the record, where the witness
10 initially indicated where the troops were that were not under the command
11 of General Gotovina, he was pointing at the western or southern-western
12 side where he talked about the parallel structure under General Norac, he
13 was referring to the upper part, which I take it to be the northern part,
14 and then when he was referring to those troops that were under
15 General Gotovina's command he was mainly pointing at the centre and the
16 centre east side of this picture.
17 I don't think we have to go into lots of details at this moment.
18 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, if I may. We at some point and I'm sure
19 that the Prosecution will, will be, of course, giving a detailed map
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. KEHOE: Concerning the formations to the Chamber. I offered
23 this map to the General because this is one that has been published.
24 It's not accurate per se there will be more detail on that accuracy. The
25 General is 100 per cent correct with regards to elements in the north and
1 what was sector north being part of General Norac's units but while we
2 are talking about this and generally those areas under command, we will
3 be presenting a more precise --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MR. KEHOE: -- map to the Chamber.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Chamber asks these kinds of questions
7 because we get information which is very much isolated and is not in any
8 relation yet to this case to the extent that this is not a case about
9 events but this is a case about whether or not three accused are
10 responsible for certain events.
11 But we'll not at this moment go into further detail in this
12 respect. If you have one second. Yes. I'd like to go back to one of
13 your previous answers. This map, may I take it, is this a spare copy you
14 would like to make available?
15 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Judge, you can have that copy.
16 JUDGE ORIE: We'll take care that it will be uploaded into the
17 e-court system, and Mr. Tieger, no objections?
18 MR. TIEGER: No, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then Mr. Registrar, that would be ...
20 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
21 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours this becomes Exhibit C1.
22 JUDGE ORIE: And C1 is admitted into evidence.
23 In one of your previous answers you referred to issues that had
24 any sort of political implications or wider implications where you said
25 Mr. Cermak could not -- was -- felt frustrated by not being able to make
1 any decisions. Could you give us an example of what kind of issues of
2 political implication or of wider implication?
3 A. Sir, one of the principal issues of moving or getting agreement
4 to move the displaced persons from our compound to Serbia had to do with
5 a variety of Serbs who the Croats accused of war crimes. That was a
6 lengthy, politically-charged series of discussions with the eventual
7 resolution being the Human Rights Action Teams from the United Nations
8 supervised the transfer into custody of a number of Serbs from our
9 compounds into a variety of detention facilities run by the Croatian
10 government, and as far as I know that all went well, as well as these
11 things do.
12 There was a whole series of subdiscussions around that central
13 issue, some of which were very mundane and I am trying to think of a
14 specific example, one will come to me shortly, in which General Cermak,
15 it was apparent, had absolutely or very little say in any of its
17 The support and cooperation to Sector South from the moment I
18 left, I can't really qualify with any expertise or comment on with any
19 expertise because I was gone and I was then essentially an occasional
20 visitor to Sector South as I was to the other sectors in UNCRO. I know
21 that at some point, there was discussions of burning and looting that was
22 happening in the Sector South area. I am very confident I brought them
23 up, but I cannot recall eliciting any response from General Cermak in the
24 sense of he didn't express any -- there was no resolution of that. I
25 think it was more a comment from us to him, but he didn't appear to have
1 any -- well, there was no response.
2 JUDGE ORIE: This was during the meetings that you had after you
3 had left.
4 A. Yes, sir, when we would return. But it was not a main topic of
5 discussion because such issues were essentially dealt with by Sector
6 South and we were very focused, us from UNCRO, on the movement of the
7 displaced persons.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, you told us on the basis of this
9 published, let's say, sketch, which troops under the command of
10 Mr. Gotovina were involved in the events on the 4th and the 5th. Could
11 you tell us, you told us that you observed troops at the gate of the
12 compound. Could you tell us when these troops -- whether, and if so when
13 these troops left the city of Knin again?
14 A. Sir, unfortunately, I cannot, because I had left. I left on the
15 7th. And the initial troops which showed up at our front gate didn't
16 stay very long and I can deduce why, because they were continuing the
17 advance -- those were the frontline troops continuing the advance in
18 pursuit of the retreating Serbs.
19 Now, I can't tell you who -- what the command and control
20 arrangement for the troops that showed up at the front gate to replace
21 those initial ones, I don't know which unit they came from.
22 In terms of the larger context, the information or intelligent
23 functions at UNCRO headquarters were of the opinion that within about
24 three or four days, most of General Gotovina's frontline professional
25 fighting brigades were essentially clear of what we would call the
1 traditional Sector South boundaries and were continuing the attack or the
3 That is the extent of my knowledge. I cannot tell you who had
4 command of what troops at what time based on personal observation.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So when you are talking about the fighting
6 brigades that apparently had left within three or four days, that under
7 what command the remaining units or forces or soldiers were, you cannot
8 tell us.
9 A. No, sir. But I have been told subsequent to my departure that
10 General Cermak, as the military governor of Knin, had responsibility for
11 the governor's troops which formations comprised his troops and at what
12 point did General Gotovina have command responsibility over the rear
13 echelons of his fighting brigades which may have been in and around Knin,
14 I don't know.
15 JUDGE ORIE: And you said, "I have been told." Could you tell us
16 by whom.
17 A. The intelligence officers at UNCRO headquarters and general
18 discussions amongst a variety of senior officers at both UNPF and UNCRO.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. This was not detailed information but
20 information of a general nature about command moving without a clear
21 picture; is that ...
22 A. Yes, as a word picture, and this is a generalisation.
23 General Gotovina was seen as the war fighter and General Cermak was seen
24 as the administrator.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, last question or perhaps last couple of
1 questions. You just mentioned the issue of looting which you raised
2 during one of your later conversations. Did you in any way personally
3 observe any looting or burning, either within the city of Knin or outside
4 the city of the Knin?
5 A. Yes, sir. There was a couple of vehicles that had been abandoned
6 by Serbs in close proximity to the headquarters, you could see some
7 Croatian soldiers rummaging through the vehicles. I did not see any
8 looting inside Knin without one very minor exception. And to be fair, to
9 be fair, that one incident I saw, one could argue that that may be
10 someone was searching that vehicle to see if there was any explosives or
11 such but ...
12 However, on subsequent trips into and through the zone, there
13 were numerous instances when I saw smoke plumes on the horizon,
14 occasionally burning buildings, and in close proximity, Croatian
15 soldiers, but I cannot tell you what the units of these Croatian soldiers
16 were. And there's a variety of statements and notes which I and others
17 have provided to the Prosecution which make specific references and dates
18 and times.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE ORIE: You told us that you cannot tell us what the units
22 of these Croatian soldiers were. Could you give us, apart from what
23 units they belonged, give us an impression? Was the looting done in an
24 organised way? For example, in groups of soldiers, eight or ten, sharing
25 transportation facilities? Or did you get the impression that it was
1 rather individual, one or two? Could you tell us a bit more about what
2 you observed which could assist us in better understanding what --
3 whether these were individual actions or whether this was part of some
5 A. Sir, in my opinion, and of course I did not personally see -- I
6 did not physically see, with the exception of that minor incident outside
7 the compound with the vehicle, I did not physically see Croatian soldiers
8 actually engaged in the act of looting. Nor did I ever personally catch
9 or see a Croatian soldier burning a house.
10 But in broad daylight, sometimes weeks after Operation Storm, we
11 would be driving down a road and there would be a house burning with
12 Croatian soldiers in a substantial group in close proximity to that
14 JUDGE ORIE: Substantial group for you is ...
15 A. 30 to 40, sir.
16 JUDGE ORIE: 30 to 40. Croatian soldiers dressed in full
18 A. They were -- sir, they were dressed in full uniform but they were
19 not dressed in combat gear. In other words, they had weapons but they
20 were not covered in ammunition, grenades, and all the normal
21 paraphernalia of soldiers expecting imminent combat.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. This about burning, about looting, did you
23 observe scenes which gave you the impression that they were related to
24 looting? I can imagine that, for example, if you see a soldier driving
25 in a truck with six washing machines at the back, that you could wonder
1 whether he is selling washing machines or whether he was doing something
3 I'm just giving this example as I want to -- this Chamber wants
4 to hear the facts you personally observed which you link to looting, if
5 there were any.
6 A. Sir, I was aware of numerous reports of other people who had seen
7 looting, but I cannot look you in the eye and tell you that I personally
8 saw anything resembling the word picture that you describe. I did not
9 see it myself. There was debris on the side of the roads, there was, you
10 know, sheets and beddings over windows, but I did not see a Croatian
11 soldier carrying a trophy of some kind down the road.
12 [Trial Chamber confers]
13 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber has no further questions for you. If
14 the questions by the Chamber has triggered any need by the parties to put
15 additional questions, a limited opportunity will be given.
16 Mr. Kehoe.
17 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour. If we could just take a quick
18 break to consult with co-counsel.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please take your time.
20 Meanwhile, I'll ask you, Mr. Tieger.
21 MR. TIEGER: No, Your Honour.
22 [Defence counsel confer]
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
24 MR. KEHOE: I didn't, Your Honour, I, in discussions with my
25 learned friend, I am going to turn the floor over to Mr. Kay.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Kay.
2 MR. KAY: Your Honour, these questions arise from the questions
3 by the Bench and if you can understand that as well, Mr. Leslie. I'm
4 asking you questions now on behalf of Mr. Cermak.
5 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Kay:
6 Q. The first matter I want to deal with is the issue of Mr. Cermak
7 helping you in relation to the displaced persons. These questions
8 haven't come about in the prepared form because they come from the Bench
9 so I've had no notice of them but I have, in the back of my mind, that a
10 letter was written complimenting Mr. Cermak. Did you write a letter? I
11 know General Forand did.
12 A. Sir, I cannot recall, and I would -- I would doubt if I would
13 write the letter because General Al Rodan that would be his remit, he as
14 the responsible commander.
15 Q. And I'm not putting it as a fact as I am remembering 5.000
16 documents in my head as I ask this question, and it wasn't expected by
17 me. I just had a feeling that you wrote the letter but you certainly
18 can't remember that?
19 A. Sir, I doubt if I would have written -- at that time, I didn't
20 work for General Forand, I worked for General Al Rodan so I would have
21 not written General Forand's draft. I cannot recall writing such a
22 letter for my commander, General Al Rodan and I can't remember.
23 Q. Fine. The issue or not of the letter is irrelevant, in a way.
24 It was actually the support of General Cermak in relation to this
25 particular issue of the movement of the people from Knin and transferring
1 them to Bosnia or Serbia by which you were impressed in relation to the
2 steps he'd taken.
3 A. Actually, sir, without meaning to distract the Court at all, I
4 remember General Cermak and I talking that when this was all over, we
5 would commiserate and have a beer.
6 Q. Thank you. I want to turn now to a matter of slight substance in
7 your evidence to the Bench, and that's this issue of calling him the
8 military governor. Now, presumably, you talked to General Cermak through
9 an interpreter.
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And did that interpreter always be the same interpreter or did
12 the interpreter change?
13 A. I did not bring my own interpreter. I cannot recall, but I think
14 it is a safe assumption for me to say that more often than not, it would
15 probably be the same person provided by Sector South headquarters, but I
16 cannot attest to that.
17 Q. Right. Because you weren't a B/C/S speaker, as we call it in
18 these courts.
19 A. No, I'm not.
20 Q. Thank you. And you gave the date of the 6th of August when
21 Mr. Cermak visited the UNCRO camp. We actually have evidence in the
22 court that establish it was the 7th of August when Mr. Akashi visited.
23 A. I stand corrected.
24 Q. And that was the day you departed Knin as well?
25 A. Yes, I left just after Mr. Akashi and General Forand had a
2 Q. Right. And were you there when General Cermak had any
3 discussions with General Forand or Mr. Akashi?
4 A. I was there when General Cermak first arrived and greeted him,
5 brought him into the operations centre. They, being General Forand,
6 Mr. Akashi and General Cermak, I believe, then went up to
7 General Forand's office and I was not included in that meeting.
8 Q. But this was -- were you there when Mr. Akashi toured the camp,
9 met the people, spoke to people on the ground?
10 A. I was.
11 Q. Yeah. And that was part of a fairly substantial delegation of
13 A. Oh, yes.
14 Q. Yeah. I was putting it conservatively, but there was a lot of
15 interest in this visit from Mr. Akashi?
16 A. That is correct.
17 Q. Thank you. The issue of the military governor as a title. You
18 would be aware of it being a title of significance, perhaps, in relation
19 to NATO forces or western forces as a particular position within occupied
20 territories; is that right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. On this occasion, of course, the area we're dealing with wasn't,
23 in fact, occupied territory by the Croatian forces, it was indeed part of
24 Croatia itself.
25 A. The internationally-recognised boundaries of Croatia included the
1 terrain formerly occupied by the ARSK.
2 Q. Yes. These forces from the Croatian army were not upon foreign
3 soil as sometimes happen in the experience of your armed forces, the
4 armed forces of many people in this room, when they, so to speak, get
5 into a position of occupation on foreign soil.
6 A. Sir, you're asking me a question which has a variety of legal
7 strands with which I'm not familiar. I think I'm outside my sandbox now.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any dispute about this between the parties.
9 MR. TIEGER: No.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Why ask the witness --
11 MR. KAY: It's because it helps in development of the next
12 question and it's unsettling if I don't lead it.
13 JUDGE ORIE: The parties don't have a dispute about the
14 positive -- yes, they were not on foreign soil.
15 MR. KAY: Thank you. Please proceed.
16 THE WITNESS: Absolutely, sir. It just shows that I'm trainable.
17 So, I agree with you.
18 MR. KAY: Thank you.
19 Q. But the issue being that were you aware that in fact within the
20 Croatian legal system, system of government, there is no such position as
21 military governor?
22 A. No, I wasn't aware.
23 Q. Were you, in fact, aware of the actual position that Mr. Cermak
24 was appointed as holding when he arrived in Knin on the 6th of August and
25 kept for the duration of his stay there?
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger.
2 MR. TIEGER: Just for clarification, I take it that Mr. Kay is
3 seeking to elicit whatever information the witness might have about the
4 formal position.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I take it that that's what you're seeking at
6 this moment, Mr. Kay.
7 MR. KAY: Yes.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, could we cover that in one rather general
9 question because if the witness has no knowledge about the formal
10 position of what -- the position, in formal terms, the position in which
11 Mr. Cermak was appointed, then we can leave it aside. The Chamber of
12 course has received meanwhile some evidence on it.
13 MR. KAY: And we're not going through that again, but I don't
14 know whether the witness knows or not, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but if we just put one general question.
16 Were you in any way familiar with the precise position in which
17 Mr. Cermak was appointed at that time and what competences, what powers
18 that decision would give, how it was structured in the state organisation
19 of Croatia.
20 THE WITNESS: No, sir.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Kay.
22 MR. KAY:
23 Q. You weren't aware that he had the position of "zborno mjeste" of
24 Knin, the garrison commander of Knin?
25 A. No.
1 Q. Did you look at letters from Mr. Cermak?
2 A. I'm sure I saw letters that Mr. Cermak may have or General Cermak
3 may have exchanged with General Forand, but I can't recall with any
4 degree of precision the content or the signature block.
5 Q. Did you ever note that within those letters, there was no title
6 of military governor, but in fact, ZM Knin?
7 A. I can't recall.
8 Q. Thank you. It seems, from what you are saying, that someone told
9 you that he was the military governor; is that right?
10 A. Yes, I'm -- that was, I believe, the standard appelation with
11 which most Sector South personnel described General Cermak, but I can't
12 tell you where that name came from or that title came from.
13 Q. And I don't disagree with that, General, you're not on your own
14 here and that's an issue in the case. But the title of military governor
15 was not something from, as I understand it -- your evidence to be, that
16 you actually investigated yourself?
17 A. That is correct.
18 Q. And wherever military governor came from, you would agree, would
19 you not, that if it was wrong, then that is something that has
20 incorrectly been passed down the chain?
21 A. Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, all the answers that the witness has given
23 on your questions are answers that almost logically follow from the
24 answer to the question I put to him and unless there's any specific issue
25 you'd like to deal with, the Chamber got your point that the awareness of
1 the formalities of the position of Mr. Cermak were at a rather low level
2 with this witness.
3 MR. KAY: Thank you, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
5 MR. KAY:
6 Q. Again, I have to ask this as a prelude to the next question, I
7 hope the Bench are understanding about that.
8 You've already said that the tasks and responsibilities of
9 Mr. Cermak were not known by you in any sort of detail?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. You only knew, I presume, what he did from what he did.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And you never saw him commanding any troops in the Knin area.
14 A. Actually, sir, on the -- the night before the displaced Serbs
15 were to leave our compound, they had fired a large volume of small arms
16 fire over the compound in a show of intimidation and General Cermak
17 arrived and put a very abrupt stop to that, and to me that demonstrates
19 Q. How did that happen? Where did the volley of fire come from?
20 A. The volley of fire was from Croatian personnel stationed outside
21 the camp it did didn't harm anybody.
22 Q. Yes?
23 A. It cause the obviously no casualties and we believe it was a
24 means of encouraging those who were about to leave to really make sure
25 that they left.
1 Q. And the particular individuals firing in that way were whom, how
2 were they identifiable?
3 A. Sir, they were not identifiable. I don't believe -- I certainly
4 did not see them fire, I certainly heard it. I was there at the time.
5 Q. Yeah.
6 A. And -- but I did not see -- it only lasted a minute or two and I
7 was gone the next morning. So -- but there was many other people from
8 Sector South who can give you much more detail on this incident.
9 Q. So we don't know if they were civilians or military personnel?
10 A. That's correct.
11 Q. And did you see what Mr. Cermak actually did to stop this?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Suffice it to say, then, from your knowledge and experience of
14 the matter, that something very unpleasant was happening that he put a
15 stop to.
16 A. Correct.
17 Q. So putting that example then to one side, your dealings with Mr.
18 Cermak come about from matters concerning the UN and the government of
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Would you like me to sort of just expand it for you --
22 A. No, no, I think I understand the general context.
23 Q. You understand what I'm putting to you?
24 A. Yes, I agree.
25 Q. Right. Just to make it clear, the displaced persons within the
1 camp were a large problem that the UN had for several weeks that needed
2 to be resolved.
3 A. It was definitely an issue.
4 Q. Your view then about him having command over troops in the area
5 at some stage who was in that area, is, in fact, based upon information
6 that you've received from others within the UN system.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And you would accept, would you not, that that information can be
9 right or wrong?
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay. If the witness would say I cannot accept
11 that information that reached me was right or wrong, information is
12 always right or wrong, and there will be a need really any specific
13 situation where someone would be for the full 100 per cent sure that the
14 information is right or is wrong and that is so exceptional that the
15 question -- putting to the question to the witness is -- qualifies more
16 or less a superfluous question.
17 Please proceed.
18 MR. KAY: I apologise, Your Honour, but the issue itself is large
19 within the case which is why it's of concern arising this way through the
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Kay, whoever tells this Court that he got
22 information, this Court will always be aware that this information may be
23 right, may be wrong, and we'll consider it always in the context of the
24 totality of the evidence we receive.
25 Please proceed.
1 MR. KAY: Your Honour, I'm very grateful for that indication from
2 the Bench.
3 Q. It comes to it and I can't really develop this issue with you any
4 further, can I, because the -- given the basis of your knowledge?
5 A. Sir, I am not -- I'm not an expert on General Cermak's Croatian
6 command and control architecture or his terms of reference, so I would
7 agree with you.
8 MR. KAY: I'm very obliged. Thank you.
9 JUDGE ORIE: May I take it that the discussions among Defence
10 counsel and the outcome of that means that there are no further questions
11 by other Defence counsel or is that ...
12 MR. KEHOE: That is correct, Your Honour, nothing from
13 General Gotovina.
14 MR. KUZMANOVIC: That is correct, Your Honour, thank you.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Leslie, this, then, concludes your testimony in
16 this court we'd like to thank you very much for coming to The Hague and
17 for answering all the questions that were put to you, and I usually say I
18 wish you a safe trip home again but in view of your profession, I don't
19 know whether your trip will be home or not. But at least a safe trip
20 wherever you go.
21 Mr. Usher, would you please escort Mr. Leslie out of the
23 THE WITNESS: Thank you, sir. It's been an honour.
24 [The witness withdrew]
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber would like to deliver a decision, then
2 have a break, then invite the Prosecution to call its next witness.
3 This is the Chamber's decision on matters relating to the
4 Prosecution's motion requesting the admission of Rule 92 ter statements
5 of Mikhail Ermolaev and Kari Anttila and associated exhibits.
6 The Prosecution filed this motion on the 1st of February 2008.
7 On the 13th of February, 2008, the Cermak Defence filed a response
8 requesting that the Chamber deny the Prosecution leave to conduct an
9 examination in chief to supplement the Rule 92 ter statements, or order
10 the Prosecution to supplement and clarify the statements in written form
11 and in advance of the court hearing.
12 On the 19th of February, 2008, the Prosecution filed a request
13 for leaving to reply and a reply.
14 On the 27th of February, 2008, the Chamber decided to grant the
15 Prosecution's request for leave to reply and informed the parties
16 accordingly, through an informal communication.
17 The Gotovina and Markac Defence did not file any responses on
18 this matter, and the time to do so has run out.
19 None of the Defence teams objected to the admission of the Rule
20 92 ter statements and the associated exhibits. The Chamber will deal
21 with this matter at the appropriate time during the testimony of the two
22 witnesses in question.
23 As for the Cermak Defence's requests, this Chamber follows the
24 practice of many other Chambers at the Tribunal in allowing the
25 Prosecution to conduct an examination in chief to supplement the Rule 92
1 ter statement of a witness. The Chamber expects the Prosecution to
2 clarify -- to clarify as necessary portions of the statement, without
3 eliciting the same evidence viva voce.
4 As an exception, the Chamber expresses a strong preference for
5 receiving in the form of viva voce testimony, important evidence that
6 goes to acts and conduct of the accused.
7 As for the Cermak Defence's concerns regarding adequate notice of
8 the evidence that the Prosecution intends to lead, this is a matter to be
9 addressed through proper disclosure by the Prosecution.
10 The requests of the Cermak Defence are therefore denied in their
12 This concludes the Chamber's decision.
13 We'll now have a break. We'll resume at 20 minutes to 1.00.
14 --- Recess taken at 12.20 p.m.
15 --- On resuming at 12.43 p.m.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Is the Prosecution ready to call its next witness?
17 MS. FROLICH: Yes, thank you, Your Honours, Ruth Frolich. The
18 Prosecution calls Mile Sovilj.
19 JUDGE ORIE: No protective measures, Ms. Frolich.
20 MS. FROLICH: No.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Then Mr. Usher, would you please ...
22 Perhaps I could already inquire with the Defence whether the new
23 statement and the new exhibits cause any problems which would amount to
25 [The witness entered court]
1 JUDGE ORIE: Since the witness has now entered the courtroom,
2 Mr. Mikulicic.
3 Yes, the witness -- good afternoon, Mr. Sovilj. I take.
4 Mr. Sovilj, before you give evidence in this court, the Rules of
5 Procedure and Evidence require you to make a solemn declaration that you
6 will speak the truth, the whole truth, the nothing but the truth. May I
7 invite you to make that solemn declaration of which the text is now
8 handed out to you by the usher.
9 WITNESS: MILE SOVILJ
10 [Witness answered through interpreter]
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, Your Honours, I
12 solemnly swear that I will speak the truth, the whole truth and nothing
13 but the truth.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Sovilj. Please be seated.
15 Ms. Frolich.
16 MS. FROLICH: Thank you, Mr. President.
17 Examination by Ms. Frolich:
18 Q. Good morning, Mr. Sovilj, or should I say good afternoon. Could
19 you please state your full name for the record, please.
20 A. Mile Sovilj.
21 Q. Did you give a statement to the investigators of the Office of
22 the Prosecutor on the 22nd of February, 2007?
23 A. Yes, I did.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic.
25 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I have a problem. My translation is
1 in French now.
2 THE INTERPRETER: Channel 4 is English.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yeah, I receive English on channel 4.
4 MR. MISETIC: It must be just me then, Your Honour, because ...
5 JUDGE ORIE: Let's test it again whether your channel 4 is --
6 please proceed.
7 MS. FROLICH: Mr. President, would it be helpful if the usher
8 could provide the witness with a B/C/S version of the statement.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I take it that's very practical.
10 MS. FROLICH: Could also the 65 ter number 04834 be presented on
11 the screen and marked for identification.
12 Q. Mr. Sovilj, on the screen in front of you, you also have, you I
13 believe you can see the statement. Is this the statement that you gave
14 to the representatives of the OTP on the 22nd of February, 2007?
15 A. Yes, it is.
16 Q. Now, after your statement was recorded, was it read back to you
17 in the language that you understand?
18 A. Yes.
19 MS. FROLICH: Sorry, could we just flip through the pages of the
20 statement, go to page 2, and page 3, and page 4. And finally, page 5.
21 Q. Now, Mr. Sovilj, did you sign the English version of the
23 A. Yes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any use to have on our split screen two
25 English versions rather than on the one side --
1 MS. FROLICH: Oh, I apologise, Mr. President, I didn't notice
2 that both were in English. No, I believe that B/C/S version would be on
3 one side of the screen.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, as it was in the beginning. Please proceed.
5 MS. FROLICH:
6 Q. Is this your signature that you see on the screen? Sorry, not on
7 this page of the interpreter's certification, I'm sorry, if we could go
8 back one page in both versions, please?
9 A. Yes, yes.
10 Q. Did you have a chance to review the statement in a language you
11 understand yesterday?
12 A. Yes, I did.
13 Q. And did you make some corrections to that statement?
14 A. Yes.
15 MS. FROLICH: Could 65 ter 04854 be shown on screen, please and
16 marked for identification.
17 Now, Mr. President, we still do not have the B/C/S translation of
18 this statement, it was taken yesterday so we only have the English copy
19 to work with.
20 Q. Mr. Sovilj, is this -- are these -- is this the statement
21 containing the corrections that you made yesterday?
22 A. This thing now is in English.
23 Q. Mr. Sovilj, did you sign -- were the corrections that you made
24 yesterday read back to you in the language that you understand?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And did you sign the English version of that statement?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Mr. Sovilj, is this your signature on the bottom left corner?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. If you flip to the second page.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Is this your signature at the bottom of -- at the bottom left
8 corner of this page?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. If we go one more page. Is this your signature at the bottom
11 left corner?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And one more page, please. Is this your signature at the bottom,
14 left corner?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And the last page, please. Is this your signature, Mr. Sovilj?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Thank you. Now, these two statements that are read together are
19 they -- do they accurately reflect what you said to the representatives
20 of the OTP?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And these two statements taken together, are they in full
23 accordance with the truth to the best of your knowledge?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. If you were asked the same questions today, would you give the
1 same answers?
2 A. Yes.
3 MS. FROLICH: Thank you.
4 Mr. President, with your leave, we would like to tender both
5 statements into evidence under Rule 92 ter.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections against the admission of these 92 ter
8 MR. MISETIC: No objections from the Gotovina Defence, Your
10 MR. KAY: No objection, Your Honour.
11 MR. MIKULICIC: No objection, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Then Mr. Registrar, the first statement is the 22nd
13 of February, 2007 statement. That would be ...
14 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P86, Your Honours.
15 JUDGE ORIE: P86 is admitted into evidence. And the other one is
16 the statement of I think it was yesterday, 23rd of April, 2008, that
17 would be ...
18 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P87, Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: P87 is admitted into evidence. Please proceed,
20 Ms. Frolich.
21 MS. FROLICH: Thank you, with your leave, I would like to read
22 the witness summary now.
23 JUDGE ORIE: The witness is aware of why this is read.
24 MS. FROLICH: Yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
1 MS. FROLICH: Thank you. Mile Sovilj was born in the village of
2 Kijani in the municipality of Gracac. He lived in the town of Gracac in
3 1995 and was present when the shelling attack on Gracac started on the
4 4th of August, 1995.
5 Mr. Sovilj's evidence relates to the circumstances in which he
6 witnessed the shelling of Gracac and left the town and afterwards Croatia
7 after the shelling started. He also relates evidence about the flight of
8 the civilian population from Gracac and his native village of Kijani and
9 about the 14 individuals from Kijani including his father who stayed
10 there and were killed.
11 Finally, Mr. Sovilj relates the information regarding the events
12 preceding Operation Storm that occurred in the Medak pocket in 1993 as
13 well as the circumstances that stopped him from returning to Croatia
14 after he left it on the 5th of August, 1995.
15 That concludes the witness summary, Mr. President.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Frolich.
17 MS. FROLICH: I would now like to ask some additional questions
18 of the witness.
19 Q. Mr. Sovilj, how big was the town of Gracac in 1995?
20 A. In terms of the population, around 5.000.
21 Q. And do you know what was roughly its ethnic composition?
22 A. If we are talking about Gracac itself, Gracac proper, the
23 population was 25 Serb and 75 per cent Croat and other non-Serbs.
24 Q. Excuse me, I'm referring to the period in 1995 just before the
25 attack, the shelling attack of the 4th of August, if I did not make
1 myself clear.
2 A. Yes, you could say it was on the eve of Operation Storm.
3 Q. Mr. Sovilj, if I could refer you to -- I'm sorry, can I -- just a
5 [Prosecution counsel confer]
6 MS. FROLICH:
7 Q. Mr. Sovilj, was there, in fact -- what was the ethnic majority
8 living in the town of Gracac on the eve of the shelling attack on the 4th
9 of August, 1995?
10 A. Serbian orthodox.
11 THE INTERPRETER: Christian orthodox, interpreter's correction.
12 MS. FROLICH:
13 Q. So in fact when you say that 75 per cent were Croat, did you
14 perhaps mean that 70 [sic] per cent of the population was Serb?
15 A. I don't know what I said that when I was talking about
16 percentages of the population, I meant to say that about 95 per cent were
17 Serbs and five per cent were Croats and other ethnic groups.
18 Q. Thank you for that clarification.
19 Now, Mr. Sovilj, what kind of military training, if any, do you
21 A. I did my military service in the former Yugoslav People's Army
22 and after that, I was engaged in military drills several times.
23 Q. Was this your only military experience?
24 A. Yes.
25 MS. FROLICH: If we could have P86 back on the screen just for
1 ease of reference.
2 Q. Mr. Sovilj, I would like to turn your attention to the events
3 that you describe in paragraph 5 of your statement which is page 2 in
4 both English and B/C/S.
5 Could you tell the Court where were you at around 5.00 a.m. on
6 the 4th of August, 1995?
7 A. On the 4th of August, 1995, in the morning, I was in my apartment
8 in Gracac. I lived on Czar Dusan Street as it was called then, 133.
9 Q. Can you describe what happened at that time?
10 A. Around 5.00 a.m., as I was preparing to go on the road, I was
11 about to travel, I heard the explosion of a shell that had fallen at a
12 distance of about 120 metres from my flat.
13 Q. How do you know that you heard the explosion of a shell?
14 A. We who lived -- who had lived for several years in the state of
15 war, were able, by then, to distinguish between the sound of a bullet and
16 the sound of another round from the sound of a projectile from a cannon.
17 We could distinguish it by the sound it made as it flew through the air
18 and also the explosion.
19 I want to add that Gracac had already been shelled in 1993 during
20 the Medak Pocket operation and Maslenica operation, so we had some
22 Q. How were you able to estimate that the distance was -- of the
23 explosion was about 120 metres from your flat?
24 A. Well, a crater was found later in that place with fragments
25 scattered around, debris, branches from a nearby tree.
1 Q. Can you explain by -- what you mean by that a crater was found?
2 Did you observe this crater yourself? Or did you hear it from someone
4 A. I saw it myself.
5 Q. When did you see this crater?
6 A. I can't tell you the hour, but I saw it as I left my apartment to
7 go towards the municipal assembly building in Gracac, it could have been
8 around 9.00 or 10.00 a.m.
9 Q. As you left your apartment in Gracac, did you observe any
10 other -- you said you heard shelling, but did you observe any other
11 damage such as you described?
12 A. Well, I heard the shelling occasionally, sporadically, I can't
13 tell you in which intervals. Gracac is a population centre that is in
14 terms of configuration and area it covers, rather large. It stretches
15 along -- around 4 kilometres, perhaps a little less, or a little more.
16 In various sections of the town, explosions were heard occasionally that
17 I suppose were from shells and as I was going towards the municipal
18 assembly building, crossing the bridge next to Gradina hill, I saw broken
19 branches of a tree and it all looked like another shell had fallen there
20 as well, but I didn't go closer to see exactly where it happened.
21 Q. Could you tell the Chamber where the municipal assembly building
22 is located in Gracac?
23 A. How shall I explain? It's in the centre of the town, the centre
24 of Gracac next to the primary school, next to the former municipal
25 committee building. On the main street.
1 Q. Thank you. That will be sufficient. Can you tell what the
2 frequency of shelling was as you recall it?
3 A. Well, all of that was a long time ago, but shells hit
4 occasionally. I can't tell you in what intervals, maybe an hour, maybe
5 half an hour, depending on which period we're talking about.
6 Q. You also say in paragraph 7 of your statement which is I believe
7 is the same page, page 2 of the English version and page 3 of the B/C/S
8 version that you left Gracac around 4.00 p.m. on the same day, on the 4th
9 of August, 1995.
10 Could you tell the Court for how long did the shelling continue
11 during that time, during that period?
12 A. Well, as I told you. As I was leaving Gracac, it was around 4.00
13 p.m. there was sporadic shelling on Gracac town. Later as I was going
14 towards Kijani village, I heard explosions from that direction but
15 whether it was there or somewhere farther away, I could not judge.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Frolich, the Chamber would say copied, at least
17 the Chamber staff was copied on some e-mail exchanges which would cause
18 us to expect that, apart from hearing from this witness that the
19 municipal council building was next to the school, I don't know where the
20 school is as a matter of fact, so I still do not know where the centre of
21 the town, that there would be maps annotated et cetera. Is that not --
22 MS. FROLICH: I was just about to ask for the map of Gracac, 65
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, because if all the markings are there, we can
25 go there more quickly, it gives us a better impression of just knowing
1 that the building is next to a school building.
2 MS. FROLICH: Thank you for that, Judge. 65 ter 4850 if you can
3 bring it up on screen.
4 Q. Mr. Sovilj, do you see the map on screen before you?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. What is this map?
7 A. Well, that's a map of Gracac with the surrounding villages.
8 Q. And what are these markings?
9 A. A is the location of my apartment.
10 Q. Excuse me, Mr. Sovilj, can I just stop you for a moment. Do you
11 recognise these markings as -- I'm sorry --
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Who made these markings?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And --
16 A. I did.
17 Q. When did you make them?
18 A. Yesterday.
19 Q. Whose signature is this on the bottom left corner of the map?
20 A. It's mine.
21 Q. Thank you. Now, could you tell us what marking A represents?
22 A. I said already A is the location of my apartment where I used to
24 Q. What is marking B?
25 A. B is the place where the first shell I heard fell.
1 Q. Marking C?
2 A. C is the place near the rivulet otuca near the bridge where I saw
3 the tree with broken branches and where I thought a shell had fallen.
4 Q. Can you tell us what marking D represents?
5 A. D is the location where the municipal assembly was.
6 Q. Now, without -- would the Chamber be assisted if the witness may
7 perhaps mark also the location of the school or just point to where the
8 school roughly was?
9 JUDGE ORIE: No, I'm -- the school, until now, played just a role
10 as being adjacent to where the municipal centre building was. That is
11 the only role until now which the school played so therefore there's no
12 need to mark it unless there's anything else you would like to ...
13 MS. FROLICH: No, I was merely checking with the Chamber. Thank
15 Q. What does marking E represent, Mr. Sovilj?
16 A. That is the location of the police station in Gracac.
17 Q. Marking F?
18 A. That's the railway station.
19 Q. Marking G?
20 A. G is a hamlet called Surle near Kijani village where my parents
21 used to live before the Operation Storm.
22 Q. And finally, marking H?
23 A. H is the road I used to go from Gracac to Surle hamlet on the 4th
24 of August, 1995 after 4.00 p.m. when I left Gracac.
25 Q. Is marking B the location where you saw the crater of the first
2 A. Yes.
3 MS. FROLICH: Thank you. Your Honours, if this document could be
4 tendered into evidence.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections?
6 MR. MIKULICIC: No objections, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Then no one else jumps up so no objections.
8 Mr. Registrar.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P88, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE ORIE: P88 is admitted into evidence. Please proceed.
11 MS. FROLICH: Could we just keep this map on the screen for a
12 little longer.
13 Q. Mr. Sovilj, did you observe any other damage in Gracac as you
14 walked to the municipal centre?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Mr. Sovilj, do you know what, if any, military facilities there
17 are in Gracac?
18 A. No. In Gracac, there had never been any military installations,
19 barracks, or anything else except, as far as I remember in the beginning
20 of the war in 1991, there used to be some military units and some
21 military equipment, only at that time.
22 Q. Were there civilians or soldiers or both in Gracac at the time
23 the shelling attack commenced?
24 A. Well, in Gracac at the time of the shelling, that is, at the
25 beginning of Operation Storm, civilians were mainly there and as far as I
1 know, there was some people in the police station who constituted the
2 duty service. And 7, 10, 15 days prior to that, everyone of military age
3 capable of carrying a rifle had been mobilised and everyone was on the
5 Q. Just to clarify, when you say, "7, 10, 15 days prior to that,"
6 you mean -- do you mean Operation Storm?
7 A. Just before Operation Storm started, some 10, 15 days earlier and
8 memories are fading, you have to understand, that but generally speaking,
9 everyone capable of carrying a rifle was mobilised and sent to the
10 frontline so only the civilian population remained, women, children, and
11 certain individuals who stayed on duty at the police station, at the
12 assembly building, people who were there on duty so that life could
14 Q. How did the civilian population of Gracac react to the shelling?
15 A. In the course of at that day before 4.00 p.m. when I left Gracac,
16 on two or three occasions, I went to the municipality building and back
17 and you could hardly see anybody on the streets. People were mostly
18 locked up in their apartments, flats, or even shelters that were there.
19 Q. And later on in the afternoon, was the situation the same or
21 A. In the course of the afternoon, I noticed the first people who
22 started leaving Gracac and on my return from the municipal building
23 around 2.00 in the afternoon or half past 2.00, I even saw a few tractors
24 fully loaded with their necessities and I could also observe people who
25 started moving from Gracac in the direction of north to Deringaj and
1 Mazba [phoen].
2 Q. I'm sorry, these locations are -- were they in -- with respect to
3 Gracac, the villages ...
4 A. It is north from Gracac but you can't see it on this map because
5 this map stops right before the village of Deringaj. So you won't see it
6 on this map.
7 Q. Can you describe the appearance of people who were leaving from
9 A. Concerned, worried, with an expression on their faces showing
10 pessimism, not very optimistic expression on their faces.
11 Q. Why did you leave Gracac?
12 A. Well, obviously as everybody else, I was afraid so I'd say that I
13 left for safety reasons.
14 Q. Did you plan to return or not to Gracac at that time?
15 A. I believe that all these people who were leaving Gracac at the
16 time thought that it was only temporary and that they would return sooner
17 or later. However, it turned out that they did not return, only some did
18 a few years later, they returned to go and live there.
19 Q. You personally, did you have plans for return?
20 A. To be very honest, no.
21 Q. Let me turn to another topic now. In paragraph 10 of your
22 statement which is page 3 in both English and B/C/S, you refer to your
23 father. Could you tell us where your -- where did your father live
24 before the 4th of August, 1995?
25 A. Including the 4th of August and the 5th of August, he lived in
1 the village of Kijani, in the hamlet called Surle.
2 Q. And under what circumstances did you first start believing your
3 father was dead?
4 A. Immediately after the operation, after Operation Storm and after
5 we fled to Serbia, we tried to get him out of the village but he refused
6 to leave the village. I personally told him that his safety might be at
7 risk but he did not want to leave, even temporarily, but he stayed down
9 So when we arrived there, I said some 10 or 15 days later when he
10 didn't turn up that we should report him as missing to the International
11 Red Cross, the Red Cross of Serbia, the then-Yugoslavia, and I did that.
12 I reported his disappearance to UNPROFOR which was still in Krajina, that
13 part of Croatia, that is, and to the Croatian-Helsinki watch. My friend
14 the late Pero Mrkoj [phoen], who was the director of the Helsinki board
15 at the time went and inspected the area and went to Gracac and tried to
16 learn something about my father after I had spoken to him, and he came
17 back to me to tell me that nobody told him anything about my father. His
18 trail was lost.
19 After that, I reported all that to the information and
20 documentation centre Veritas in Belgrade, an institution that also dealt
21 with the issue. In other words, I spoke to all the institutions that
22 might have helped to learn something, but I couldn't learn anything. The
23 information that I received was controversial, mostly wrong, and some
24 year later when I had already lost a hope that I would ever see him
25 alive, I started actually believing that he had been killed.
1 Q. When did you first learn some concrete information about your
2 father's whereabouts?
3 A. The first concrete piece of information came in 2004 after the
4 exhumation of victims from the Gracac cemetery. I got a call to come to
5 give blood in Zagreb for the -- for DNA analysis.
6 Q. Was there anything else that happened prior to that
8 A. Before that identification, I got a call from the Veritas office
9 in Belgrade. I believe it was in 2002 when that happened. They had
10 received certain photos of bodies which had been found in the area of
11 Gracac and other locations through the exchange with the Croatian side.
12 I went there to possibly recognise my father's body among those photos.
13 MS. FROLICH: Could we show Exhibit 65 ter 04847, sorry, 65 ter
14 number, not exhibit.
15 Q. Mr. Sovilj, what did you observe when you went to Veritas? What
16 was on the photos of bodies?
17 A. There were a lot of photos depicting bodies. My attention was
18 attracted by a photo of a body which appeared to be a gruesome image. It
19 was a decomposing body that had previously been burned, I believe. I was
20 attracted by one thing in that photo and that was a metal tobacco box,
21 which I had bought my father maybe two years prior to Operation Storm and
22 that my father used to carry on him at all times so at that point, I
23 assumed, I suspected that that might have been my father's body next to
24 that tobacco box.
25 Q. Mr. Sovilj, do you see the document on the screen in front of you
1 on the right-hand side is the document in the B/C/S version. Now do you
2 recognise what is this document?
3 A. Yes, this document is a report on death that I received from the
4 Department of Forensic Medicine in Zagreb when I received the mortal
5 remains of my father at the border crossing between Ilok and Backa
6 Palanka. And before that, the DNA analysis had established a positive
7 identity of my father as one of the bodies that were exhumed.
8 MS. FROLICH: Excuse me, could we scroll back to the left-hand
10 Q. Are there any mistakes in this death certificate that you think
11 should be just corrected for the record?
12 A. Just the year of birth, it says 1930 whereas my father was born
13 in 1931. I don't know how this error occurred.
14 MS. FROLICH: Could this document be tendered into evidence,
16 JUDGE ORIE: No one apparently --
17 MR. MIKULICIC: No objections.
18 JUDGE ORIE: No objections from either Defence counsel.
19 Mr. Registrar, that would be number ...
20 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P89, Your Honours.
21 JUDGE ORIE: P89 is admitted into evidence. Please proceed,
22 Ms. Frolich.
23 MS. FROLICH: Thank you. Could we show 65 ter number 04846.
24 Q. Mr. Sovilj, what is this document?
25 A. This document is, as far as I can see, just one part of the list
1 of people missing or killed in Operation Storm who hailed from the
2 territory of Gracac.
3 Q. Is there any information on this -- in this document that is
4 familiar to you?
5 A. I would just like to say that there's some family names that hail
6 from the territory of Knin, not only from Gracac. I'm familiar with the
7 name of my father, Vlade Sovilj, father's name, Mile; and then
8 Danica Sovilj, whose father's name was Milos. I'm also familiar with the
9 name of Nebojsa, Surle; Ilija, Orla and Nedeljeko Petar.
10 Q. I apologise. Could you just read the numbers that are next to
11 the these names that you recognise of your father and Danica Sovilj.
12 A. 22 in front of my father, and 23 in front of Danica Sovilj.
13 Q. Could you read please the date of your father?
14 A. 27 November 1931.
15 Q. And the number that's in the column --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Frolich.
17 MS. FROLICH: Yes.
18 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that you want to tender this document into
20 MS. FROLICH: I do.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then the Chamber is I would say perfectly able
22 to read 22, 23, 25 and the 1931 instead of 1930 as the date of birth of
23 the father of this witness.
24 You want to tender this document into evidence?
25 MR. MIKULICIC: No objections.
1 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
2 Mr. Registrar.
3 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P90, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar. P90 is admitted into
5 evidence if you have any further questions which go beyond just reading
6 what the document says, please proceed, Ms. Frolich.
7 MS. FROLICH: No, thank you, I'm done with this document.
8 Now could 65 ter 03820 be shown on screen and at the same time,
9 would it be possible to show the hard copy of the exhibit as well to the
10 witness, namely just some portions that are translated are part of the
11 same document unless it is easy to go to a different page in the same
12 document at the same time. That would be page 1 in English and page 22
13 is the portion that's -- the same portion that's translated into B/C/S.
14 That's also number X0164071. Yes.
15 Q. Mr. Sovilj, on the screen in front of you -- have you seen this
16 document before?
17 A. Indeed, I have.
18 Q. When did you see this document for the first time?
19 A. Yesterday.
20 Q. Is there any information in this document on this page that is
21 familiar to you?
22 A. Well, a reference is made here to the cigarette box and the word
23 used here is tobajara that's the word used for the object in case.
24 MS. FROLICH: Thank you. Could this document be tendered into
1 MR. MIKULICIC: No objections.
2 JUDGE ORIE: We hear of no objections.
3 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P91, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE ORIE: P91 is admitted into evidence.
5 Please proceed.
6 MS. FROLICH: Thank you.
7 Can 65 ter 04845 be shown. Could we zoom in a little bit. Thank
9 Q. Do you recognise this photo?
10 A. I do.
11 Q. Where did you see this photo?
12 A. Here, yesterday, in your office.
13 Q. What do you -- is there anything on this photo that you
15 A. Again, I can see the same metal tobacco case, but I'm also
16 familiar with the pull over -- I believe that my father had a very
17 similar if not an identical pull over.
18 Q. Can you go to the next page of this 65 ter? Do you recognise
19 this photo and what is on this photo?
20 A. Yes. The metal cigarette case appears again, the tobajara.
21 MS. FROLICH: If both photographs in this 65 ter number could be
22 tendered into evidence, please.
23 MR. MIKULICIC: No objections, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
25 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P92, Your Honours.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and that's the series of photographs, P92 is
2 admitted into evidence. Please proceed.
3 MS. FROLICH:
4 Q. Mr. Sovilj, is this tobacco case, is this the same tobacco case
5 that you talk about earlier as belonging to your father?
6 A. As far as I can see, I believe so, as far as I can tell.
7 Q. Thank you. In paragraph 14 of your statement, you talk about
8 your native village of Kijani being hit. Can you briefly explain what
9 you meant by that? To be clear, this is page 3 in English and page 4 in
11 A. What I meant was that -- actually, this was a wrong
12 interpretation of my words when I was providing the statement. The
13 village of Kijani was not shelled. Shells never fell there. When I said
14 that the village was hit, I meant that it was plundered and torched.
15 That's what I meant by this word "hit."
16 Q. What happened to your family's house?
17 A. My mother and father had two houses, the old one and the new one,
18 the latter having been constructed on the eve of Operation Storm. Both
19 houses were looted and torched.
20 MS. FROLICH: Can you show 65 ter 4853, page 1.
21 Q. Mr. Sovilj, while we are waiting -- it's loading.
22 Do you -- what is this photo?
23 A. This photo depicts my parents' new house which looks just like
24 you see it here.
25 Q. And who took this photograph?
1 A. The photo was taken by my friends who went there and popped over
2 either by chance or intentionally. They travelled through Kijani and
3 they took this photo.
4 Q. Can you go to page 2. And I believe there should be a
5 translation available of what is written on page 2. I'm not sure if we
6 can load the translation as well.
7 In the meantime, Mr. Sovilj, can you read out what is written on
8 this? Oh, it's not going to be necessary. What is this writing?
9 A. This is on the back of the photo that we have just seen. It says
10 here, "The house of Milena and Vlade Sovilj in the village of Kijani
11 Gracac municipality destroyed in Storm in 1995."
12 MS. FROLICH: Thank you. And can these two pages of 62 ter be
13 tendered into evidence, please?
14 MR. MIKULICIC: No objections.
15 JUDGE ORIE: No objections. Mr. Registrar.
16 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P93, Your Honours.
17 JUDGE ORIE: P93 is admitted into evidence.
18 MS. FROLICH: Mr. President, I just only have a couple more
19 questions then I will be done.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes then if you would please finish before we
21 adjourn for the day, that's four minutes from now.
22 MS. FROLICH:
23 Q. How many people lived in Kijani before you left it in 1995?
24 A. I can't be very precise. According to my estimate, between 70
25 and 80 people.
1 Q. And you mention in paragraph 13 of your statement you did not
2 return to Croatia for safety reasons. Can you elaborate on that?
3 A. I had never intended to go back to live there for several
4 reasons. One of the reasons was also safety.
5 Q. Where does your family live nowadays?
6 A. In Novi Sad.
7 Q. And can you tell the Court who you have left of your family?
8 A. Unfortunately, my family has been halved. My father was killed
9 during the war in his village and four years later, first my wife died,
10 and then my mother due to the inability to adapt to a life as refugees
11 and they just could not cope with everything that they had been through
12 which means that only me and my son are now left.
13 MS. FROLICH: Thank you.
14 Mr. President, that concludes my direct examination.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
16 Could I inquire with the Defence counsel how much time they would
17 need for cross-examination? Mr. Mikulicic.
18 MR. MIKULICIC: Your Honour, I will go first and I think I need
19 let's say an hour and a half, two hours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of course we'll not do that today.
21 Other Defence counsel.
22 MR. MISETIC: I believe Mr. Mikulicic will cover all the topics
23 and I don't anticipate any cross-examination.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay.
25 MR. KAY: No questions at this moment.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 Mr. Sovilj, we will conclude for the day and we will resume
3 tomorrow. Just to prepare you already, you will find two judges
4 tomorrow, I will not be there tomorrow but I will read carefully what
5 your testimony is so don't be surprised if you find only two tomorrow.
6 Mr. Sovilj, I would like to instruct you that you should not
7 speak with anyone about your testimony, that is your testimony that
8 you've given already today or you're still about to give tomorrow. Is
9 that clear to you?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Tomorrow, we'll start at 9.00 in Courtroom III.
12 Mr. Usher, would you please escort Mr. Sovilj out of the courtroom.
13 [The witness stands down]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Frolich, what would we have missed if not only
15 this witness would have told us that this was his parents house or the
16 new house of his parents but if he would not have known who made that
17 photograph, if he would not have known that the person who took that
18 photograph apparently wrote at the photograph the same thing that is
19 already testified. Similar questions I could put in relation to the
20 tobacco box. The tobacco box once written with TA then with TO, is there
21 any -- was there any dispute about this house being the destroyed house
22 of the parents of this witness. Is there any dispute where apparently
23 there has been some DNA analysis whether the reason why we final came to
24 this person was through the tobacco box which then appears in a document
25 read out in full, then we see a picture of this tobacco box?
1 I fully understand how important that is for witnesses, but how
2 important is it for us at this moment?
3 MS. FROLICH: Thank you, Mr. President. This was merely meant to
4 assist the Chamber in clarifying that the identification that were made
5 in different documents related to the same body or the same individual.
6 Therefore, there is, I believe, no dispute.
7 JUDGE ORIE: There's no dispute about it. Why not then tell the
8 Chamber, we have an autopsy report and Defence and Prosecution agree that
9 it is an autopsy report related to the father of the witness and this has
10 been confirmed by DNA. That's done in approximately 30 seconds whereas I
11 think we spent altogether, and these are just two examples, and I
12 insisted several, several, several times on efficiency in these matters.
13 That is the Chamber would like to hear specifically where the parties
14 apparently disagree and a bit to our surprise where there seems to be
15 quite a lot of argument, we found yesterday that we had to ask for this
16 information in addition to what the parties had presented.
17 I again, I'm urging both parties really to try to use our court
18 time as efficiently as possible and with full respect for the trial
19 techniques you apparently are using in a very skilled way, nevertheless,
20 please focus on the core issues.
21 We will adjourn for the day. We'll adjourn until tomorrow, the
22 25th of April, 9.00 in the morning Courtroom III.
23 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.49 p.m.
24 to be reconvened on Friday, the 25th day of April,
25 2008 at 9.00 a.m.