Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 5191

 1                           Thursday, 26 June 2008

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The witness entered court]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 9.07 a.m.

 6                           [Technical difficulty]

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning to everyone.  Good morning,

 8     Mr. Galbraith.

 9             Mr.  Tieger, are you ready to put further questions to the

10     witness?

11             MR. TIEGER:  Yes, Your Honour.  Thank you.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Galbraith, then, I would like to remind you that

13     you are still bound by the solemn declaration you gave at the beginning

14     of your testimony.

15             I see that there is no transcript.

16             And, of course, before we continue, I would invite Mr. Registrar

17     to call the case.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning to

19     everyone in the courtroom.  This is case number IT-06-90-T --

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, we could give it a new start because

21     we have no transcript at this moment.

22             There seems to be a technical problem.

23             Mr. Galbraith, we need some patience.  Although the IT helps us

24     very much, sometimes it lets us down.

25             Let's have a new start.

Page 5192

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.

 2             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning to

 3     everyone in the courtroom.  This is case number IT-06-90-T, The

 4     Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

 6             Mr. Galbraith, I, again, but now on the record, remind that you

 7     are still bound by your solemn declaration that you gave at the beginning

 8     of your testimony this Monday.

 9             Mr. Tieger, are you ready?

10             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Again, you're ready.

12             Please proceed.

13             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you.

14                           WITNESS:  PETER WOODARD GALBRAITH [Resumed]

15                           Re-examination by Mr. Tieger:

16        Q.   Good morning, Mr. Ambassador.

17        A.   Good morning.

18        Q.   Just quickly, you were asked, yesterday, presented with a

19     document, D416, referring to the Krajina Liberation Army.  I was

20     wondering if you were aware of whether that body was ever constituted,

21     formed, and active?

22        A.   It certainly wasn't active, and I -- and since I don't have any

23     other awareness of its existence, I presume it was a pretty negligible

24     institution, if it existed at all.

25        Q.   You were asked on Tuesday, at approximately page 4997, I think

Page 5193

 1     you were directed to a portion of your -- of the book, "United States and

 2     Croatia, A Documentary History:  1992-1997," an excerpt which referred to

 3     the Washington Agreement and which included a statement that, by the

 4     Washington Agreement, Croatia agreed to abandon the idea of an separatist

 5     Croatian republic in part of Bosnia; and, instead, decided to support

 6     fully the territorial integrity independence and unity of that sovereign

 7     country; and in so doing Croatia put itself squarely on the side of

 8     international law and justice.

 9             And you were asked whether President Tudjman, on behalf of the

10     Republic of Croatia, went along with the Washington Agreement.

11             Actually, you were asked:  President Tudjman, on behalf of the

12     Republic of Croatia, went along with the Washington Agreement, did he

13     not?

14             And you responded:  "He did not like the idea of the Washington

15     Agreement.  He did not want to conclude the Washington Agreement.  But

16     under intense pressure from the United States, he was pragmatic enough to

17     agree at various times.  He did what he could to undermine the Washington

18     Agreement; but in the end, the agreement did survive."

19             I simply wanted to ask to you briefly explain what

20     President Tudjman did to undermine the agreement and why those steps were

21     taken?

22        A.   Well, first, he did not want to include the agreement up until

23     almost the last minute.  We presented the proposal at one point to him on

24     a Thursday and he rejected it; and then over the weekend, as he

25     contemplated possible sanctions on Croatia, he changed his mind and

Page 5194

 1     accepted it.

 2             Once it was signed, he -- the idea was then that the separate

 3     institutions of Herceg-Bosna would disappear, but, in fact, it remained

 4     as a separate state, a de facto state.  It had used the Croatian Kuna as

 5     its currency.  It operated in part with Croatian banks.

 6             In the 1995 Croatian -  well, was it 1995 or 1996 Croatian

 7     presidential election - all through the Herceg-Bosna, there were posters

 8     for Tudjman.  I think the slogan was "The right man for the right time,"

 9     and we also wanted to add "and the wrong country," because it wasn't

10     Croatia.

11             There was no commitment on his part to building common

12     institutions; and, basically, I could give you a long litany of ways in

13     which he did not wish to see a real integration between the Bosniaks and

14     the Bosnian Croats.

15        Q.   Ambassador, you were asked yesterday at length, and there was

16     extensive discussion concerning the laws on return and property, and the

17     question of the timing of return, the intent behind the decrees and laws

18     referring or directed to that issue.

19             MR. TIEGER:

20             And in connection with that, Your Honours, I wanted to present

21     the ambassador with a document that currently has a number for which --

22     but about which this is an dispute.  So I wanted to bring the Court's

23     attention to that first, and that is P462.

24             We received a communication, I believe the Court did as well,

25     that this document is contested.  I won't be seeking to tender it, but

Page 5195

 1     this will be the only opportunity to elicit from this witness any

 2     response to -- to that document.

 3             We can resolve the question of the admissibility of that document

 4     in due course, but I would like to proceed with presenting it to the

 5     ambassador.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic --

 7             MR. KEHOE:  Just --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kehoe, yes.

 9             MR. KEHOE:  I'm sorry, Your Honour.  I am just trying to pull

10     up --

11             MR. TIEGER:  Before my learned friend begins, I just wanted to

12     said "I won't be seeking to tender."  I meant to say I won't be seeking

13     to tender it at this time, until the issue is resolved.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But you intend to put it to the witness.

15             MR. TIEGER:  Yes.  First, I --

16             MR. MISETIC:  It is my understanding of what happened on Monday,

17     and I could be wrong procedurally, but I thought it was admitted with the

18     proviso that we had seven days to raise an objection to get it

19     unadmitted.  So, I don't know --

20             MR. TIEGER:  I appreciate that.

21             MR. MISETIC:  -- what tendering means.

22             MR. TIEGER:  Sorry.  That is precisely right.  I didn't mean to

23     preempt the objection in any way.

24             MR. MISETIC:  Right.  I guess, I would, on behalf of the Gotovina

25     Defence, I guess object if the document, itself, is not authentic, then

Page 5196

 1     the propriety of putting an inauthentic document to a witness, to ask his

 2     opinion on a document that, on its face, doesn't appear to be an

 3     authentic document.

 4             I don't know if the Chamber was -- has seen the e-mail that I

 5     sent yesterday.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  I saw an e-mail of 6.27 p.m. yesterday.

 7             MR. MISETIC:  That's right.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  It was copied to the legal officer of the Chamber.

 9             MR. TIEGER:  I mean, as Mr. Misetic, I think, very fairly and

10     graciously pointed out, the document is in evidence pending the

11     objection.

12             The question of its authenticity, in our view, is not one that's

13     going to lead to anything but the admissibility of that document.  This

14     is a document that we received pursuant to RFAs in due course, in the

15     same manner as we did the other documents.  There may be questions.

16             I mean, I don't want to address the issues raised by counsel at

17     this time, but our position is that the document is fully admissible,

18     properly admissible, will be admitted, but this will be the only

19     opportunity to elicit comment from a well-informed witness.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  I see that.  First, when I read the e-mail

21     yesterday, the first thought that came into my mind, if it is not

22     authentic, where does it come from.

23             MR. MISETIC:  And I was about to say that we also have the same

24     document from the Republic of Croatia --

25             JUDGE ORIE:  But a different one.

Page 5197

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Well, I mean, I guess it is to be determined

 2     whether the problem was in Croatia, or the problem happened in the Office

 3     of the Prosecutor, or --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  Are there differences in relation to the issue

 5     Mr. Tieger wants to raise?  Because, otherwise, if the whole of the

 6     document, if you were both provided apparently by the Croatian

 7     government?

 8             MR. MISETIC:  The Croatian state archive.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, state archive.

10             And you got it from the?

11             MR. TIEGER:  The Croatian government, pursuant to a request for

12     assistance.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  From the Croatian government, yes.  Now, that means

14     that there is a fair chance that those portions which are identical, that

15     we can later sort out what is the entire document, what is the authentic

16     one --

17             MR. TIEGER:  Your Honour, just to clarify, if I may, so there

18     won't be confusion down the road.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

20             MR. TIEGER:  What appears to be the case is that the document

21     that was provided to Mr. Misetic is identical to the document that was

22     provided to us, with the exception of a number of pages which include the

23     discussion, which the individuals whom he identified in the e-mail

24     participated.  So we fully accept that they weren't participants in that

25     particular meeting, and somehow two meetings got conflated in the

Page 5198

 1     document we were sent.

 2             But, clearly, on the face of that document, or both documents if

 3     you want to consider them separately, they were both sent by Croatia.

 4     They both bear all the same earmarks of all the presidential transcripts,

 5     including the same transcribers' notations.  It is simply a case that

 6     they were placed together, instead of submitted separately.

 7             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, I don't have knowledge of a second

 8     meeting, unless --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  I do understand that there could be a dispute about

10     what in its entirety would the authentic document or not.  At the same

11     time, I do take it that, at this moment, Mr. Tieger wants to put to this

12     witness a portion of what apparently is a transcript or a report of a

13     meeting.

14             Now, if the two versions of this document are in that respect the

15     same, then even without the document itself - I don't know how long the

16     portion would be, Mr. Tieger - it could even be read into the record,

17     saying that "Mr. Galbraith, it was reported, although in two different

18     documents, that this and this and this was said during a meeting which

19     was held on, I do understand, the 9th of August," then we can put that to

20     the witness and then later --

21             MR. MISETIC:  That is precisely the problem, Your Honour.  Let me

22     just take a step back here.

23             The meeting where we know the date, the place, the participants

24     et cetera, is not -- the text that he wants to put to him is not in the

25     context of that meeting.  So, I guess, now the position of the

Page 5199

 1     Prosecution is that this portion of that transcript that he wishes to put

 2     to him comes from some other meeting for which we don't know the

 3     participants, the date, the place, anything, at this point in time.  So

 4     it's out of context completely.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  At this moment -- yes.

 6             MR. MISETIC:  And I would add that Mr. Galbraith is not someone

 7     who was present four either meeting.  So the second objection would be

 8     that, essentially, we are now asking him to comment or provide an opinion

 9     on his interpretation of a portion of a transcript which we don't know

10     where it comes from, when the meeting occurred, with whom it occurred, at

11     what date it occurred, to provide, essentially, an opinion.  However, I

12     think we are here to hear his observations and facts of what he actually

13     saw at the time.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Whether Mr. Tieger is going to ask for an opinion is

15     still to be seen, because I haven't heard Mr. Tieger's question yet.  So

16     it could be about whether he observed something personally, as was

17     described in this meeting, of which we do not know who exactly

18     participated --

19             MR. MISETIC:  Or when.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  When, yes.

21             MR. TIEGER:  Your Honour.  Insofar as "when" is concerned, like

22     many other documents we've seen in this institution, this could be

23     contextually dated.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, of course.  We don't know the document, so

25     whether this document would allow for contextually dating this document

Page 5200

 1     is still uncertain.

 2             Let me just confer with my colleagues.

 3                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  The Chamber will allow Mr. Tieger to read a portion

 5     of a report on a meeting on which the Chamber is now fully aware that

 6     when this meeting was held, where it was held, who were the participants,

 7     is still to be determined; and then we will carefully listen to

 8     Mr. Tieger's question, and we'll see what he would like to know from the

 9     witness, not perhaps primarily about the document, but primarily about

10     the content of what was reported, both in your version and in your

11     version, Mr. Tieger, that was said during this meeting.

12             Please proceed.

13             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you very much, Your Honour.

14        Q.   Ambassador, pursuant to the Court's directions, I'm going read

15     portions of this document to you.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  And do it slowly please, Mr. Tieger.

17             MR. TIEGER:  Quite slowly.

18             MR. KEHOE:  Counsel, can you tell me what pages you are reading,

19     please.

20             MR. TIEGER:  Beginning with page 18.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Which version.

22             MR. KEHOE:  That, I don't know either, Your Honour.

23             MR. TIEGER:  Exhibit P462, Your Honour.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, P462.

25             MR. TIEGER:  And that I believe is page 20 or 21 in the B/C/S.

Page 5201

 1        Q.   It begins, Ambassador.

 2             President saying:  "Karpina."

 3             And then Drago Karpina:  "Mr. President, I think we should pass a

 4     law:  They would declare all abandoned property, state property on the

 5     pretext of preserving the property.  And, then, in the procedure, if

 6     someone returns, if there are no legal obstacles, the state will give him

 7     back his property.  In addition, in my opinion, this thing should be put

 8     into the context of future succession, war damage, and everything else,

 9     as in the case of Italy after the Second World War.  I think this can be

10     defended politically, legally, and in any other way."

11             Then Nikica Valentic:  "President, in this law, it is important

12     that our people have security and that they cannot be thrown out.  In my

13     opinion, that is important, the wording, because nobody will move in if

14     they can be thrown out in a year.  Now the question is what form is most

15     suitable to put this basic idea in."

16             Dr. Jure Radic:  "Nothing is more important than this, nothing is

17     more important in Croatia today than this, because people are coming,

18     Croats.  And I don't know, we don't have a report on this, but I don't

19     know if you know that Vojnic used to have only 51 inhabitants.  Today, it

20     is a town of 15.000 people.  Tomorrow, we can fill up with 15.000 in

21     addition.  Lapac has 14 inhabitants, 14 Croats; Donji Lapac, 14

22     inhabitants (It's more than the number of houses).  I agree.  But it is

23     strategically so important and it's in such a position that we must

24     repair the houses, Gojko, and put Croats there.  Such is the position of

25     the place."

Page 5202

 1              President:  "I am with the more radical.  If someone has left

 2     the country and does not appear there, I don't know, a month or three

 3     month, et cetera, that shall be considered think of the wording, state

 4     property, et cetera.  We have come out of a war, et cetera.  Define it

 5     like that."

 6             Nikica Valentic:  "Not three months.  Three months is to long

 7     because we ..." --

 8             President:  "Okay, a month then."

 9             Dr. Jure Radic:  "Well, then we must do it through a government

10     decree.  We can't wait.  And the assembly is on the 15th September, and

11     we must do it through a government decree."

12             Djuro Brodanac:  "Yes.  It should be done urgently, urgent

13     because today ..." --

14             Dr. Jure Radic:  "Because the three-month deadline has already

15     expired for Okucani, and that's an area where we must be able to move

16     people in already."

17             There is another I portion I am going to want to bring your

18     attention to in a moment, Ambassador, but let me ask you a few questions

19     about those excerpts first.

20             First of all, referring to Mr. Karpina's initial comments about

21     passing a law declaring all abandoned property state property on the

22     pretext of preserving the property, was that consistent with what you

23     observed in Croatia; and, in particular, did you observe conditions or

24     circumstances indicating that the declaration referring to abandoned

25     property was a pretext -- was based on a pretext for preserving the

Page 5203

 1     property?

 2        A.   Yes.  It is completely consistent with what I observed.

 3             Second, it was -- it was part of an operation that was aimed at

 4     confiscating this property, and the notion that property was being

 5     observed was based on what I observed and the opinions I formed at the

 6     time and that I still have.  The notion of preserving the property was

 7     simply a pretext for taking the property, making it impossible for the

 8     Serbs who had left to return to that property, and as part of a scheme to

 9     try to resettle Croats in the area, thereby changing its strategic -- the

10     strategic complexion of the Krajina from being Serbian to being Croat.

11        Q.   And let me direct your attention -- sorry.

12             Let me continue for a moment.

13             Dr. Jure Radic:  "We have good houses, intact houses.  Who do we

14     keep them for?"

15             Nikica Valentic:  "So, move them into the houses, and we will

16     provide for that by law or decree in the coming days."

17             Antun Vrdoljak:  "So they must know that if they move into the

18     house, we will ..." --

19             MR. KEHOE:  Excuse me, Counsel.  Can you just give us a --

20             MR. TIEGER:  Oh, I'm sorry.  That's page 21.

21             MR. KEHOE:  Can we transfer there, please.

22             MR. TIEGER:

23        Q.   Again, Mr. Vrdoljak:  "So they must know that if they move into

24     the house, we will not ..." --

25             Then Ivan Milas:  "Mr. President, it doesn't even need to be that

Page 5204

 1     way.  You put everything under the state's sequestration and give

 2     guarantees to those inside that nobody will touch them, the state deals

 3     with them, and we put that also for these," and then parenthesis, which

 4     in these transcripts seems to indicate that someone else is speaking:

 5     (We did).

 6             Vladimir Seks:  "President, we did put it into the law for the

 7     second reading, but the people that move into a house have ownership

 8     security.  They don't want temporary use.  They must invest, repair, keep

 9     it in order, if they want to own it."

10             President:  "Yes.  Well, that's clear.  It's in our interests,

11     too.  Sarinic?"

12             Hrvoje Sarinic:  "Mr. President, first, as far as I understand,

13     the law is about allotment of temporary housing, and I'm sure that

14     nobody, or very few people, will move in under these conditions.  At a

15     VONS meeting, I already say said where I asked about the case when the

16     French left Algeria.  The case set a precedent that the whole

17     international community subsequently adopted; that is, the Algerians

18     moved into all abandoned flats, houses belonging, in fact, to the French;

19     and then the state paid for ten years a symbolic franc for this into a

20     fund, so simply for the sake of form.

21             "And they said, when resolving the whole problem, what they

22     collected over ten years would be made available.  We have the

23     succession, which will take place, so we could create such a fund, and

24     say we will include that into the succession and the succession.

25             "But quite the opposite, people have moved in with definite

Page 5205

 1     guarantees that they move into the houses."

 2             President:  "Yes.  "We should definitely do that, but there we

 3     can -- I mean ..."  -- And then it emphasizes:  "President" means the

 4     president is speaking:  "Yes.  We should definitely do that, but there we

 5     can -- I mean, it didn't go as individual compensation.  If from a legal

 6     point of point of view they should be individually compensated, then we

 7     should do it, and then we have the right ..." --

 8             MR. KEHOE:  Excuse me, Counsel.  I'm just waiting for this page

 9     to change.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Although, I take it you can get that page by

11     yourself on the computer.  Double-click on it, and then --

12             MR. KEHOE:  I was just following the transcript, Judge, but I was

13     following what is coming up on e-court.  That's all.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

15             Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.

16             MR. TIEGER:  "... then we should do it, and then we have the

17     right that he did not take part in the war against Croatia in the

18     destruction of Croatia, et cetera."

19             Djuro Brodanac:  "Nobody can get such ..." --

20             President:  "Please, we must be, if they could destroy half of

21     Croatia, then we must be ... enough to now that we can do it."

22        Q.   Ambassador, referring to Mr. Sarinic's comments about the

23     succession in Algeria and the establishment of a symbolic fund for

24     succession, can you put that into context for the Court, and indicate

25     whether that's consistent with the positions and policies you saw or

Page 5206

 1     heard from the people in attendance at this meeting?

 2        A.   Yes, it is.  As I testified before, I heard this transcript,

 3     which confirms the points I was making.  Tudjman's idea - and they're

 4     discussing it in this meeting - Tudjman's idea was that they would seize

 5     the Serb property; give permanent ownership to the Croats who settled

 6     into it; and then settle the claims of these -- of the departed Serbs,

 7     not treating them as Croatian citizens, but as citizens of Yugoslavia

 8     and, therefore, having their property settled -- their property rights

 9     settled internationally.

10             Sarinic referred to what happened in Algeria, but what I heard

11     earlier in the transcript - and I meant to call your attention to it, my

12     previous answer, but I will now - to set it will as they did, the claims

13     by ethnic Italians in Istrija under the Osemo [phoen] Agreement.

14     Basically, at the end of the Second World War, Tito took over Istrija;

15     confiscated the property of Italians; and then in a by lateral agreement

16     between Yugoslavia and Italy, the ethnic Italians were given a pittance,

17     almost nothing as compared to the value of the property.

18             And that is exactly what Tudjman had in mind; and, of course, it

19     is what Sarinic is describing happened to the French in Algeria.

20             We knew that this is what Tudjman had in mind.  We objected to

21     this because we believed that these people were Croatian citizens and

22     should be treated on the same basis as other Croatian citizens, not in an

23     unfair which, which would be the result of handling as claims -- by

24     nationals of a different country.

25        Q.   Now, Ambassador, you referred to making it impossible to return

Page 5207

 1     and barriers to return.  And in your statement at paragraph 36, you

 2     stated that although that issue was -- that that issue was linked to

 3     passports which Serbs were unable to obtain.

 4             I'd like to bring your attention next to P466, if I may, please,

 5     and I'd like to direct the Ambassador's attention to page 25 of the

 6     English and page 53 of the B/C/S.

 7             MR. TIEGER:  Your Honour, if it's helpful I have a hard copy of

 8     that for the witness.

 9        Q.   Ambassador, if I could direct your attention to page 25, toward

10     the top, when Mr. Jarnjak begins to speak.

11             Ivan Jarnjak:  "And I should mention the other question that

12     should become operational now, and I have to say it is not a big one, but

13     it appears."

14             MR. TIEGER:  Your Honour, I should mention that this is a

15     transcript from August 30th, 1995.

16        Q.   Continuing with what Mr. Jarnjak is saying:  "The question is

17     about the Serbs that are coming through Hungary, and they are coming to

18     knock on our border because they want to come back."

19             President:  "Do they have passports."

20             Ivan Jarnjak:  "No.  They do not have anything."

21             Mr. Sarinic:  "They have Yugoslav passports."

22             Ivan Jarnjak:  "I would like us to give them ..." --

23             MR. KEHOE:  Excuse me.  We're trying to get some context to this

24     reading, Your Honour, from passing back and forth, both on mine and the

25     Court's.  Now it comes up on e-court.

Page 5208

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Since it is now on the screen, you may proceed.

 2             MR. TIEGER:  I'm sorry.  And I recognise now the logical

 3     difficulties; and with any future documents, I will pause and make sure

 4     that counsel has that on their screen.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Could we just inquire:  Do you have a way of getting

 6     the whole of the document and not just the page which is in front of you?

 7     Because what I usually do is I immediately switch to the entire document,

 8     which makes me less dependant from those who are assisting us; not that I

 9     don't appreciate their assistance, but, nevertheless, independence is a

10     great thing.

11             MR. KEHOE:  It is a great thing, Judge.  It's just that, you

12     know, when someone says "I'm starting at page 18" and they start reading,

13     then I have to catch up and go into that.  I am trying to between two

14     different screens to get that.  Meanwhile, we are already about ten lines

15     into the reading.  So if we could just, you know, pause for a second,

16     say, "Okay.  We'll get on this particular page," so I can get on that

17     page, then it will make it a lot easier.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Tieger, not for me, but for Mr. Kehoe, perhaps

19     you slow down a bit.

20             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Your Honour.  Just for me; not for anybody else

21     in the courtroom.  Maybe I am not as logically savvy as everybody else --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  [Overlapping speakers] ... no, no --

23             MR. KEHOE:  -- but I would like to read along when counsel is

24     reading.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

Page 5209

 1             Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.

 2             MR. TIEGER:  I think I indicated I would do that.

 3        Q.   Mr.  Jarnjak:  "I would like us to give them instructions that

 4     they should get entry visas in Belgrade in our office, if you agree."

 5             President:  "I would not give anything.  You have to give

 6     instructions to the Customs that they should not let people without

 7     papers to cross border.

 8             Sarinic:  "President, let us get inspired the way it is in

 9     Western Slavonia.  It was very positive for us because no one came back.

10     Let them report to the international humanitarian organisations, and then

11     those organisations should give us ..." --

12             President:  "Wait a second.  He comes from another country and

13     the Custom's officer does not conduct any politics."

14             Sarinic:  "We should not let them come here.  No way.  They were

15     coming like this to Banja Luka as well ..." --

16             President:  "Therefore, you see."

17             Ivan Jarnjak:  "But we should give our people over there, until

18     they get the request, not to let them come in."

19             President:  "Therefore, we should not have any directions, but

20     just to let them know they cannot come inside."

21             Dr. Granic:  "According to the agreement, in Belgrade, there are

22     only 204 of them that are registered, and they started to register in

23     Skopje.  So they did that as well down there.  And the third thing is

24     that they started to come here without any papers."

25             President:  "If we let 204 persons come here, tomorrow you would

Page 5210

 1     have 1204, and in ten days 12.000, nothing for now."

 2             And, again, Ambassador, is this consistent with what you observed

 3     at the time and consistent with the policies and expressions an actions

 4     of those with whom you were dealing who were present at the meeting?

 5        A.   Yes.  It was the policy to make sure that Serbs could not return,

 6     by making sure that they could not get passports.

 7             MR. TIEGER:  And one more document quickly, P477.

 8        Q.   Ambassador, P477 is a report on the situation of human rights in

 9     Croatia, pursuant to Security Council Resolution 1019, and this report is

10     dated 21 December 1995, and if I can quickly direct your attention to

11     page 9 of that document.

12             MR. TIEGER:  And if we could highlight paragraph 35, the second

13     paragraph on that page.

14        Q.   And I just wanted to direct your attention to a sentence in the

15     middle of that paragraph:  "Given the substantial obstacles to return

16     discussed below, the requirement that owners must reclaim their property

17     by 27 December constitutes a virtually insurmountable obstacle for most

18     Serb refugees."

19             And, Ambassador, was that consistent with what you observed about

20     the effect and purpose of the policies?

21        A.   Yes, it is.

22        Q.   Ambassador, I wanted to move on quickly to another subject.  You

23     testified, at page 5055 on Tuesday, that you did not believe that Tudjman

24     was going to expel the Serbs, and that if you believed that he was going

25     to expel the Serbs from the Krajina, you would have urged, in the

Page 5211

 1     strongest possible way, for your government to give a red light to the

 2     operation.

 3             Now, directing your attention to your statement, in particular,

 4     paragraphs 22 and 23.  In paragraph 22, you state that just prior to

 5     Storm on August 1st, you issued warnings to President Tudjman that

 6     Serbian civilians had to be protected.  And as you stated in

 7     paragraph 23, you issued the warnings about the need to protect Serbian

 8     civilians "because there were a number of reasons to be worried that

 9     persecutions of civilians were likely."

10             And you continued to indicate the reasons for that, the reasons

11     for issuing the warnings about the need to protect Serbian civilians,

12     included that you knew that President Tudjman wanted an ethnically

13     homogeneous Croatia.

14             And, Ambassador, at paragraph 81 of your statement, you indicate

15     that or you state that:  "Had the Serb population remained when Croatia

16     took over ..." -- that's the last sentence and paragraph in that

17     statement:  "Had the Serb position remained when Croatia took over, the

18     Croatian policies would have been such to make them leave."

19             And, similarly, at paragraph 42 of your statement - and if I'm

20     moving too quickly, please tell me - you indicate in the last sentence of

21     that paragraph, paragraph 42, that you believe that:  "Had the Serbs

22     remained, the Croats would have engaged in ethnic cleansing."

23             MR. KEHOE:  Excuse me, excuse me, Your Honour.  First of all

24     that's an area of speculation, this last line; and, second of all, this

25     was never gone into in cross-examination, and we're talking about a

Page 5212

 1     situation where he said there was no ethnic cleansing there.  And this

 2     particular area is an area of pure speculation, as the Prosecutor knows,

 3     in paragraph 42 as to what would have happened if anybody was there.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Is this in -- I do see two elements in your

 5     submission.  The one is that you consider the portion read of

 6     paragraph 42 to be speculation, which does not object to the question.  I

 7     don't think that you have asked about that.  And, of course, what would

 8     have happened if matters would have gone differently, that is clear to

 9     the Chamber as well.

10             So to that extent, of course, the Chamber will carefully look at

11     whether there is speculation or whether there are facts known to a

12     witness.

13             The second part, Mr. Tieger, is that the matter was not touched

14     upon in cross-examination and, therefore, whether in re-examination, it

15     would be appropriate to raise the issue.

16             I'd like to have a response to that.

17             MR. TIEGER:  Well, Your Honour, it would be, I think, clear if I

18     was permitted to ask the question, but the -- it arises from the

19     cross-examination.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's then first listen to the question, yes.

21             Mr. Tieger read some portions of the statement of the witness and

22     now we're waiting for his question, and then we might see whether this

23     question is about something that was raised in cross-examination.

24             MR. KEHOE:  As Your Honour has pointed out in other instances

25     from questions, you can tell when a question starts out where it

Page 5213

 1     ultimately is going to end; and if we go back scroll up and see what --

 2     how this question ended in the area of speculation, I think Your Honour

 3     can make a conclusion.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  The Chamber, it may come as a surprise, is

 5     often not aware of where a question ends.  So, therefore, let's first

 6     allow Mr. Tieger to complete the question, and then we may hear an

 7     objection to the question as formulated by Mr. Tieger.

 8             Mr. Tieger.

 9             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you, Your Honour.

10        Q.   Putting those together, Ambassador, was it the case that you

11     considered that the purpose of Operation Storm was the reintegration of

12     the Krajina and didn't believe that Tudjman was going to expel the Serbs,

13     but were concerned that during the course or after that operation, there

14     would be an effort to force Serbs out?

15             MR. KEHOE:  Judge.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Before I give an opportunity to Mr. Kehoe to object

17     to the question, could you please rephrase it in such a way that I

18     understand the question, and, hopefully, the witness also understands

19     what you're really asking him.

20             MR. TIEGER:

21        Q.   Ambassador, notwithstanding your belief at the time that Tudjman

22     was not going to expel the Serbs and so you didn't urge the US to give a

23     red light, were you, nevertheless, concerned that during the course of or

24     after the operation, there would be an effort to force Serbs out?

25             MR. KEHOE:  If I may, Judge.  This witness, pursuant to Your

Page 5214

 1     Honours' question, made it very clear that there was no intent to expel

 2     the Serbs as a result of Operation Storm.  Now counsel is trying to

 3     conflict this, and somehow alter that to the Prosecution's benefit

 4     because of that answer.

 5             That is clear from that anticipate, and, excuse me, Counsel, and

 6     what has happened here is we are now retreading ground that Your Honour

 7     clarified with the hope that the Prosecution can resuscitate this.  This

 8     has been asked an answered, and certainly asked an answered on numerous

 9     occasions by the Prosecution and certainly by the Court.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  I re-read the question.  One second.

11                           [Trial Chamber confers]

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Tieger, the Chamber considers the issue you're

13     raising in this question to be sufficiently dealt with in the examination

14     of the question.

15             MR. TIEGER:  I'm sorry.  I didn't have a chance to respond to

16     Mr. Kehoe.  So I want to make this clear, if I may.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please do so.

18             Mr. Kehoe.

19             MR. KEHOE:  No, no, I am just standing, sorry.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Although, it is not as common as you said, as an

21     exception, but also in order to redress a mistake I've made by not giving

22     you an opportunity to response.

23             So that' fair.  So an exception would be for me an exception to

24     make a similar mistake in the future.

25             Please proceed.

Page 5215

 1             MR. TIEGER:  Contrary to the assertion that the Prosecution is

 2     trying to conflate these issues, I'm concerned about the risk of having

 3     these issues improperly conflated and am trying to get the full picture

 4     of what this witness was aware of and was thinking and was concerned with

 5     at the time.  And I don't think his determination at the time or belief

 6     at the time that the operation wasn't intended for that purpose gainsays

 7     other aspects of what you knew and was concerned about at the time, and I

 8     just want to make sure that that isn't confused.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kehoe.

10             MR. KEHOE:  Your Honour, this was dealt with on direct

11     examination.  That was the Prosecution's opportunity.  The Court

12     specifically put this issue directly before Ambassador Galbraith on two

13     separate occasions.  He answered the occasions.  The Prosecution doesn't

14     like what the answer was, and now they want to go back into it and

15     attempt to change it.  That is the sum and substance of this strategy.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, let's --

17             MR. KEHOE:  I apologise.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  -- let's not analysis strategies.

19             MR. KEHOE:  Yes.  In any event, Your Honour, this is squarely

20     before the Court.  Based on what witness said, there is no need to go

21     back into this again, and yet resuscitate and re-cross on the issue once

22     again.

23             Thank you.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, in order not to make the same mistake,

25     Mr. Tieger.

Page 5216

 1             MR. TIEGER:  Yes, Your Honour.  I don't know what is meant by

 2     "resuscitate."  But if it provides any clarification, it is extremely

 3     useful to the Court, and I think the point I made is one in the interest

 4     of clarification.  If it doesn't, we -- the Court is clear; if it does,

 5     it is extremely helpful.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  I gave a ruling earlier on the basis of incomplete

 7     information.  Now the same ruling stands on the basis of incomplete

 8     information.

 9             Please proceed.

10             MR. TIEGER:

11        Q.   Ambassador, at paragraph -- at page 5175, you were asked about

12     and discussed, in particular, the Varivode incident, but more generally

13     the issue of investigations of killings where pressure from international

14     public on all sides was exceptionally great.  And I would like to draw

15     your attention, if I may, please, to 1D33-0325.

16             MR. TIEGER:  If that can be called up.

17        Q.   Ambassador, this is a further report on the situation of human

18     rights in Croatia pursuant to Security Council Resolution 1019, dated

19     14 February 1996, and if I could draw your attention to page 4, please.

20             Now, this is a section of the report that deals with violations

21     of the right to life.

22             MR. TIEGER:  And if we could highlight paragraph 13, please.

23        Q.   Paragraph 13 indicates that the -- or states that:  "The

24     discrepancies noted in my earlier report, between the number of apparent

25     violations of the right to life recorded by United Nations investigators

Page 5217

 1     in the former sectors -at least 150 - and the number of cases

 2     acknowledged by the Croatian authorities, continues to be unaccountably

 3     large.  While the government has pursued prosecutions in the most

 4     dramatic cases, e.g., the massacre of nine Serbs at Varivode and some

 5     others, there is little evidence of progress in resolving the many other

 6     reported cases of individual killings."

 7             Ambassador, was that consistent with your observations and

 8     information concerning the gap between the number of killings and the

 9     investigations -- and the investigations of dramatic or highly publicised

10     cases?

11        A.   Yes.

12             MR. TIEGER:  Your Honour, if may I, I would tender this exhibit.

13             MR. KEHOE:  No objection, Your Honour.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr, Kehoe.  I take it that you speak on

15     behalf of all Defence counsel.

16             Mr. Registrar.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit P485.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  P485 is admitted into evidence.

19             MR. TIEGER:  And, Your Honour, contrary to the Court's concerns

20     that the passage of time would inflate the period of examination, that

21     concludes my redirect.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

23             Mr. Kehoe, any need to put further questions to the witness.

24             MR. KEHOE:  No, Your Honour, we have no further questions.

25             Thank you, Mr. Ambassador.

Page 5218

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay, I see you're nodding no.

 2             MR. KAY:  No, Your Honour.

 3             MR. MIKULICIC:  No further questions, Your Honour.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Any questions by the Bench?

 5                           [Questioned by the Court]

 6             I would have one question in relation to paragraph 59 of your

 7     statement.

 8             Mr. Galbraith, I will read the relevant part.  You said:  "My

 9     impression was that the initial phases of the operation were relatively

10     respectful of international law, such as bringing people to camps where I

11     understood they were not abused.  The Serbs confined in camp did

12     criticise the shelling to which they were subjected."

13             This is an explanation as relatively respectful of international

14     law.  Bringing people to camps, could you explain to us where what you're

15     expressing here exactly as bringing people into camps, what that meant

16     under international law, and your views at the time?

17             I mean, do you consider bringing people into camps - it is a

18     rather general statement - in accordance with, or I'm just trying to

19     understand what you're telling us.

20        A.   I guess I would say my first point would be that this was --

21     this, of course, is a statement taken by the Prosecutor.  Perhaps, as I

22     read this now, it could not look quite as I meant it.

23             What I meant was that there were not major violations of

24     international law that we observed in the early phases of the operation;

25     point one.

Page 5219

 1             Point 2, that when people were brought to camps, they appeared to

 2     be well treated; and that when I and -- well, I observed this, when I

 3     visited a camp in Sisak, and the embassy officers who visit the detained

 4     -- people brought to camps around Knin, said that they also were well

 5     treated and noted that they felt free enough to speak critically of the

 6     Croatians.

 7             I do not mean to imply, and I would not imply, that bringing

 8     people to camps is somehow consistent with or respectful of international

 9     law.  Simply, my point was that there were not, in this early phases,

10     what we consider to be major violations of international law --

11     international humanitarian law.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Of course, what is major and what is minor is still

13     a matter of judgement.  Then the second part is --

14        A.   Your Honour, just to clarify that point.  Of course, you're

15     right, but --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  I am just putting a question, so I can't be right or

17     wrong.

18        A.   No, no.  But when I say "major," I am contrasting-- I was, in the

19     statement, trying to contrast what took place in the first few days of

20     the operation, as compared to what followed which, as is obvious from my

21     testimony, did, in my view, constitute major violations of international

22     humanitarian law.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Now about the criticism on the shelling.  You

24     include that in your assessment, that there were no major violations of

25     international humanitarian law.  That also puzzles me.  What kind of

Page 5220

 1     criticism was there?

 2        A.   The point in this statement is that the persons in these camps

 3     run by the Croatian authorities felt free to speak out.  They were not

 4     intimidated as were, for example, people that I visited in Manjaca camp

 5     in 1992, who were held by the Bosnian Serbs; or, for that matter, when

 6     our staff visited HV-run camps in Bosnia in 1993, they were not allowed

 7     to speak to the prisoners.

 8             So this was a different kind of situation from what was the norm

 9     in the war at that time, and that was the point that is meant to be

10     expressed in this statement.

11             As to the question of the shelling, whether that constituted a

12     violation of international humanitarian law, my view, at that time, which

13     is still my view, is that I distinguish what happened in Knin, and here

14     the people who were criticizing were detainees or people in Croatian

15     camps in Knin.  But I would distinguish the shelling of Knin, which was

16     relatively brief, based on the observations of the embassy staff, who

17     included military officers -- or, actually, an artillery officer.  So it

18     was relatively brief, it was not very destructive, and took place in the

19     context of an operation aimed at capturing the town.

20             That was different from, very different from the kind of shelling

21     that took place in other parts of the war, notably the shelling of

22     Vukovar, which destroyed the city before it was taken; or Sarajevo, which

23     was basically intended to destroy the city without taking it; or of

24     Dubrovnik which was also brief, much more destructive and an act of

25     cultural vandalism, as well as aimed at the people.

Page 5221

 1             I think I would go on to say that the issue of whether -- I mean,

 2     you run into a danger, in my view, when you say that any kind of shelling

 3     is a violation of international humanitarian law --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  That's certainly not my position --

 5        A.   No. I'm not saying that is your position.  It would also seem to

 6     me that you have to make a distinction between, for example, what the

 7     United States might do, given the technical it has, and whether it can

 8     avoid major, you know, casualties, as opposed to a country that would be

 9     much less capable technologically.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  One additional question:  In your answer, you made

11     reference to your city of Knin, and you based your answer on the

12     observations by those, or at least a person who was there where you were

13     talking about an artillery officer.  Would that information also cover

14     villages, dwellings, hamlets in the area, so not in the city itself, but

15     in the area of Knin.

16        A.   What our people -- I don't know that they observed shelling in

17     the areas around Knin, as opposed in the city or town of Knin.  What they

18     did observe was some burning on the road into Knin.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So their observations were limited, and

20     therefore, the scope of what they told you is similarly limited.

21        A.   They didn't go every place, but they did go from Drnis to Knin.

22     I'm not sure now they came from Knin.  And we, over time, we had three

23     different trips into Knin in those very early days, which may have taken

24     different routes.  I don't know now what routes they would have taken.

25     So the act to getting to Knin would have given them an opportunity to

Page 5222

 1     observe more than just the town, and we also had people going to other

 2     parts of the Krajina, including myself in Sector North.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you for those answers.

 4             Have the questions of the Bench raised any need to put further

 5     questions to Mr. Galbraith.

 6             MR. KEHOE:  No, Your Honour.

 7             MR. TIEGER:  No, Your Honour.

 8             Your Honour, if I may, well, this is just an administrative

 9     matter, so it shouldn't --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  If we need the presence of Mr. Galbraith for your

11     administrative matters, then we'll ask him to stay.

12             MR. TIEGER:  No, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  But if not, Mr. Galbraith this concludes your

14     evidence, I'm hesitant to say, in this Tribunal, at least in this case.

15             Mr. Galbraith, I would like to thank you very much for having

16     come the long way to The Hague, and I'd like to thank you for answering

17     the questions put to you by the parties and by the Bench.  And I usually

18     say "I wish you a safe trip home again," but I change that now and say,

19     I'm happy that we can release you as such a time that it will not

20     frustrate your further private plans.

21             THE WITNESS:  My children are grateful, Your Honour.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Usher, could you please escort Mr. Galbraith out

23     of the courtroom.

24                           [The witness withdrew]

25                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

Page 5223

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  I think it was Mr. Kuzmanovic or was it -- yes,

 2     Mr. Kuzmanovic who --

 3             MR. MIKULICIC:  He will be joining us later, Your Honour.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  He still owes me an answer as to whether the

 5     compensation for the loss of property is found in the constitutional

 6     court decision.

 7             MR. MIKULICIC:  I think there is no specific reference to the

 8     exact wording "loss of property," but it comes out of the context, yes.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, this is various translation of --

10             MR. MIKULICIC:  It is it a question of interpretation, of course.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  as good lawyers, we usually end with that

12     phrase.  Thank you very much.

13             I suggest to the parties that we first give an opportunity to

14     Mr. Tieger to raise the administrative matter he has on his mind, and we

15     then would not start with the next witness but, rather, have a break

16     first.

17             Mr. Tieger.

18             MR. TIEGER:  Your Honour, rather than take credit for the note

19     that Mr. Hedaraly sent me, perhaps I can ask him to address that matter.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Hedaraly.

21             MR. HEDARALY:  Thank you, Your Honour.

22             Exhibit P457 was moved into evidence and also was inadvertently

23     on the bar table list of documents, so it was also admitted as

24     Exhibit P460.  So P460 should be vacated, and we apologise for the

25     confusion to Mr. Registrar and the Court.

Page 5224

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, I take it that you know how to deal

 2     with that.  The Chamber supports the suggestion by Mr. Hedaraly.

 3             There is an application for protective measures for the next

 4     witness.  I wonder whether we should deal with it now, then we should

 5     have to move in private session.

 6             MR. MISETIC:  [Microphone not activated] ... before we do that?

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 8                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Schildge, I'm not going to throw you out of this

10     courtroom because it is a public hearing, not at all.  At the same time,

11     of course, you're free to move to the public gallery, if you would like

12     to do that.

13             Thank you for coming; and, of course, your role, your task, I

14     take it, has been finished.  So, therefore, if I want to leave, don't

15     hesitate to do so.

16             MS. SCHILDGE:  Thank you, Your Honour.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

18             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Your Honour.

19             Just, I guess, as a housekeeping matter, we had, obviously, the

20     long discussion about Exhibit 462.  Before I lose track of the fact that

21     it is an issue, and it is, as far as I understand, admitted into

22     evidence, can we MFI that exhibit at least, or how do we deal with the

23     issue, so that we're --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  [Overlapping speakers] ... to change the status

25     again.  Well, first of all, the issue will internally for the Chamber on

Page 5225

 1     be on its pending issues list.  So, therefore, we will certainly not

 2     forget about it.  But perhaps it would be wise, under the present

 3     circumstances, to change the status even if that would be only a

 4     temporary solution into MFI, if that is possible.

 5                           [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm informed that it has already the status of MFI.

 7     I have to read it all during the break to find out exactly what happened.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.  Thank you.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  If there is no other matter, perhaps we briefly move

10     into private session to deal with the issue of protective measures for

11     the next witness to come.

12                           [Private session]

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 5226











11 Pages 5226-5229 redacted. Private session.















Page 5230

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15                           [Open session]

16             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, we're back in open session.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

18             We will adjourn until 11.00.  But on the basis of what was

19     discussed during private session, the public should expect that we almost

20     immediately will move back into private session again, once we have

21     resumed.

22                           --- Recess taken at 10.31 a.m.

23                           --- On resuming at 11.07 a.m.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  The Chamber has decided to grant a motion by the

25     Prosecution to order protective measures for the next witness, which is

Page 5231

 1     Witness 86.  The protective measures granted are face distortion, voice

 2     distortion, and pseudonym.  And the Chamber expects that in order to make

 3     these protective measures effective that most, if not all, of the

 4     testimony will be heard in private session.

 5             We move into private session.

 6                           [Private session]

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 5232











11 Pages 5232-5287 redacted. Private session.















Page 5288

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6                           [Open session]

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, we're back in open session.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  We adjourn until tomorrow, the 27th of June, 9.00 in

 9     the morning, Courtroom I.

10                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.52 p.m.,

11                           to be reconvened on Friday, the 27th of June, 2008,

12                           at 9.00 a.m.