1 Tuesday, 9 September 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.19 p.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everyone.
6 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is case
8 number IT-06-90-T, the Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
10 The witness is not yet in the courtroom. I do understand that
11 the issue of a reservation to the 92 ter statements of Mr. Liborius are
12 not there anymore.
13 Is that correct, Mr. Waespi?
14 MR. WAESPI: I'm not sure that's correct, but we did indeed
15 discuss with the Gotovina Defence last night the issue of the
16 admissibility under Rule 92 ter and we also got some feedback from the
17 Cermak Defence. I understand that the Gotovina Defence agrees with us
18 that their concerns that were raised in connection to Rule 91 have
19 nothing to do with the formal admissibility of the statements under
20 Rule 92 ter.
21 Of course, the introduction of the 92 ter statements is no
22 acknowledgment by the Defence even if they haven't objected to the 92 ter
23 statement as to the contents of the statement. They can fully
24 cross-examine, of course, the witness on these statements. It is simply
25 an acknowledgment, we believe, that the procedural requirements have been
1 met of Rule 92 ter.
2 So I would like to renew my written and oral application to have
3 these five witness statements entered at this point in time.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 Could I hear from the --
6 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I think in fairness to the witness it
7 might be wise to do this in private session, my portion.
8 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
9 [Private session]
11 Pages 8246-8248 redacted. Private session.
11 [Open session]
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
14 Just to inform the public that after having heard further
15 arguments on the admissibility of witness statements given by the present
16 witness, Mr. Liborius, the Chamber decided that the statements given by
17 the witness on the 2nd of November, 1995; the 11th of November, 1997; the
18 12th of October, 2005; the 20th of June, 2008; and the 5th and 6th of
19 September, 2008, are admitted into evidence under the respective numbers,
20 same order, P799 up to and including P803.
21 Are you ready to continue your examination-in-chief, Mr. Waespi?
22 MR. WAESPI: Yes, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Madam Usher, could I ask you to escort the
24 witness into the courtroom.
25 [The witness entered court]
1 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, Mr. Liborius.
2 Before we proceed, I would like to remind you that you're still
3 bound by the solemn declaration you gave at the beginning of your
5 Mr. Waespi, you may proceed.
6 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
7 WITNESS: SOREN LIBORIUS [Resumed]
8 Examination by Mr. Waespi: [Continued]
9 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Liborius.
10 A. Good afternoon.
11 Q. We left off yesterday about your findings in relation to that
12 crater analysis you did outside the ECMM office or your accommodation.
13 Do you remember that?
14 A. Yes. I conducted a total of four crater analyses, two and two,
15 in the days after Operation Storm when we had a chance to revisit the
16 RC centre and our accommodation.
17 Q. Did you note your findings in any of the reports you had to
19 A. I did not note the crater analysis in details because the
20 reporting format, the RC Knin, the Regional Centre Knin, and I were
21 supposed to edit, had the task of describing in general detail -- in
22 general state, the general state of affairs. The RC Knin situation
23 report and daily report were not really the -- the medium through which
24 you would transmit such individual findings. But they were an underlying
25 factor in our overall assessment, I should stress.
1 Q. Let's turn to one of these overall assessments.
2 MR. WAESPI: And, Mr. President, this is 65 ter 5415. That's a
3 report dated the 4th of August.
4 Q. Do you recognise this report? Mr. Liborius --
5 A. Yes, I do. I cannot see the bottom of the report, however.
6 MR. WAESPI: Perhaps if we could scroll down.
7 THE WITNESS: Yes, I do recognise the report.
8 MR. WAESPI:
9 Q. Now, it's dated 4th of August, shortly before midnight. And you
10 make an assessment, since you're the author, under 1 and I read it out:
11 "Since the all-out Croatian attack began 0500 this morning, the
12 destructive effect to the RSK is both military and psychological
14 Did you write this assessment?
15 A. I believe, yes.
16 Q. And can you explain what you meant by the psychological
17 devastating effect?
18 A. At the end of day one, 4 August, it was my impression, based on
19 our observations and our information from -- from the rest of the ECMM
20 that by that time a significant breakdown of RSK structures had taken
21 place and that was not only military but also psychological in the sense
22 that there was a -- a collapse of the will to defend the territory.
23 There was a lack of key personnel. There was an evacuation in progress.
24 And there was a mood of -- of collapse.
25 Q. And when you wrote this, did you have in mind what the effect of
1 the shelling was on the civilian population?
2 A. We had by the end of day one, experienced a shelling campaign
3 that began quite intense at 5.00 in the morning, and it had various
4 intensity throughout the day. It peaked in the morning hours and then
5 moved into a more steady-state bombardment where the fire, at least what
6 I could observe and hear and see, targeted different areas of the Knin
7 town, and that, to me, indicated that no specific military target or no
8 specific target was selected for -- for all the fire and by spreading the
9 fire over a larger area in which the civilian population is still in,
10 then you -- you gain the effect of -- of panic. That's a standard
11 reaction when indiscriminate fire is employed.
12 Q. Did you also observe shelling on the 5th of August?
13 A. I heard shelling and I did observe some. It was of a
14 considerable less intensity, as opposed to the -- throughout the 4
16 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, if this current proposed exhibit
17 could be tendered into evidence, please.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections? No objections. Madam Registrar.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P804.
20 JUDGE ORIE: P804 is admitted into evidence.
21 Please proceed.
22 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
23 Q. In one of your witness statements, I think it is in your first
24 one, which is now P799, you characterize what you just described as
25 indiscriminate fire, also as harassment fire. Do you want to add
1 something as to the description you gave?
2 A. Yes. Yesterday I think that on answering one of your questions
3 erroneously that could have been the interpretation that I only saw a few
4 impacts in -- in the area of the RC and my accommodation. Let me be very
5 clear: The number of impacts I saw in the area of the RC Knin building,
6 the accommodation, and a little bit further down south where we also had
7 monitors living in the direction down to Tvik factory, accommodation for
8 workers, I saw many, many impacts.
9 The impacts mainly are of artillery, heavy artillery. I had
10 observed the sound of multiple rocket launchers. They are a bit more
11 difficult to pinpoint than the impact of an artillery shell.
12 Q. Did you form an opinion at the time about the quality of
13 intelligence the Croatian army had?
14 MR. MISETIC: Objection, Your Honour. He is asking for an
15 opinion. I don't know what basis this witness would form an opinion on
16 Croatian intelligence capabilities. There'd been no foundation laid.
17 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President.
18 JUDGE ORIE: The question was, of course, a factual question,
19 whether he did form an opinion. Then of course the next question would
20 be on what that opinion would be based and there I think the Chamber
21 would not be assisted by just hearing the opinion.
22 Mr. Waespi.
23 MR. WAESPI: Yes. And it's part of page 4 in P799 where the
24 witness gave his comment about that. But I can elicit it live.
25 Q. Now, based on the observations you had made about the impact of
1 artillery, at that time did it cross your mind what the intelligence of
2 the Croatian artillery must have been?
3 MR. MISETIC: Again, I don't think a foundation has been laid for
4 this question.
5 MR. WAESPI: I can ask him as soon as he says "yes" what --
6 Mr. President has said what the basis was for that.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Of course it doesn't make sense to ask him about an
8 opinion he never formed. That's --
9 MR. MISETIC: Yes, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: -- that's true. At the same time, the last
11 question, however, was phrased differently. Did it cross your mind what
12 the intelligence must have been. That's seeking a conclusion, because
13 not what it was, but what --
14 MR. WAESPI: Very well.
15 JUDGE ORIE: -- what it must have been.
16 Now, perhaps you must have an idea, Mr. Waespi, on what you need
17 to form an opinion on what should have been there, so if would you start
18 with that, and then we'll see if there's a sufficient basis.
19 MR. WAESPI:
20 Q. Do you know how good the Croatian intelligence was when they
21 shelled the impacts you had observed?
22 A. The Croatian intelligence was in general --
23 MR. MISETIC: This is what I was afraid. I mean, he is not
24 answering yes or no, he is going into what the opinion is. So, again, I
25 would ask for a foundation.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Apart from that, Mr. Waespi, there's an
2 implicit assumption that intelligence, when they shelled the impacts you
3 had observed, we have heard from the witness that he has seen impacts. I
4 think it has not been further explored. The specific impacts he was
5 talking about where they came from.
6 Try to -- let's try to see what the witness knows for a fact.
7 One more chance.
8 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
9 Q. Do you know anything about the Croatian intelligence?
10 A. Yes, I do.
11 Q. And how do you know anything about Croatian intelligence?
12 A. From my previous occupation, I had a chance to -- to get
13 acquainted with Croatian intelligence prior to my deployment. In the
14 area, I had a chance to talk with Croatian army officers, both before and
15 after the Operation Storm. The knowledge was coinciding, in the sense
16 that the Croatian intelligence picture corresponded very much to the
17 picture the ECMM and the UN possessed. And I also know that a couple of
18 countries own intelligence -- the intelligence picture was established by
19 the fact that the conflict had gone on for many years and that a number
20 of delegations, journalists and so on, had visited RSK area.
21 After Operation Storm, I had a chance to speak with Croatian army
22 personnel who, to me, described in considerable detail what went on in
23 Knin on the 3rd and 4th of August, details that I would imagine would be
24 difficult to have, unless you possessed a quite detailed picture.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic.
1 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I'm sorry to interrupt but this whole
2 explanation is completely speculative. "I would imagine that would be
3 difficult to have ..." I mean, how much more speculative can we get?
4 JUDGE ORIE: Whether that's speculation or whether that is
5 forming opinion, Mr. Waespi, the witness is telling us in -- with a very
6 rough brush he is creating a picture. It would certainly assist if we
7 would have a more precise brush, talking about persons I have spoken to
8 might be further explored as who they were, what their positions were,
9 when discussions took place, what they told the witness so as to see
10 whether we have -- coming closer to the picture whether we have the
11 details and not just a very rough outline of the picture.
12 Please proceed.
13 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
14 Q. Can you identify one person you have talked about from the
15 Croatian side, which gave rise to your comment about their level of
16 knowledge, about --
17 A. I talked with persons, personnel of the 4 Guards Brigade. I
18 don't have the name available now. But they were soldiers that I
19 frequently talked with in my duty after Operation Storm.
20 Prior to Operation Storm, I had the chance to speak with Croatian
21 officials - I'm sorry I don't have the name now - in my preparation for
22 the deployment to Knin. They were based in Zagreb. They were working in
23 one of the newspaper agencies and in an agency dealing with refugees and
24 displaced persons.
25 MR. WAESPI: Does that suffice, Mr. President?
1 JUDGE ORIE: It leaves more questions open than it answers. For
2 example, talking about an official who works in a newspaper agency, that
3 requires to know better what an official is and how this person gained
4 his knowledge he shared with the witness.
5 That's just one of the issues. Again, the rough brush might not
6 be of great assistance.
7 Could you tell us, an official working at the newspaper agency
8 was he government employed?
9 THE WITNESS: The official working was in the office dealing with
10 refugees and displaced persons in the Gracac area and in Zagreb
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And is that the same person as the person you
12 referred to as working in the newspaper?
13 THE WITNESS: No, no.
14 JUDGE ORIE: So we're talking about --
15 THE WITNESS: Two different persons.
16 JUDGE ORIE: -- two different persons. Now, if you would tell us
17 in detail what the one told you and when he told that you and whether you
18 know what the basis of his knowledge was. Let's start with the official.
19 THE WITNESS: The official working with refugees and displaced
20 persons issues I met first in Gracac and I later met the person in
22 JUDGE ORIE: When did you meet him for the first time?
23 THE WITNESS: For the first time I met him in 1994, in the
25 JUDGE ORIE: Summer of 1994.
1 THE WITNESS: Secondly, I met him in Zagreb in 1995.
2 JUDGE ORIE: When in 1995?
3 THE WITNESS: In July, before my deployment to Knin.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 Mr. Waespi, perhaps you further explore because, of course, I'm
6 not examining the witness, but I just gave a brief example on what, at
7 least, I would expect.
8 Please proceed.
9 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
10 Q. You also said you met somebody from the Croatian military.
11 A. That's correct.
12 Q. Do you remember what his position was within the Croatian
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, you're now moving to another source. I
15 gave a few questions on the first source but not to exhaust because we
16 still don't know exactly what that source told the witness.
17 The person you met first in Gracac in 1994 then you later met in
19 THE WITNESS: He told me the assessment of the RSK, so to speak,
20 defence potential, the state of the economy, the mood of the population,
21 the mood of the armed forces, the -- the way the defence was structured.
22 I had the sense that, as he was working with refugee and displaced
23 persons, of course, they form a good source of intelligence, that he was
24 indeed a very knowledgeable person. What struck me was that once inside
25 Krajina, I had been inside Krajina --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Let's take it step by step.
2 You told us that the Croatian intelligence was good.
3 THE WITNESS: Coinciding --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, intelligence -- this person which
5 apparently worked with refugees, do you know whether he shared his --
6 what he learned from these refugees with other institutions?
7 THE WITNESS: Institutions in the Croatian system?
8 JUDGE ORIE: For example, or with whomever.
9 THE WITNESS: I would with an almost 100 percent certainty
10 believe that he was not only wanting to share but he was under an
11 obligation to share it.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Now did he tell that you he did share it with
14 THE WITNESS: No. But that was quite common at that time. I
15 guess most personnel engaged also in the Croatian intelligence would not
16 tell a foreigner like me that -- that part of their work fed into an
17 intelligence system but I think that is beyond any doubt established that
18 all -- all such work is feeding into intelligence.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, in respect, therefore, of this source of
20 yours, apparently you formed an opinion that he fed the intelligence
21 services with his information on the basis of what such a person's duty
22 would have been and what you would have expect him to do and that makes
23 you almost 100 per cent certain that this is what happened.
24 Is that correctly understood?
25 THE WITNESS: Yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, would you please, when exploring other
2 sources for the witness's opinion about intelligence, also seek details
3 which give us a clear picture of -- on what the percentage of certainty
4 of the witness is based on.
5 MR. WAESPI: Thank you.
6 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I would just like to add to that - I
7 don't know if we're talking about the same thing - but some foundation as
8 to how this witness is qualified to assess intelligence.
9 Thank you.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Well, he told us how he assessed it.
11 MR. MISETIC: Yes, but there should be some foundation. He is
12 now giving us how intelligence works and things like that. I don't think
13 there's been anything in the statements to establish his background to
14 make assessments of intelligence capabilities and processes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I leave that to Mr. Waespi at this time. But it
16 certainly would add to the information for the Chamber to properly
17 evaluate the testimony of this witness.
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Mr. President. Your Honour, I'm sorry. Just to
20 add to that --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I'm sorry, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: No, no, please.
24 MR. KUZMANOVIC: There was a statement that said something to the
25 effect that part of their work led into a system of intelligence that fed
1 into something. I mean --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think I gave guidance to Mr. Waespi up to a
3 level more than usual. Let's not try to -- to give, all of us, more
4 instructions to Mr. Waespi than I have already done.
5 Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.
6 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, I would like to move on to a
7 different subject.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
9 MR. WAESPI:
10 Q. I would like to move to the aspect of looting and there are
11 numerous references in your daily reports, also in your witness
12 statement. And the first one is in your statement which is now P799.
13 When you say - and this is recorded on page 4 at the bottom: "On
14 the 5th of August from around noon
15 armoured units from the 7th Puma Brigade dominated the town. From my
16 observation point, or post, I observed how the looting by these soldiers
17 began instantly."
18 Now, what's the basis for saying that in your witness statement?
19 A. The basis is that from my observation post in the UN Sector South
20 headquarters I observed the transportation of private valuables from
21 houses - TV sets, small appliances - being transported to a collection
22 point just outside the gates of the UN Sector South, trucks constantly
23 coming, offloading goods, private cars bearing the RSK number plates
24 being parked in -- in huge rows. Soldiers obviously proud of their loot
25 coming to -- to -- to exchange that for other stuff. It went on in front
1 of our eyes.
2 Q. And how do you know they were from the Puma Brigade?
3 A. The tactical sign, insignias, on both the uniforms and the cars.
4 Q. In your 2005 witness statement, which is now P801, you say that
5 you could see HV trucks leaving the areas.
6 Do you remember that instance, that you saw HV trucks leaving the
8 A. Could I just have the page, please.
9 Q. Yes. It is page 3 in the middle.
10 MR. WAESPI: And perhaps for ease of reference, the witness could
11 be given the five witness statements.
12 JUDGE ORIE: That would be very practical.
13 Madam Usher, could you please assist.
14 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
15 MR. WAESPI:
16 Q. It's on page 3 of the 2005 statement. Sorry -- yes, 2005.
17 A. And what paragraph?
18 Q. Yeah, I'm not sure you're looking at the 2005 statement.
19 A. Oh.
20 Q. It's the third statement in your bundle, dated 11 and 12
21 October 2005. On page 3, the seventh paragraph.
22 A. Yes, I see it.
23 Q. Again, if you could let the Chamber know whether you remember
24 what you recorded here, and when it was and where it was that you saw
1 A. Yes. That is what I referred to, that in front of the UN
2 barracks HV trucks, we observed throughout the day, would come and unload
3 the goods, return empty, and then come back with -- with new things.
4 There was a constant traffic of soldiers and it apparently was some sort
5 of a depot where all sorts of goods were brought in. In the beginning,
6 light goods that you could carry; later on, heavier goods, and as I said,
7 also cars that during some instances were used for -- for small racing
8 games among the soldiers on -- on the parking space.
9 Q. And who loaded and unloaded these trucks?
10 A. It was soldiers in -- from the -- from the HV, and there was a
11 mix of -- of different soldiers. So it was, to my mind at that point,
12 not one particular unit, one particular corps, so it gained into a party
13 place where soldiers would rally and inspect the loot.
14 Q. Now, moving to another instance of looting you had observed by
15 the 7th Puma Brigade. That was on the 7th of August, and I think it
16 concerns the ECMM headquarters.
17 Do you remember that you saw, again, the Puma Brigade being
18 involved in -- in looting. And I can refer you to your first witness
19 statement, which is P799, the last page. The middle of the top
21 A. I see it, yes.
22 Q. "Approximately 1205 hours, three HV soldiers riding a civilian
23 small Fiat car without registration plates arrived. They wore
24 7th Puma Brigade insignia."
25 Do you remember this incident?
1 A. Oh, yes, I very well do. I was out to recover my personal
2 belongings in my accommodation, the one I described yesterday as the way
3 I observed the first shelling at 5.00 in the morning. And the soldiers
4 had apparently the intent of -- well, not apparently, they had the intent
5 of emptying the houses of valuables they could carry away and I was in my
6 own living-room collecting my own stuff, and they were quite surprised to
7 see that somebody was indeed in the house. And they explained to me that
8 it was their right to take what was of value in the house and I politely
9 said, "You can't do that. It's my stuff." And it was a quite bizarre
10 incident where soldiers very obviously surprised to see that -- that
11 somebody is actually in the house, and luckily, the situation did not
12 develop violently. But I told them that it was not possible for them
13 just to start stealing my stuff or the stuff of the family. They had
14 left a flat days before.
15 But that was indeed a quite remarkable incident.
16 Q. Thank you. Now, I see that you describe these HV soldiers as
17 arriving in "a civilian small Fiat car without registration plates."
18 Now was that the only time in the aftermath of Operation Storm
19 that you saw HV soldiers in private vehicles without licence plates or
20 did you observe other instances?
21 A. I did observe that on a number of occasions. The use of cars
22 without number plates in the days and weeks after Operation Storm was
23 certainly not something special. If you had a car you would just ride in
24 it. And number plates missing, to me, indicated that it was a car that
25 was taken from an abandoned car, for example, having RSK licence plates
1 before Operation Storm. Otherwise, it would have a Croatian licence
2 plate, in most instances.
3 Q. Let's move on to next exhibit. That is 65 ter 4023 and this is a
4 report of 7 August.
5 And I direct your attention to the description of the general
6 situation that: "Knin is now calm with soldiers from the 4th and
7 7th Brigade still carrying out small-scale looting and then ROM still
8 applies for some teams but seems to be lifted for RC Knin."
9 Now, I note that the author is Rick Bigland and you, yourself.
10 Can you tell us who Rick Bigland was?
11 A. Rick Bigland was my fellow operations officer in the
12 Regional Centre Knin.
13 Q. And my question again: How do you know that it was soldiers from
14 the 4th and 7th Brigade who were carrying out this looting?
15 A. It's quite simple. When soldiers are moving in vehicles with TAC
16 signs and they, on their uniform, wore TAC signs, that is a clear
17 identificator. And there is no reason why Croatian soldiers should
18 suddenly swap uniforms in the days after Operation Storm.
19 Q. Let me go to the second page of this exhibit, and to paragraph 5.
20 "Economical, industrial and infrastructure matters," and letter b has the
21 following comment: "In the Knin area it seems as if random looting and
22 destruction of houses and property is about to reach a degree where it
23 will get even more difficult to restart normal life here. Comment: It
24 is very unlikely that this is a deliberate policy of the authorities. It
25 is more likely that, as the front-line, more disciplined troops are
1 moving out, the second-line soldiers are less disciplined and more ready
2 to grab what they can. End comment."
3 Do you remember whether it was you or Mr. Bigland who drafted
4 this comment?
5 A. That was Mr. Bigland who drafted that comment.
6 Q. But you signed the -- the report yourself or co-authored together
7 with Bigland. Is it consistent with what your assessment was at that
9 MR. MISETIC: The question is: Is his assessment consistent with
10 his own assessment.
11 MR. WAESPI: No. Is Mr. Liborius' assessment consistent with the
12 comment I just read out.
13 MR. MISETIC: Assessment when, today or when he wrote the --
14 MR. WAESPI: At that time.
15 MR. MISETIC: Again, Your Honours, I think we have established
16 that he is the co-author of this report, so I don't see how he is asking
17 him to -- whether his report is consistent with his own assessment.
18 JUDGE ORIE: That's not necessarily -- if you're a co-author of a
19 report, it could be that not -- your private assessment is fully
20 reflected in that report. So therefore, the question is admissible.
21 Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.
22 MR. WAESPI: Yes.
23 Q. We heard from you that it was Mr. Bigland who had drafted this
24 part of the comment, so my question to you: At that time, according to
25 your own observations is what is written here consistent with your
1 observations at that time?
2 A. Not really. On the 7th -- 7th of August, I think that I was at
3 least disturbed by the activities, the looting that went on, clearly
4 without any attempt to -- to control it, or to stop it. And indeed as
5 you say, Your Honour, it was a co-authored report and the production
6 procedure into a RC Knin daily report was so that different elements
7 would be written throughout the day, and there was not a time to do a
8 consolidated big discussion where everybody could be in full alignment
9 with the comments. But that was Richard Bigland's words.
10 Q. On this note, can you tell us how these reports were drafted and
11 finalised. Who would show -- or would somebody show you this report
12 before it went out?
13 A. The drafting of the RC Knin reports was done in the following
14 way. Information from the Regional Centre subordinated teams and
15 coordination centres, the information gained by the Regional Centre staff
16 itself, was then, as in -- in most reports in -- in hierarchical
17 structures, compiled and with a -- with an eye to brevity, of course.
18 They were edited and sent. Usually the person, the operations officer
19 having the final responsibility for the editing would be the one sending
20 it. And that was a task that rotated, rotated through the week.
21 Q. And in relation to this report, who would be the officer who had
22 the final responsibility for the editing?
23 A. I would imagine that particular report would Rick Bigland had the
24 last hands on.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, if it could be tendered as an
3 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
4 Madam Registrar.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P805.
6 JUDGE ORIE: P805 is admitted into evidence.
7 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
8 Can we move on to the next report, similar report. 4030, a
9 report of the 8th of August, 1995. And, again, Mr. Bigland and
10 Mr. Liborius as the co-authors.
11 Q. On -- in paragraph 1 it talks about looting and vandalism that is
13 In paragraph 3, military matters, it mentions that the
14 4th Brigade will have a permanent stationing in north barracks in Knin.
15 Do you know more about that, Mr. Liborius?
16 A. The 4th Guards Brigade established itself with the garrisons that
17 previously were used by the army of the RSK in the barracks that are
18 located in the centre of town. And quite soon after Operation Storm, it
19 became a usual barracks with traffic in and out, with soldiers being
20 accommodated there, with all the life -- the military life that is
21 associated with an active army barracks.
22 Q. Now, moving on to the last subparagraph, c, on the bottom of this
23 page. It says: "HRC
24 of Knin, General Cermak. ECMM was promised that FOM will be extended as
25 quickly as possible, and in a few days in all areas on the main roads,
1 other roads being used at your own risk."
2 Now, who is the HRC
3 A. The HRC
4 commander of the Regional Centre Knin, ECMM Regional Centre, at that time
5 it was Colonel Philippe Augarde.
6 Q. And were you present at this meeting with General Cermak?
7 A. No, I was not present at that meeting.
8 Q. Now, do you know when it says that FOM, I guess that is freedom
9 of movement, will be extended as quickly as possible, whether, at that
10 time, on the 8th of August, 1995, freedom of movement was restricted for
12 A. Freedom of movement was indeed restricted. The teams under the
13 RC Knin were unable to exercise the usual road patrolling and we
14 ourselves in the RC could move limited inside Knin but not to the full
15 extent. And that was the subject of -- one of the subjects that was
16 raised with General Cermak, because ECMM did enjoy the guarantees of
17 freedom of movement from the Croatian government.
18 Q. Let's move to the last page of this document, third page under
19 item 6 b. The meeting with General Cermak is picked up. Let me read it.
20 "In his meeting with General Cermak, HRC was told that a policija
21 guard would be put on our former office building and that we would be
22 able to use it again if required. The General apologised for the
23 looting. Comment: Does that mean he will get my Rolex back?"
24 Do you know who drafted this part of the comment -- or this part
25 of the paragraph?
1 A. That was drafted by Rick Bigland.
2 Q. And how do you know that?
3 A. Because he -- he had an Rolex or at least a fake Rolex. I don't
4 wear Rolex.
5 Q. Thank you, Mr. Liborius.
6 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, if we could have an exhibit number.
7 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
8 Madam Registrar.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P806.
10 JUDGE ORIE: P806 is admitted into evidence.
11 MR. WAESPI: The next report is 4040, Mr. President, and this is
12 a daily report of the 9th of August.
13 Q. Now, you address for the first time in the general situation, the
14 situation outside Knin. Second sentence: "Looting and burning of the
15 surrounding villages continues in plain view of UN and IOS."
16 What are IOS, if you know?
17 A. That's the abbreviation for International Organisations, among
18 them, of course, also ECMM.
19 Q. What is the basis for this assessment by you? You feature as the
20 sole author of this document.
21 A. The basis is the ECMM teams information, and by the 9th of
22 August, we were slowly able to expand our usual monitoring and road
23 patrolling activity.
24 Q. Now, in the third paragraph, military matters. There is, in line
25 4, a reference to the presence of a fairly well-known dirty group
1 belonging to the Diverzantia who have a skull as their signal and that
2 they belong to the 7th Brigade, wore normal Croatian camouflage uniform
3 and weapons. And you go on to say that: "They cannot be described as
4 irregular elements or terrorists." And they were observed in a village
5 burning houses.
6 What's the basis for this written observation, Mr. Liborius?
7 A. That is my own observation, together with one of the RC Knin
9 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, there were many observations in what
10 Mr. Waespi read out, and I think they should be broken down as to which
11 specific observation he was referring to.
12 MR. WAESPI: I can address that, Mr. President.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
14 MR. WAESPI:
15 Q. Did you see the members or units of this Diverzantia group?
16 A. Yes, I did.
17 Q. And where did you see them?
18 A. I saw them in the village of Biskupija
19 And as the roads were quite narrow, we passed each other from each end of
20 the village, so close that you could reach out for the other car on the
21 other side of the road. So we had to slow down and the group were
22 apparently surprised to see us. They also slowed down.
23 We observed them in the middle of the burning of the village,
24 observed the tactical signs on the vehicles, observed the tactical signs
25 on their uniforms, observed the -- the weapons they were wearing,
1 bringing along, the burning of the houses that took place while we were
3 Q. And how far were you away when you observed the burning of houses
4 by these troops?
5 A. The closest house set on fire was -- well, the distance to the
6 door there, I would say. 12, 15 metres or so. But the entire village
7 was being searched, and houses were being set on fire there.
8 Q. Now, incidentally, did you ever hear of the presence of warlords
9 in the aftermath of Operation Storm?
10 A. No. I did not hear that, and it was not an issue. Warlords, if
11 we define that as -- as commanders of -- of groups of persons who are
12 somehow outside the formal chain of command, it was not an issue. The
13 Croatian soldiers in general, they were in a military structure, they
14 were under command, and the chain of command functioned. It was not an
15 issue at that time.
16 Q. Let me turn to one sentence in your comment: "Beyond any doubt
17 this is a war crime act," and I'm reading from the bottom of the first
18 page. "The systematic burning of property, houses, stables, haystacks
19 and the like. Depriving the population the possibilities of surviving in
20 the area."
21 Can you elaborate on -- on this comment, Mr. Liborius?
22 A. The comment is my description of the information that the ECMM
23 teams had produced and that pointed to the quite serious destruction of
24 property, as I say, property, houses, stables, haystacks and the like.
25 So it was the scale of the activity that was important to me. The
1 systematic approach that it had in our observations at that time, and by
2 war crimes, I would say that the removal of the material basis of life
3 for civilians in the area, to my mind and to my training prior to that,
4 would constitute a war crime.
5 Q. If we move on to the next page, paragraph 4, humanitarian and
6 human rights.
7 You report here or you note the small-scale looting and burning
8 of houses in Drnis and then you go on to say and I quote: "However, they
9 saw four Orthodox churches in a few villages, Zvjerinaca, Kosovo, Jovici,
10 and Bujici, which had been completely untouched. Two of which had signs
11 persuading people to stay away. These will be checked every couple of
12 days to keep an eye on them. Comment: It appears that the Croat
13 authorities may be being very clever protecting these Serb churches as
14 they know there would be a huge outcry if they were seen to be abusing
16 Do you recall who observed these churches and the way they stayed
18 A. I did, myself, observe a couple of them and I did also in my
19 routine patrolling in the weeks that followed Operation Storm pay
20 attention to also religious sites, churches and graveyards. And it was
21 my impression that they were untouched. I talked with soldiers on guard
22 at the gate of graveyards and churches, asked them if I could see the
23 church, what their brief was, what their instruction was, and I was told
24 that they were specifically guarding those religious sites under the
25 instruction of General Gotovina.
1 And of course that is very good, that you do not burn churches
2 and graveyards, destroy them. However, I would say that the same care
3 should be also extended to the rest of the property.
4 Q. When you say you talked to soldiers on guard, was that at that
5 time you made those observations which are noted down here?
6 A. I did talk with soldiers throughout the -- the -- the weeks. I
7 made it a point, as all good monitoring activities should do, to gain as
8 much firsthand information as possible. That includes talking with the
9 soldiers on the spot.
10 Q. And the reference to "them telling you that they were
11 specifically guarding those religious sites under the instruction of
12 General Gotovina."
13 Do you remember who told you that and when and where?
14 A. I was told that the monastery that is to the south-west of Knin,
15 Krka -- one of the monasteries -- if I'm issued a card, I can find it.
16 And also the guard at the Kosovo Polje church. And both gave identical
18 Q. And the date --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Liborius, could I seek clarification from your
20 previous answer. The question was: Do you remember who told you?
21 Now, the first part of your answer is: "I was told that the
22 monastery that is to the south-west of Knin," where you say you don't --
23 it's one of the monasteries. If I'm issued a card you could find that,
24 and then you said: "And also the guard at Kosovo Polje church."
25 But I have not heard in the first portion of your answer who told
1 you apparently something about this monastery.
2 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, there was a guard. I believe that I
3 should speak slowly.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes -- a guard at the monastery which could you find
5 on the map and also a guard at the Kosovo Polje church.
6 THE WITNESS: Yes. The monastery I'm referring to is the
7 monastery that is located to the south-west of Knin.
8 JUDGE ORIE: I was not seeking these details. I was just trying
9 to understand where the second person was in your answer.
10 THE WITNESS: Guards both places.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please proceed.
12 THE WITNESS: Army guards in regular Croatian army uniform with
13 their weapon and standard soldiers.
14 MR. WAESPI:
15 Q. And do you recall when it was that you got this information from
17 A. It was fairly recent after we were out doing road patrolling
18 again. If I'm given a chance to burrow through the ECMM reports, I can
19 find it. But fairly soon after.
20 Q. And how do you talk to these soldiers? In what language?
21 A. Either I would be talking through my interpreter or I would be
22 talking to them myself.
23 Q. And in what language would you talk to them, without an
25 A. I would talk Serbo-Croatian or German, a little English here and
1 there. It was possible to be carrying out a conversation.
2 Q. Thank you, Mr. Liborius.
3 MR. WAESPI: If that would be admitted, Mr. President.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
5 Madam Registrar.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P807.
7 JUDGE ORIE: P807 is admitted into evidence.
8 MR. WAESPI: Next proposed exhibit, Mr. President, is 65 ter
9 5416. This is a report, ECMM report, dated the 12th August, and I'd like
10 to go to political matters, the second numerated paragraph. And I quote:
11 "General freedom of movement is still the rule. However, a number of
12 patrols from UN and ECMM have been restricted locally with reference to
13 safety reasons. This concern for safety does not apply to the civilian
14 Croats passing through the same areas."
15 Now, Mr. Liborius, do you remember this observation?
16 A. Yes, I do. I observed it myself many times and so did the -- the
17 teams in RC Knin.
18 The situation would usually be that the team would be stopped at
19 a check-point by either Croatian civilian police or military police
20 without permission to enter, it could be a hamlet or a village or a
21 wooden area or any other specified area, and often the reason would be
22 given that there was danger ahead. There would be either RSK soldiers,
23 there would be de-mining, there would be something that constituted a
24 type of military threat that you could not really argue against. And of
25 course we observed that.
1 At the same time, however, unless you would be waiting at a
2 check-point like that you would frequently see Croatian civilian cars
3 passing by in both directions in and out of that particular area. And
4 sometimes when I addressed the check-point commander, whether the same
5 safety precautions wouldn't also apply to the civilian Croats I was given
6 a smile or -- or a non-answer.
7 Q. Let me move to paragraph 3, smaller letter e, and here there is
8 reference to teams Knin, and another UN patrol that were stopped from
9 patrolling in the Vrlika area. They were escorted away. And there is a
10 comment, and I quote: "It seems clear that the HV in the Vrlika area are
11 trying desperately to hide something, maybe the continuing burning of
12 houses between Drnis and Vrlika, lots of which were seen during the night
13 drive back to Knin or maybe some more terrible abuses of human rights.
14 It will be discovered eventually."
15 Do you remember this instance, Mr. Liborius?
16 A. Let me just read it here.
17 I have not experienced that myself. It would be the personnel
18 of -- of -- as it's said November 2 and 3, together with the Head of
19 Regional Centre. I am the operations officer compiling that report.
20 Q. Do you have any doubts as to the accuracy of what was reported to
22 MR. MISETIC: Objection, Your Honours. Calls for speculation.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, the --
24 MR. WAESPI: I can lay a foundation --
25 JUDGE ORIE: -- the objection is denied because whether the
1 witness has any doubt is, of course, his personal observation whether he
2 had any doubts. Of course without knowing on what such doubt would be
3 based or on what belief in what was said is based, without that
4 information, of course, it's not of great assistance to the Chamber.
5 MR. WAESPI:
6 Q. Can you let us know what the reporting system was in relation to
7 reports coming in and you putting it down on paper.
8 A. The reporting system in the RC Knin, as in all ECMM, would be
9 that the teams would produce their daily reports, and they would forward
10 them to the Regional Centre, where the operations officer would compile
11 them and fit them into the reporting format, and as I said before,
12 with -- with due attention to -- to brevity and significance, then they
13 would send it as the RC report.
14 Now, with regard to -- to this particular information, there's
15 also always the rule that you should be able to trace the information
16 here and -- and either it's the RC staff, this is the case, Head of
17 Regional Centre, and it is the November 2 and November 3 teams.
18 Q. And remind us again of HRC
19 A. The Head of Regional Centre was Colonel Philippe Augarde at that
20 time. And I could honestly see no reason why I should doubt the factual
21 information contained there.
22 MR. WAESPI: I move that into evidence, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objection.
24 Madam Registrar.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P808.
1 JUDGE ORIE: P808 is admitted into evidence.
2 MR. WAESPI: The next proposed exhibit is 4381.
3 Q. And this is a report authored by you, Mr. Liborius, on the 18th
4 of August, 1995. And I'm interested in --
5 MR. WAESPI: Can we scroll up to the top, please. Yes. Thank
7 Q. I'm interested in the second paragraph, freedom of movement, ROM.
8 What does ROM mean, Mr. Liborius?
9 A. Restriction of movement.
10 Q. And I quote: "At one occasion, N2 was denied access to an area.
11 However, a phone call to General Cermak solved the problem. See below."
12 And we can actually move to the second page, subparagraph (c),
13 security and FOM.
14 And I quote: "Having waited two minutes at the combined
15 Croatian MUP, MP CP in Dabar and being told not to move, N2 phoned
16 General Cermak (see N2 DR yesterday) requesting him to solve the problem
17 of FOM. This solved the problem and after a few minutes, N2 was back in
18 business. Comment: There is still a problem with the flow of
19 information in the Croatian chain of command. When two authorities, the
20 military and civilian police are involved, the problem magnifies.
21 Advice: Don't hesitate to call the supreme chiefs in the area."
22 Do you know how it came about that N2 was able to call
23 General Cermak directly?
24 A. We were issued by the General himself the phone number. It also
25 happened in a meeting he held with me, and he advised us to call him if
1 we encountered restrictions of movement and then he would address the
3 Q. And you personally, how often did you use the phone connection to
4 General Cermak, in order to get something done; for instance, past a
6 A. I did that frequently. As soon as I encountered restriction of
7 movement I would wait, as it said there, a very short time, before
8 following that agreement and call him. If not he, then his aides would
10 Q. Were you always successful or was there an instance, that despite
11 Mr. Cermak's or his aide's intervention you couldn't get through?
12 A. I can't recall a instance where we were not able to solve the
14 Q. And lastly on this document, the comment which is made here, and
15 drafted by you, that: "When two authorities, the military and civilian
16 police are involved, the problem magnifies."
17 Can you comment on that?
18 A. Yes. The check-points that were manned both by civilian police
19 and military police, it was explained to us also by the Croatian army
20 liaison officers that the military police exercised authority over
21 military personnel that would be encountered at the check-point, and
22 civilian police would exercise authority over civilians.
23 Sometimes discussion - and that's what I'm referring to here -
24 discussions would develop between the staff at the check-point who would
25 be the most senior to take the decision, whether to allow our team to
1 proceed or impose restriction of movement. And as that was frequently
2 the case, the advice that is carried in that report was the
3 Regional Centre's advice to the teams out in the field, to use the -- the
4 phone number of the General Cermak or his aides.
5 Q. And you would require, successfully now as we know,
6 General Cermak's intervention whether the check-point was civilian or
8 A. It did not make any difference. He -- as I said, I cannot
9 remember any instance where such an intervention was not able to solve
10 the problem, meaning us being able to proceed.
11 Q. Thank you. Just lastly on this document. Can you tell us what
12 was N2? November 2?
13 A. November 2, or N2, is the designator for the second team in
14 RC Knin.
15 Q. And how many teams were there in RC Knin?
16 A. The RC structure was adapted to the -- to the changing situation.
17 At the time of the Operation Storm, the RC had directly subordinated to
18 it November 1, November 2, November 3. It was able to dispatch from its
19 own ranks a team inside Knin. It had a number of CC centres. It had a
20 team in Dubrovnik
21 change of name or location, change of name and location took place
22 sometime after Operation Storm.
23 The -- whenever you come across the November 1, November 2,
24 November 3, or so, these are team designators.
25 Q. Thank you, Mr. Liborius.
1 MR. WAESPI: I would like to tender this exhibit, Mr. President.
2 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I don't know if we can get
3 clarification in light of the last answer, but is the witness part of N2?
4 Is this something he eye-witnessed? I don't know that that was clear.
5 And is he one of part of any of these three teams. Because it wasn't
6 clear to me whether ...
7 MR. WAESPI: Yes, can I answer -- I can ask the witness.
8 Q. Can you explain your role vis-a-vis these patrols, these teams?
9 A. I accompanied N2 and formed a part of the team when I was not on
10 my operations officer duty. Later on, I was designated as the team
11 leader of N2.
12 Q. And when was that?
13 A. I have to consult my notes or my diary. But it was ... if we
14 asked for a specific date I prefer my notes or diary.
15 Q. Yeah, I think you might be able to use the break for that.
16 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to tender this document, Mr. President.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Since there are no objections.
18 Madam Registrar.
19 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit P809.
20 JUDGE ORIE: P809 is admitted into evidence.
21 Mr. Waespi, I think we should first have a break.
22 We resume at a quarter past 4.00.
23 --- Recess taken at 3.48 p.m.
24 --- On resuming at 4.21 p.m.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, you may proceed.
1 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
2 Q. Mr. Liborius, during the break did you have a chance to review
3 your notes in order to find out when you became team leader of N2?
4 A. Yes, I did. And the date was 18 August.
5 Q. Thank you very much. If you would please close your diary or
6 your notes, and in case you need them, you can certainly ask
7 Mr. President whether you're allowed to consult them.
8 Let's move on to 65 ter 4117.
9 Do you recognise this list, Mr. Liborius?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And can you let Their Honours know what it is, what it depicts?
12 A. It is a response to an ECMM order issued 21st August to all teams
13 to compile the information on at least a weekly basis with regard to
14 burning and destruction of the -- the hamlets and villages in each team
16 November 1, November 2, November 3, Gospic and Split, abbreviated N1, N2
17 and N3 GNS, and in it there is a compilation of assessments of individual
18 villages, hamlets or other points mentioned in maps.
19 The information is then whether the area, the hamlet, the
20 village, the city, is not destroyed, limited destroyed, deserted, what is
21 the status of the different locations.
22 The purpose was to draw an assessment on the possibilities for
23 people to go to the different hamlets or villages or places.
24 Q. And can you let us know how many people being members of these
25 sources, N1 to S, you listed participated in these patrols, in order to
1 collect the data recorded?
2 A. It would be no less than 12 people. A team structure would
3 usually be at least two persons, a driver; and in larger teams co-located
4 you would have more staff to -- to assist.
5 Q. Now, there has been evidence in this courtroom that there was a
6 study, a similar study done by the UNMOs. Did you work together with the
7 UNMOs in doing this study or was it done independently?
8 A. This study is a -- an ECMM work.
9 I should perhaps be very clear that the RC structure, of course,
10 also helped in compiling this document. The 12 people would be only the
11 monitors in the teams.
12 Q. Was there a difference in the cars the UN, UNMOs, and ECMM had,
13 which was recognizable for the locals?
14 A. Well, yes. ECMM cars had their own specific look. UNMOs used
15 other cars, their own markings.
16 Q. So just to be clear, whatever was entered into this study came
17 from your own ECMM-generated data and not from other data?
18 A. As I would imagine, the sources N1, N2, N3 Gospic and Split
19 It was a combined effort, so I was not the only one participating in the
20 drafting of the document.
21 Q. Who else was involved?
22 A. That would be the staff of the -- the Regional Centre in the
23 RC Knin. The Regional Centre Knin located the Regional Centre staff to
24 Zadar on the 14th of August.
25 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I would make an objection as to a
1 non-responsive answer. I'm still not sure whether --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 Mr. Liborius, there was a rather simple question which was
4 whether data entered and used for this study exclusively were
5 ECMM-generated data. Your answer is not clear. You said, as I would
6 imagine, or involvement of others -- were there any data received from
7 other agencies than ECMM?
8 THE WITNESS: I don't think so.
9 JUDGE ORIE: You say, I don't think so. Are you sure that they
10 were exclusively ECMM-generated data? What makes you doubt?
11 THE WITNESS: The standard procedure, when the report -- excuse
12 me, for, Your Honour, for a little elaborated answer. The sources
13 indicated would exclude UNMO information or others. Now, as I'm not the
14 signing-off person of this document, I can only say that to the best of
15 my belief.
16 I don't know if that satisfies the question.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Then add one question. You were a member of N2, if
18 I understood you well.
19 THE WITNESS: Yes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Data provided by N2 for this report, were they
21 exclusively data gathered and obtained by N2, as far as you were aware of
23 THE WITNESS: Yes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: There was no other input by anyone --
25 THE WITNESS: No.
1 JUDGE ORIE: -- else.
2 Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.
3 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to move this
4 exhibit into evidence.
5 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
6 Madam Registrar.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P810.
8 JUDGE ORIE: P810 is admitted into evidence.
9 Please proceed.
10 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
11 If we could move on to 65 ter 4116.
12 Q. And this is a daily report authored by you and Mr. Hendriks. Can
13 you tell the Trial Chamber who Mr. Hendriks was or is?
14 A. Mr. Hendriks was my fellow monitor colleague in team November 2.
15 MR. WAESPI: I would like to go to page 2, humanitarian and human
16 rights issues.
17 Q. If you can please read paragraphs a and b, which deals with
18 observations made by N2. And you observed a HV MP car carrying two
19 uniformed MP wearing 72nd BAT sign and a JNA light truck.
20 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I ask that it be specifically -- it is
21 not JNA, it is INA, or I-N-A, which could be important.
22 MR. WAESPI: Yes, that's correct. I apologise for that.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
24 MR. WAESPI:
25 Q. Do you remember this incident, Mr. Liborius?
1 A. Yes, I did -- yes, I do. I did also take a picture of the
3 Q. And can you tell us a little bit more of what you observed?
4 A. On our patrol, we observed smoke coming from a remote village,
5 remote in the sense that it was quite far away from the main road, and
6 there was only one dirt track leading up to it, and we wanted to
7 investigate further the events there. And we departed the main road,
8 took the dirt track up to the hamlet, and we met the HV military police
9 car - it was a BMW, if I'm not mistaken - and the INA truck just coming
10 out of the -- the, so to speak, centre of the hamlet, and there was no
11 other entrance to that hamlet. So we wanted to see whether there were
12 any other movements, any other cars in that hamlet. There wasn't. And
13 the -- my team observed the -- the fire as it took the -- the house and
14 the stable and the haystack of a house at the -- at the south end of the
16 Q. And can you tell us what the INA truck looked like?
17 A. The INA truck was a Mercedes van-type truck, white, with one of
18 the blue stripes on it.
19 Q. And what --
20 A. It had INA signs on the -- on the van.
21 Q. And what does it carry?
22 A. An INA truck would -- as INA company is the oil company, it would
23 be a truck usually associated with delivery of petrol products.
24 Q. And your assessment was who was responsible for setting light to
25 these structures?
1 A. As I write in the report, the circumstances surrounding the
2 torching of houses and stables and haystacks in that area could, to my
3 mind, only be done by these persons from the HV military police car and
4 the INA light truck. We saw simply no other traces of persons in the --
5 in the village. We observed it for 40 minutes, and we got to the place
6 just as the house had caught fire. The roof was still intact when we
7 came to that part of the hamlet and we departed when the roof had
8 collapsed and we patrolled the hamlet without finding anyone else. There
9 was only one access route to that particular hamlet.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Liborius, one of your previous answers when
11 asked what this truck carried, you said that you would associate this
12 truck with the delivery of oil products because it was an oil company.
13 Could you also tell what the truck carried, if you know.
14 THE WITNESS: I did not have any chance to inspect the truck, but
15 it had the markings, it had the look of a truck that would usually carry
16 petrol products.
17 JUDGE ORIE: It was a truck -- covered, enclosed.
18 THE WITNESS: It was a covered and closed truck.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.
20 Please proceed.
21 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
22 Q. And I'd like to move to the comment in the same paragraph, just a
23 few lines down. "The promises regarding property made by the Croatian
24 leadership in general and General Cermak for the Knin region in
25 particular, clearly has a hollow tone."
1 Do you remember who made this comment?
2 A. The comments were made by various Croatian officials, including
3 General Cermak. They were also made by the -- by the government in
5 Q. Yes. My question was -- I'm sorry, I wasn't clear enough. Who
6 drafted this comment in this ECMM report?
7 A. Me and Eric Hendriks.
8 Q. And going back to the comment attributed to the Croatian
9 leadership and General Cermak, were you present when a comment was made
10 by General Cermak to -- to that effect, or a promise, a promise was made
11 by General Cermak as recorded in this report?
12 A. The promises were aired on radio, they were given in meetings. I
13 heard them a couple of times both in radios and at meetings, public
15 Q. And why do you write that these promises have a hollow tone?
16 A. Because the involvement of especially HV military police
17 personnel, to me, indicates that the persons who should ensure safety and
18 protection of property were in the middle of burning things down.
19 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to tender this exhibit, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
21 Madam Registrar.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P811.
23 JUDGE ORIE: P811 is admitted into evidence.
24 Please proceed.
25 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
1 Q. Let's move to the next exhibit. This is it 4392, a report, daily
2 report, dated 23rd August by Mr. Liborius and Mr. Hendriks. And I'd like
3 to move to page 2.
4 The top paragraph, small a, carries reference to an informal
5 meeting with the commander of the HV forces stationed in B, and I believe
6 B is defined on the first page as Benkovac.
7 Do you know more about this commander of the HV forces? Have you
8 met him?
9 A. Please allow me time to read it here.
10 Yes, I recognise that, yes. Yeah, I met him in the Benkovac
12 Q. Do you know what his unit was called?
13 A. I'd have to consult my notes. It was a regular army unit. He
14 talked at length about having received his military training in the US
15 in particular.
16 Q. Thanks. Let's move to the second alinja [phoen] b, and I quote:
17 "During today's patrol following was observed. Kistanje, in the auto
18 workshop by the INA station, a fire was lit at 11.04. Next to the place
19 was seen one civilian bus with HV soldiers, registration number
20 SI 253-AB; and a Renault car, SI 24 -- 254-S. As the fire was lit,
21 soldiers embarked the bus and the cars left the scene."
22 Do you know more about this instance, Mr. Liborius?
23 A. Yes, my team observed the incident on patrol in Kistanje, and the
24 bus, a standard size 50-person bus was -- with Croatian army soldiers
25 stopped at this petrol station/workshop that was located in the centre
1 of -- of Kistanje, and for reasons not clear to me, they -- they
2 disembarked the bus and went to the workshop and station and -- and set
3 it on fire, observed that the fire had caught good ground and then they
4 -- they left again. And after that, we continued our patrol.
5 Q. You may not know that but let me ask you, do you know what SI in
6 the registration number plates refers to?
7 A. Sibenik.
8 Q. Thank you, Mr. Liborius.
9 And lastly on this page, in this document, humanitarian and human
10 rights issues, small paragraph a: "Given the statement by General Cermak
11 two days ago about the 100 persons already having returned to Biskupija,
12 N2 tried to pay these people a welcome-back visit. However, N2 cannot
13 confirm the return of 100 persons."
14 And at the end there's an assessment: "Maybe General Cermak was
15 inflating the numbers of returned."
16 Do you have any observations on this record?
17 A. We patrolled the area of Biskupija with a view to -- to try and
18 find these persons. Biskupija is quite a well-defined village, and we
19 were unable, as it is stated in the report, to find any of these persons.
20 What we did find was a few houses on fire, and there's really not much
21 more to add than saying that the statements that these persons could have
22 returned we could not substantiate by our findings in the field.
23 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, I would like to tender this document.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Would you allow me to ask one or more clarifications
25 on the document.
1 Mr. Liborius, on the second page, second line, it's described
2 that there's been an informal meeting with -- in the B house.
3 THE WITNESS: Could we move up?
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, second page, second line -- well, third line,
5 as a matter of fact.
6 THE WITNESS: Could I please see the first part of the report.
7 Yes, please, scroll down.
8 Yes, Your Honour, could I have your question, please again.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Reference is made on the second page, third line,
10 about in the B house of the HV, which is not clear to me what that means.
11 THE WITNESS: That is the Benkovac house of the HV, meaning the
12 officers and NCOs' recreation facility next to the barracks. House of
13 the army --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. They were accommodated there.
15 THE WITNESS: Yes.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
17 One more question is second page, military situation under b, you
18 are talking about the civilian bus with HV soldiers.
19 Do you have any further details as to these soldiers?
20 THE WITNESS: The soldiers wore all normal Croatian army
21 uniforms. They were riding together in one bus. I saw different ranks
22 among the soldiers. I would imagine that they constituted a normal
23 military unit.
24 Does that satisfy your question, Your Honour?
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. One second, please.
1 THE WITNESS: I should add that we were actually parked right
2 opposite the auto workshop and the distance between the bus and my patrol
3 vehicle was less than ten metres.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 Do you remember approximately the number of soldiers who were
6 boarding the bus?
7 THE WITNESS: 20, 25, roughly.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
9 Are there any objections against admission.
10 No. Madam Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P812.
12 JUDGE ORIE: P812 is admitted into evidence.
13 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
14 Can we move to 65 ter 4390.
15 Q. This is a daily report dated the 24th of August. And I'd like to
16 go to the middle of the page, military situation, little a: "N2 went to
17 Bosanski Grahovo, ten civilian buses, ten trucks, and 15 other vehicles
18 were observed. Troops were resting in the town, receiving mail. The
19 officers large envelopes, and new ribbons were being given to the units.
20 The vehicles bore registration plates -- registration plated from HVO,
21 HVO and Mostar, ZD and SI."
22 Now, again, have you -- were you personally on that N2 patrol?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And Bosanski Grahovo is where exactly?
25 A. Bosansko Grahovo is in Bosnia
1 located to the east of -- of Sector South.
2 Q. And --
3 A. In the -- in the northern part of the -- of the adjacent
5 Q. And why would you go to -- to Bosnia? Was that part of your
7 A. The ECMM mandate included all the six republics of the former
9 MR. MISETIC: I object as to a non-responsive answer,
10 Your Honour.
11 THE WITNESS: The answer is yes, it was our mandate.
12 MR. WAESPI: Thank you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: May I then take it that your mandate was not split
14 up to certain portions, that you would be assigned a task in a limited
16 THE WITNESS: We would be assigned a task in a limited area.
17 However, depending on the situation that area would be flexible. For
18 example --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And your area included parts of Bosnia
20 THE WITNESS: The adjacent areas of UN Sector South, yes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Would be included.
22 Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.
23 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
24 Q. Let's move to what is the bottom of this page, same page,
25 paragraph c. It records what the patrol observed and then it goes on to
1 say: "N2 observed 15 uniformed HV soldiers leaving the stable after
2 having set it on fire. They left the scene when we arrived in a tractor
3 on a white Mercedes pick-up, registration number SI-262-T. One soldier
4 wore the insignia blue and red 1.HT." And then a comment for OPS:
5 "Please identify the unit from the large HV insignia book."
6 Were you on that patrol?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And just to make things clear, the white Mercedes pick-up was
9 used by whom?
10 A. If you could just scroll up the document, please. No, up. And
11 the previous page, please.
12 And then scroll down, please. The next page, please.
13 Yes. And your question, if you can just ...
14 Q. Yes. The white Mercedes pick-up was used by whom?
15 A. Yeah. The soldiers were using the -- the pick-up -- the white
17 Q. Meaning 15 soldiers were fitting into this one pick-up?
18 A. No, they were using it for transporting goods and they were also
19 transported on some of the tractors. And it had a -- a trailer.
20 Q. And what's the reference to OPS? I guess that's operations.
21 "Please identify the unit from the large HV insignia book."
22 Can you tell us what that meant?
23 A. It was a question for, as you said, the operations centre to help
24 us identify a new tactical sign that we had not in our reference book.
25 And in the operations department they had a -- a large reference
1 material, large reference book on different insignias of the Croatian
2 army, as well as other armies. And the Ocestevo incident was a -- again
3 an incident where there is only one access point to the village, so we
4 wanted to know who would be operating in that area.
5 Q. Now, this reference book on different insignias, was used by
7 A. It was used by the operations department to support the teams in
8 the field with identification, if we came across unfamiliar tactical
10 Q. Thank you. Did you find out what this blue and red insignia 1.HT
11 stood for?
12 A. I can't remember that now.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 A. They were -- the soldiers wore normal Croatian army fatigue, and
15 I did not have the feeling that it was a -- a formation that was
16 operating just on -- by itself. So my attention was drawn to the fact
17 that I saw, for the first time, that tactical signature that I hadn't
18 seen before.
19 Q. Thank you, Mr. Liborius. Let's move to small letter b on the
20 same page. And I read it out: "Concerning the physical harassment of an
21 old Serb living in Knin who was met by ECMM, N2 handed a letter of
22 concern to the office of General Cermak. The General was not available,
23 but N2 scheduled a meeting with General Cermak for Friday, 1500 hours."
24 How often, if you know, would matters such as physical harassment
25 of an old Serb be raised with General Cermak or his office?
1 A. It would be raised occasionally. At that time, the
2 UN Human Rights Action Teams were also active in the Sector South area.
3 And in our team structure we had a designated humanitarian officer who
4 would also be carrying forward issues like the one mentioned there.
5 How often, every now and then. I don't have a specific number.
6 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to move this document into evidence,
7 Mr. President.
8 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
9 Madam Registrar.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P813.
11 JUDGE ORIE: P813 is admitted into evidence.
12 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
13 Now, the next document is a similar document of the following
14 day, 25th of August, 1995, 4391.
15 Q. And I would like to go to humanitarian and human rights issues,
16 down at the bottom of the first page. And there is reference to: "N2
17 having a meeting with General Cermak about the mistreatment by three HV
18 soldiers of the old Serb man Drpa Dusan living in Knin on the 22nd of
19 August, 1995. N2 told him that the status of the human rights and the
20 current developments in Krajina area are of concern to the ECMM.
21 General Cermak reacted that he was still working on the case: Police is
22 investigating the case, and the General promised to keep us informed.
23 Assessment: The General is very keen on keeping a good image with the
24 ECMM, and he wants us to inform him directly in such matters. He is
25 anxious to broadcast the impression that 340 Serbs have returned to their
2 Were you present in this meeting with General Cermak?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And is it accurate what is said here?
5 A. The issue of the treatment of this Mr. Drpa Dusan was raised in
6 that meeting, and what is in the report there, I consider accurate,
7 accurate as -- as I have drafted it myself. The case and the reaction of
8 the General was selected because the case was quite easy. It had a
9 victim; it had three identified perpetrators; and it was quite recent in
10 time. So it was an obvious example where the Croatian authorities could
11 react to the case. We followed it up in questions later but received no
12 answers. I'm not aware of any subsequent information on this case.
13 Q. Thank you, Mr. Liborius.
14 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to move this exhibit into evidence,
15 Mr. President.
16 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
17 Madam Registrar.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P814.
19 JUDGE ORIE: P814 is admitted into evidence.
20 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
21 Now I would like to move to a somewhat different report, and this
22 is 65 ter 4147. And it's titled: The initial consequences in former RSK
23 of Operation Storm, and dated 22nd August 1995. And the author is you,
24 Mr. Liborius.
25 Do you recognise this document?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And let me just read out the -- the summary. "In the period from
3 7th to the 24th [sic] of August, 1995, three ECMM teams observed a
4 systematic destruction, mainly by burning of property in the former RSK
5 areas. A rough estimate is that between 60 to 80 per cent of the
6 property in former UN Sector South have been fully or partly destroyed.
7 The burnings were to a very large extent carried out by uniformed HV
8 soldiers under command inside areas where access was strictly controlled
9 by HV military and Croatian civil police. In general, churches and
10 fields remained undestroyed.
11 "The Serb population was promised by the Croatian government to
12 be treated well and be given the same rights as Croats. The behaviour of
13 the victorious HV forces have proven otherwise. Now it is estimated that
14 maximum two per cent of the former Serbs remain."
15 Now, do you have any additional comments to the summary you had
17 MR. WAESPI: And just to correct the record, the date of the
18 document is the 26th of August and not the 24th. I might have misspoke.
19 A. Yes. The summary is a very condensed description of a set of
20 events, and they were meant, this summary was meant to -- to give as
21 accurate as possible a picture of -- of the whole situation. It was
22 intended for the visit by the US
23 Senator Kerry. And that's the reason why the from, date, subject, author
24 is a little bit different to the usual ECMM reporting format. It was
25 agreed that for this particular --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Sorry. Could I interrupt you for one second.
2 It was reported to me that there are problems with receiving
3 translation. Mr. Cermak, is that --
4 THE ACCUSED CERMAK: Sorry. No translator is Croatian. Nothing.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Then can we check whether you have the right
6 channel. Could we have a test so that --
7 THE ACCUSED CERMAK: Yes. Yes, number 6 channel.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I receive --
9 THE ACCUSED CERMAK: It's okay. Momentary is okay.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do not hesitate to inform me immediately if
11 you do not receive translation.
12 THE ACCUSED CERMAK: Thank you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Gotovina, Mr. Markac, are you receiving
15 THE ACCUSED MARKAC: Yes.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Then we can proceed.
17 MR. WAESPI: Yes.
18 Q. Perhaps I should ask you what was the -- and you might have
19 answered it --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, is there a long part that you
21 missed, Mr. Cermak?
22 THE ACCUSED CERMAK: [Interpretation] No. I understood roughly
23 what they were talking. No need to repeat as far as I'm concerned.
24 Thank you.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
1 Please proceed.
2 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
3 Q. Just to make it clear, what was the purpose of this report and
4 who asked you to pull it together?
5 A. The purpose was to present the observations and assessments made
6 by ECMM to the visiting Senate Commission. And the decision to compile
7 the report was ours, in the -- in the RC. And therefore, as it is stated
8 in the top of the report, the from and author, are a bit different than
9 you usually see in our reports.
10 So it is clear to the visitors the status of the report.
11 Q. Do you know whether they received the report, the members of the
12 visiting Senate Commission?
13 A. I handed it over to them and I briefed them in person, at the
14 UN Sector South headquarters.
15 Q. And I take it these are US senators?
16 A. It was Senator Robert Kerry and I'll have to consult to my notes
17 who the other was. They were assisted by a delegation from the Senate
18 Commission on Defence.
19 Q. Thank you, Mr. Liborius. Let me go through a few of these
20 comments or parts of your report. The first one is on page 2 at the
21 bottom of the English version. It says: "Three, living conditions in
22 former Krajina. Although the commander of Knin Military District
23 published a strong call for all Serbs in liberated territory promising
24 them food, first aid, work ... no such actions and benefits against Serbs
25 have been observed. The only help they are getting is from IOs and as
1 exception in Knin in front of broadcast teams."
2 And then on the next page in English: "Asking the people for the
3 reason of staying, the common answers are: We are too old to leave our
4 home land and we don't want any more."
5 Now, the basis for you to put that into this report was what?
6 A. It was weeks of monitoring activity by myself and my fellow team
7 members and the rest of the ECMM teams in the RC.
8 Q. Then if we move down, still, on the third page, there`s a
9 section: "The driving factors behind the destruction." And you list
10 four factors that you observed or that you can expect, as you state.
11 "Individual thirst for revenge. Soldiers or DP having endured various
12 hardship in the last years. This is assessed to cause individual
13 burnings of known houses. Can be committed by military as well as
14 civilian personnel."
15 The next factor: "The desire to remove the material basis for
16 the ethnic Serb population, thus preventing them from returning in
17 foreseeable future."
18 The third factor: "The wish to use the burnings as a
19 psychological operation designed to raise fear among the remaining Serb
21 And the last factor: "Burning of fields and houses will make
22 de-mining easier and less dangerous."
23 And these are the driving factors behind the destruction.
24 Do you have any comment? Was there one of the factors that
25 played a bigger role in your assessment, Mr. Liborius?
1 A. Between the four factors discussed in the paper, my assessment,
2 based on our monitoring activity, was that in different periods of time,
3 different motives were the prime reasons.
4 Let me explain.
5 The first two weeks or so after the end of the active
6 hostilities, the personnel, the number, the structure, indicated to me
7 that the well organised, factor two, well organised campaign was the
8 leading one.
9 As a change of personnel gradually took place and could be
10 observed in the field, other factors kicked in. Sometimes at the same
11 time as factor two, and gradually as we moved through August, the -- the
12 burning took a more individualized pattern later on. So there was a
13 gradual shift between the different four factors.
14 The monitoring basis for -- for this discussion was, of course,
15 the ECMM observations. However, as this report was ordered to be
16 delivered in conjunction with the visit of the US senators to UN, we
17 would -- we would do a discussion so that the senators had more
18 information in their further trip through Croatia.
19 It -- I don't know if that is a clear answer. I'm not sure.
20 Q. I think that somebody else than ECMM has contributed to your
21 distilling factors behind the destruction.
22 A. Some of the -- or one of the purposes for this particular report
23 was to discuss some factors at that point in time, indicate how the
24 monitoring activities prompted us in a certain direction of assessment,
25 but present a broad picture so that -- so that all the factors that were
1 aired at that time both by official Croatian authorities in discussion
2 between international organisations, in the media, was given some sort of
3 thought in the report.
4 Q. Just let me ask you again, and you talked about discussions that
5 you had, and I take it these are discussions different to the discussions
6 had you with the US
7 Did you discuss this report during the drafting process with
8 somebody outside the ECMM?
9 A. No. I was perfectly capable of writing that myself.
10 Q. So what discussions were you referring to when you said: "We
11 would do a discussion so that the senators had more information in their
12 future trip through Croatia
14 A. This was discussions with my ECMM colleagues and if you see the
15 entire structure of the report it has an annex of -- of monitoring, and
16 it has assessment - we are, of course, in the assessment paragraph now -
17 so as to -- I lack the proper English word. As to come forward with --
18 with different elements that were heard in -- in the public discussion,
19 medias and so on, to paint the -- as full a picture as possible.
20 Q. Thank you. And two more parts of this report. The first one is
21 the next page. It's paragraph 5, conclusion. And I'll read it:
22 "'Ethnic cleansing' is a word frequently used --"
23 MR. WAESPI: I think we need to go back a little bit, the English
24 version, I think it's the previous page. Yes. That's it. And I believe
25 the B/C/S version needs to be adjusted as well. Yes.
1 Q. "'Ethnic cleansing' is a word frequently used in the conflict.
2 It appears in many different forms and the responsible ones are many.
3 What ECMM has observed in the three weeks following Operation Storm can
4 be best described as subsequent cleansing and effective prevention of the
5 return of the Serbs used to live as mainly farmers in the area. This
6 action may be called the 'tit for tat' operation. Now we have the same
7 situation as after 1991, including ethnical cleansing and scorched land
8 strategy. But compared with the then successful Serb forces, this
9 operation is far more professionally executed."
10 Do you have any comment on your conclusion which you drafted on
11 26th August 1995
12 A. The comment to the conclusion, we tried to -- to paint a broader
13 picture and put it into perspective with the situation from 1991, when
14 the RSK and the Krajina Serb authorities took control of the area.
15 Having also experienced the -- myself having experienced the dreadful
16 times under the RSK and Krajina Serb rule, we tried to -- or I tried
17 to -- as I say, to take a large -- a long view back to 1991. That
18 explains the tit for tat.
19 However, when we look at how long time it took, many of the
20 Krajina Serb authorities to destroy the same number of -- of property,
21 that, compared to what we saw in the weeks after Operation Storm, led us
22 to conclude that the latter destruction was far more, as I say in the
23 report, professionally executed and more rapidly.
24 I also want to add that I'm not a -- I'm in no way defending the
25 one destruction as opposed to the other, but I have the view there to
1 paint a picture of perspection -- perspective, sorry.
2 Q. And if you make a comment about the professional exclusion you
3 linked it to the time element, that they were quicker than the other
4 people in 1991. That might be, but I ask you, are there other elements
5 for the professionality you have observed at the time?
6 A. In comparison with the RSK and the Krajina Serb authorities, the
7 ability to employ the armed forces throughout an area in a consistent
8 operational pattern maintaining effective command and control that, to
9 me, was more considerably more professionally done by the Croatian side
10 than the Krajina Serb side.
11 MR. WAESPI: And I would like to move to the last excerpt from
12 this document Mr. President. This is the last page, Annex B.
13 Q. This annex and I quote: "Is an account of the personnel and the
14 groups observed by ECMM either doing looting or burning. The ECMM teams
15 are operating in the southern part of Sector South."
16 The units involved: "ECMM have witnessed the following type of
17 people, of groups involved in burning and looting.
18 "1. The most frequent: Uniformed HV soldiers operation in
19 groups of five to fifteen at a time. More than one group may operate in
20 the same village at one time. This was the general picture in the weeks
21 32 and 33, 1995, i.e., the first two weeks after Operation Storm.
22 Vehicles used: HV vehicles, civilian, tractors?
23 "2. Frequent: Uniformed HV soldiers in groups up to five. This
24 being the general picture after the first massive phase of the burning
25 were done, i.e., week 32 and 33. Vehicles used: HV vehicles, civilian,
2 "3. Less frequent but seen more and more after the week 34:
3 Uniformed HV soldiers mixed with persons in civilian."
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, you are reading. Speed goes up.
5 MR. WAESPI: I apologise.
6 "4. Few: HV military personnel and Croatian civil police
8 "b: The areas where these acts are committed are all within
9 control of either/or both the HV Military Police or the Croatian civil
11 And you end by saying: "It should be noted that the assessments
12 are made by taking into consideration the experience gathered by the
13 monitoring mission since 1991, some of the personnel within the mission
14 having experience from 1991."
15 Q. Do you want to elaborate, Mr. Liborius, how you came to this very
16 interesting breakdown of what you had observed?
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic.
18 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, we have been going through a process
19 now, and I have not been on my feet before, of reading out long parts of
20 documents and then asking the witness, Do you have any comment, which
21 leads the witness to give long answers that often don't have any specific
22 underlying fact but provide his comments, his conclusions, things like
24 If -- I would just have a standing objection and if we can get to
25 a question with a specific -- asking for a specific fact or how a
1 specific underlying conclusion was reached, that's fine. But to read out
2 a rather long, multi-part conclusion and then invite the witness to give
3 a long answer, I don't know if it is the most efficient use of our time.
4 JUDGE ORIE: In view of the question just put by Mr. Waespi,
5 which needed, in order to be understood, at least some more information
6 about the document, I take it that Mr. Waespi will keep it in his mind.
7 At the same time, I will not at this moment prevent him from asking this
9 Mr. Waespi.
10 MR. WAESPI: Thank you.
11 Q. Let me phrase it differently. Was it obvious for you, these
12 different [indiscernible] as you describe them, or was it a hard
13 analytical job?
14 A. As I said it was --
15 MR. MISETIC: Objection as to the compound question and I'm not
16 sure what -- what a hard analytical job is.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I know a few hard analytical jobs, but I do
18 agree with you that there is a general category.
19 Mr. Waespi, could you rephrase the question in such a way that it
20 is clear to everyone.
21 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. I apologise.
22 Q. How did you come to the conclusion that there were these
23 different stages in what you and your colleagues had observed?
24 A. Let me, before answering that question, just say that we worked
25 so hard on our analytical work that I did not have a chance to type and
1 proofread it. In para 4, "Few: HV military police personnel." Police
2 personnel, that should be inserted there. And I also made that clear to
3 the visiting senators.
4 But, yes, indeed, it was a result of long and consistent
5 monitoring hours and efforts by not only me but also my colleagues. And
6 in order to separate the faces one from each other, of course, we will
7 have to compile a large body of information and see how the different
8 groups, where they were most prominent.
9 I hope that answers the question, although I'm prepared to
10 continue elaborating on that.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, the question is about stages, whereas I
12 read in these documents, I see it is about frequencies and that becomes
13 most clear if you look at category four, few, without any time reference.
14 So therefore if you ask about stages and if you intended to refer to one
15 to four, it may have been clear to you that the different categories are
16 not about stages but are about frequencies and that in three out of the
17 four a stage was included in the categories as they were developed in
18 this report but not in all of them.
19 MR. WAESPI: Yes, that is absolutely correct. I apologise.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So I think what would be -- let me try to see
21 whether I understand what you wanted to elicit from the witness.
22 Mr. Liborius, you made four categories of frequency. Can you
23 tell us what caused you to make this distinction?
24 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour. The distinction is that in the
25 first two weeks after Operation Storm what we most frequently saw was
1 larger units of Croatian uniformed soldiers, operating with the support
2 of HV vehicles. It was -- what dominated in the first two weeks was the
3 size of soldiers, indicating a chain of command.
4 As time progressed, roughly two weeks after, this most frequent
5 occurrence of five to 15 soldiers at one time and in some hamlets more
6 than one group of soldiers, one section of soldiers that became less
7 frequent, and in the next two weeks, smaller groups were operating and
8 civilian groups also joined in.
9 That, to me, and to my fellow monitors, was visible, as I say, by
10 the size of the units and the way they acted. When we say "operating,"
11 "most frequent, uniformed HV soldiers operating in groups of" blah, blah,
12 blah, operating in groups, in our words, was when people were going from
13 one house to another, doing the same thing, or going through different
14 villages in the same region, operating in groups rather than operating as
15 an individual.
16 If I may return to the INA truck and the military police we saw
17 on the 1st of September, that is a small group, at that time, that was
18 the most occurring -- frequently occurring incident.
19 In the first two weeks, the group structure was to, our mind, the
20 military group structure.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, may I try to understand your answer.
22 Is it your testimony that this distinction was made on the basis
23 of having observed a pattern, a pattern in relation to the size of the
24 groups that were burning and looting, composition of those groups, the
25 use of vehicles by those groups, and by the presence of more than one
1 group in the same area.
2 Is that --
3 THE WITNESS: That's correct.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
5 Please proceed. I say please proceed, Mr. Waespi, but that was
6 when I had not yet looked at the clock.
7 MR. WAESPI: Yes. Perhaps we can -- I'd like to tender this
9 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
10 Madam Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P815.
12 JUDGE ORIE: P815 is admitted into evidence.
13 We will have a break and resume at 6.00 sharp.
14 --- Recess taken at 5.38 p.m.
15 --- On resuming at 6.01 p.m.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, I think you gave a time estimate of four
17 hours. Is that correct?
18 MR. WAESPI: I think it's 4.5 hours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: 4.5 hours.
20 MR. WAESPI: And I think we will deal with a few documents today
21 and a few video clips and I think I need the first session of tomorrow to
22 conclude with the meetings that Mr. Liborius had with General Cermak and
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That would take you far beyond four and a half
1 MR. WAESPI: Yes, I will try to be as short as I can be.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
3 And, Mr. Liborius, short, clear, factual answers will certainly
4 assist as well.
5 Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.
6 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
7 If we could pull up 65 ter 5393, please. This is a document,
8 Mr. President, Your Honours, authored by Mr. Liborius and Mr. Hendriks,
9 dated 30th August 1995
10 I'm sorry, 4393; I misspoke. I apologise.
11 Yes. Thank you.
12 We have a reference to General Cermak, under number 2, general
13 situation: "That he warned the UN that certain areas will become the
14 scene of special large clean-up operations and, therefore, he will issue
15 restriction of movement there starting the coming Friday."
16 Mr. Liborius, do you know more about these areas you couldn't
17 work in?
18 A. The areas that we had received initial information about had, in
19 many instances, previously been patrolled by us throughout the
20 Sector South. Rural areas, including smaller villages and hamlets.
21 Q. And do you know which areas will become the scene of special
22 large clean-up operations, as reported here by you and Mr. Hendriks?
23 A. At that point in time, we did not know, but sometimes later we
24 encountered areas to the north of Knin, up in the direction of
25 Donji Lapac and in the border area to Bosnia-Herzegovina.
1 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to tender this document, Mr. President.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Since there are no objections, Madam Registrar, that
3 would be number ...
4 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P816.
5 JUDGE ORIE: P816 is admitted into evidence.
6 MR. WAESPI: Thank you. Mr. President, the next document I would
7 like to call up is 65 ter 5417.
8 Q. And this is obviously the next date, 31st of August, 1995. And
9 it has a reference in general situation, under 2: "Freedom of movement,
10 to an area 20 to 20 kilometres north-east of Knin due to special police
11 forces clean-up operations."
12 And there is a related comment at the bottom of the page:
13 "Comment: N2 was not scheduled to operate in this area today so N2 do
14 not know anything about the OPS. However, it is of concern that the
15 depicted area just include the Plavno valley. N2 will pay attention to
16 the area ASAP. End comment."
17 Were you the person, Mr. Liborius, who drafted this comment?
18 A. Yes, I believe. Could I just see the -- no, sorry, I have the
19 B/S/C translation. Yeah, fine.
20 Q. Can you add anything more about the concerns that you had at that
22 A. The Plavno valley included a number of civilians, mainly old
23 Serbs, and it had been the scene of quite a lot of looting at that time
24 and harassment, and there was a concern that the law and order was not
25 being upheld at that time. And including the entire Plavno valley in a
1 designated area for special police clean-up operations would, first of
2 all, exclude monitors or observers from coming to the area; and,
3 secondly, it would introduce, most likely, forces in higher number.
4 That was the concern.
5 Q. Thank you, Mr. Liborius.
6 MR. WAESPI: I would like to tender this document, Mr. President.
7 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
8 Madam Registrar.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P817.
10 JUDGE ORIE: P817 is admitted into evidence.
11 MR. WAESPI: And the next document is 65 ter 4180. And it's,
12 again, the following day, 1st September, 1995, authored by Mr. Liborius
13 and Mr. Hendriks.
14 Q. And I'm interested in the second part of the observations about
15 the political situation. First part, under A, deals with comments made
16 by COP
17 Who was the COP
18 A. Chief of police.
19 Q. And then the second part of that paragraph reads as follows:
20 "The cooperation between the special police units is reported good but
21 due to different tasks, no joint patrols, the relationship with the HV MP
22 is good when joint CP are made. No one is the overall chief of the CP.
23 Comment: Maybe this can explain the widespread deplorable situation
24 where cars loaded with looted goods can pass. And no CP takes action
25 against the fires in their nearabouts. End comment.
1 "The civil police will now investigate the cases of house
2 burnings, receiving aid from Zadar criminal police branch."
3 Mr. Liborius, are you familiar with this part of the comment?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. What does CP mean?
6 A. Check-point.
7 Q. And have you observed a situation which is described here?
8 A. Numerous times.
9 Q. Can you give one example.
10 A. On the way in and out of the Donji Lapac area, way in and out of
11 the Plavno valley, in the areas between Knin and the neighbouring
12 villages, when a joint check-point manned by both military police and
13 civilian police operated, we were told that there was -- we were told by
14 the Croatian army liaison officer that, as I said before, the
15 distribution of responsibilities, however, nobody took, as I write in the
16 report, action with regard to stopping cars who apparently just passed
17 out of Plavno valley or Donji Lapac or any other areas we came about.
18 Q. In your observations at that time, did they have in place at
19 these check-points the capabilities to stop cars?
20 A. Oh, yes, very much so.
21 Q. And the last comment here: "The civil police will now
22 investigate the cases of house burnings, receive aid from Zadar criminal
23 police branch," did you receive -- are you aware of any -- any feedback
24 that the civil police did investigate cases of house burnings?
25 A. This information came from the chief of police in Donji Lapac and
1 it has to be added that Donji Lapac became very, very burnt down, and I
2 did not receive any feedback in my subsequent meetings with either the
3 chief of the police or any other of the authorities in that area.
4 Q. Let's move to the second page.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask one or two questions seeking
7 You said the check-points had the capability of stopping cars.
8 Would that be true for both civilian cars and military vehicles? That's
9 the first part of my question.
10 Second part of my question is whether it would make -- if they
11 could stop both, whether it would make any difference how the check-point
12 was composed.
13 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, to your first question, whether they
14 had the capability also to stop, I would say yes. The check-points were
15 manned by sufficient manpower, around the clock if possible, if need be.
16 They were in -- in -- in radio communication with higher headquarters; I
17 saw that many times. So it was a functioning check-point. Usually the
18 appearance of the soldiers and the civilian police was professional, they
19 were operational at all times. The places the check-points were
20 established were logical, in intersections --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps my question was not precise enough because
22 in Mr. Waespi's question it was whether, on the basis of your
23 observation, they had the capability of stopping cars.
24 Did you see check-points stopping military cars and civilian
25 cars, or only one of these categories?
1 THE WITNESS: Sometimes -- sometimes I saw check-points doing a
2 brief check on both military and civilian cars. I never saw a
3 check-point stopping either civilian or military personnel and removing
4 looted goods I have just seen loaded previously, or arresting people.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, you said you have -- you saw brief checks
6 on both military and civilian cars. Did the composition of the
7 check-point, that is, who were participating in that check-point, make
8 any difference, as far as you observing cars being stopped concerned?
9 THE WITNESS: Not really. It was the same.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. "Not really" is an ambiguous answer. If you
11 say it is the same, that is a clear answer. Which of the two?
12 THE WITNESS: Check-points manned by both military and civilian
13 police would occasionally stop both civilian cars and military cars.
14 A check-point only manned with civilian police would not stop a
15 military car. I did not see that.
16 It has to be borne in mind that the check-points were not on a
17 systematic basis stopping the different types - civilian stopping
18 civilians, military stopping military - and doing checks of contents of
19 the vehicles nor the documents of the passengers.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for those answers.
21 Mr. Waespi, you wanted to move to another part of this document.
22 MR. WAESPI: Yes, thank you, Mr. President. This is the second
23 page, under b. Top of the page. We have here a reference to, second
24 line: "N2 observed two HV off-roaders, one red Cherokee, registration
25 number HV 219-VP; and one black Mitsubishi Pajero, registration number
1 HV 283-VP, close to the scene of fire. When N2 entered the very
2 difficult accessible hamlet, one HV soldier rushed to the car and
3 demanded to see the notebook of TL N2. When this was refused, N2 was
4 told that N2 was detained on the spot until the commander of the soldiers
5 could be present. Allegedly, he was out in the hills looking for the
6 ones having started the fire ... after having informed the soldier that
7 within three minutes N2 would call General Cermak asking for an
8 explanation to this strange situation, then N2 was no longer detained.
9 35 minutes later, N2 saw the two cars in six kilometres away in
10 Kastel Zegarski with its Rambo-looking soldiers."
11 And your assessment: "Circumstantial evidence can only point to
12 the uniformed HV soldiers setting these houses on fire. Obviously, those
13 who say that fires do not occur have to reconsider their statements. End
14 of assessment."
15 Who was the TL N2, team leader N2?
16 A. That's me.
17 Q. So you personally witnessed these events?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. In this instance, did you talk to - if you recall, after such a
20 long time - did you talk to General Cermak actually, or was it enough
21 that you mentioned his name?
22 A. It was enough that I mentioned the name to get out of this one.
23 Q. These Rambo-looking soldiers, can you describe them to the
24 Trial Chamber?
25 A. When we approached the very, very difficult negotiable track down
1 to the hamlet, the soldiers had dismounted their cars and were moving
2 around in the village that is located in a V-shape in the bottom of a
3 valley. They wore normal Croatian army uniform, normal weapons. And I
4 asked to talk with the senior NCO or the commanding officer of the unit.
5 However, he was not produced.
6 When we later saw them, they were still in the same uniforms,
7 flashing their weapons as they were driving through some of the villages
8 in the Kastel Zegarski area.
9 The soldier detaining us on the spot was -- well, he was a tense
10 mood but he was not dangerous, he was not threatening with his weapon.
11 He was -- he was determined, I would say, to prevent us from entering
12 into the hamlet. And the whole V-shape of the valley, the bottom there,
13 had been filled with smoke from burning houses.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic.
15 MR. MISETIC: Objection the answer is non-responsive to why they
16 were Rambo-looking.
17 THE WITNESS: Flashing of their weapons --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Part of that is if you ask the witness to describe
19 persons, the Rambo-looking soldiers, then you could expect description of
20 behaviour, description of other things.
21 Mr. Waespi, therefore, a focussed answer -- a focussed question
22 would certainly have prevented the witness from telling us a lot of
23 things but not really focussing on your question.
24 Could you tell us whether -- how was their appearance.
25 MR. WAESPI: Yes, the witness answered, line 4.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, yes, if you carefully read, you find portions
2 of an answer here and there.
3 Mr. Liborius, may I ask you to carefully listen to the question
4 and to try to give as focussed answers as possible.
5 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: You might have understood that Mr. Waespi was
7 seeking a description of how they looked, is that --
8 MR. WAESPI: Yes. And I apologise that I wasn't specific enough.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
10 MR. WAESPI:
11 Q. Let me ask --
12 JUDGE ORIE: And perhaps the witness could briefly answer. Any
13 specific features you saw --
14 THE WITNESS: The -- the flashing of their weapons as they were
15 driving quite wildly in the area gave the impression of a Rambo-type
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.
18 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
19 Q. Just to make sure that these two -- or these Rambo-looking
20 soldiers, how many were there? I don't know whether you answered that.
21 A. Two of the four-wheel drivers were filled with the soldiers. So
22 I would imagine about 10, 11, or so. They were long vehicles.
23 Q. And just to make sure I understand your evidence correctly, these
24 soldiers, Rambo-looking soldiers were sitting in these two cars which are
25 contained in your report with these two HV licence plates?
1 A. Yes.
2 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to tender this document, Mr. President.
3 JUDGE ORIE: In the absence of any objections, Madam Registrar.
4 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P818.
5 JUDGE ORIE: P818 is admitted into evidence.
6 Please proceed.
7 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. And the last document in
8 the series is 65 ter 4271, daily report, 2nd October 1995.
9 Q. And in -- on the first page, in b, general situation, it's noted
10 that: "During the weekend 30th September to 1st October, still more
11 incidents observed and reports containing information on the harassment,
12 robbery and physical mistreatment of remaining people. This has got
13 scale, frequency and the smell of an at least tacit approved campaign to
14 deprive the remaining old Serbs of their basic necessities; many will
15 most likely face a slow death, if the coming winter is strong."
16 Were you the drafter of this -- this comment?
17 A. It was the result of the discussion we had in the team. I wrote
18 it, yes.
19 Q. And the second reference I would like to guide you to is on the
20 second page under 4, humanitarian and human rights issues. Very close,
21 about the tenth line from the bottom. "Plavno valley with grid reference
22 looting by civilians and uniformed HV MP soldiers from 72nd HV MP BAT.
23 Looting of horses, furniture, and other house items, persons engaged in
24 looting, riding following cars with registration plates were recorded,"
25 and then we have a number of registration plates.
1 Mr. Liborius, do you know what the source of this information is?
2 A. That is my own team monitoring.
3 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, I'd like to move this document into
5 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
6 Madam Registrar.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P819.
8 JUDGE ORIE: P819 is admitted into evidence.
9 MR. WAESPI:
10 Q. Mr. Liborius, in 1997, did you go to the Knin area again with OTP
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And what was the purpose of the trip and what was your role in
15 A. A very brief answer, there was a request by the OTP to do a field
16 trip to obtain photographic material, and I was asked -- well, instructed
17 to assist them.
18 MR. WAESPI: Your Honours, there are four videos made from this
19 trip. These are 65 ter numbers 3763 to 3766.
20 Q. Mr. Liborius, during your proofing sessions and I think also a
21 couple of months ago when you came to give your statement, did you review
22 these videos -- these four videos?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And did you also mark a map which depicts locations where you
25 observed check-points in August and early September 1995, and also, where
1 the video was recorded in 1997?
2 A. Yes.
3 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, if 65 ter 5440 could be brought up.
4 Q. Do you see in front of you on the screen the map that you
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And I don't think that's disputed that your original markings are
8 enhanced by computer lines that include the circles in red and green and
9 also the numbers.
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Thank you, Mr. Liborius.
12 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, the purpose of this map, and I do
13 have - not now but I will provide you with - hard copies, if it is easier
14 for you, is to allow you to see where the locations that are referred to
15 in those four videos are located; and, second, where the check-points
16 Mr. Liborius has seen or located, and you can make a reference to the
17 actual names of these locations.
18 I'd like to admit this piece of evidence.
19 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections. The map will receive what
20 number, Madam Registrar.
21 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P820.
22 JUDGE ORIE: P820 is admitted into evidence.
23 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to move on to
24 show you nine different clips from these four videos. Each of them has
25 about one, two, or three minutes, and the witness is talking on these
1 videos, he makes references to what is seen when he is driving around,
2 and there is a transcript for each of these four videos which has been
3 made available to everybody.
4 So I suggest we start with the first clip.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And the speed of speech is such that a
6 transcript can be made and that the interpreters are able to translate
8 MR. WAESPI: Yes, I believe so. I think on the video, actually,
9 Mr. Liborius speaks fairly slowly.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's have a look.
11 MR. WAESPI: Thank you. Mr. President, the first video is from
12 65 ter number 3763, and --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Is it part of that 65 ter?
14 MR. WAESPI: Yes, yes, it is one part, one two-minute clip out of
15 a video that is slightly more than one hour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: It is uploaded just in the portions you intend to
17 play or ...
18 MR. WAESPI: I think so, yes. Yeah.
20 A. Apparently it is on Sanction.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And then it will be either reproduced on a DVD
22 or -- so that we have only the portions played be provided to the
24 MR. WAESPI: Yes, although I would tender all the four videos.
25 JUDGE ORIE: And the four videos all together is how much.
1 MR. WAESPI: I think two are about one hour and the third one is
2 about 30 minutes, and the fourth one as well. I think --
3 JUDGE ORIE: So a selection will be played and the whole of the
4 videos are tendered into evidence.
5 Let's first look at the selection and then we will hear from the
6 Defence whether there are any objections.
7 Please proceed.
8 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. If the first video at
9 time reference 41.20 could be played, please.
10 [Videotape played]
11 "SL: My name is Soren Liborius. I worked for the ECMM during
12 and after Operation Storm in August 1995. Today is the 18th of May,
13 1997. We are looking in the direction of the road going from Knin down
14 to Drnis, going south down to Drnis, and we are in the northern end of
15 the Kosovo valley. Located immediately south of the Knin valley.
16 "On the 10th of August, my patrol coming on the road from Drnis
17 observed some houses on fire in the south end of the valley, and a group
18 of soldiers moved along the left side of the valley, the west side up to
19 the houses we're looking at now, where they went from house to house
20 putting them on fire. The soldiers were supported by an army truck
21 carrying fuel canisters and my patrol stopped at this point ... the house
22 we're looking at now with the two distinct window and door openings on
23 the first floor were the first house where we saw the soldiers lighting
24 up the fire. It is the nearest house from this distance. It is about
25 three to 400 metres away. And having put that on fire, the soldiers
1 proceeded further up the hillside and to the north, putting the other
2 houses on fire. The details are described in the team report from that
4 "We withdrew from this point of observation when the soldiers
5 started to fire warning shots in the direction of our vehicle. After
6 approximately ten minutes of observation."
7 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Could I just check whether the speed is such that
9 perhaps one of the interpreters, by reading and the other one by
10 translating, that we can catch up?
11 I do not hear any complaints, so let's proceed with the second
13 [Videotape played]
14 "SL: We will see the new terra-cotta tiles on the roofs. These
15 are reconstructed in the autumn of 1996 and the spring of 1997, and the
16 appearance [Realtime transcript read in error "occurrence"] of the
17 Kistanje town is very different now to what it was in the summer of 1995
18 and also in August 1996. In various reports from the international
19 organisations, ECMM included, you will find reference to burnings
20 witnessed by international organisations, some also documented with
21 pictures, for example, the garage we just drove through was burned by a
22 bus full of soldiers in the middle of August, as I personally witnessed
24 "We go by the road from the east heading to the west, and as you
25 can see many windows and doors are new, but the traces of fire are still
1 very visible on the houses."
2 MR. WAESPI: That was the second sequence, Kistanje --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. ...
4 [Videotape played]
5 "SL: Looting, of course, was done before the houses were set on
6 fire. And throughout the month of August and September, you could see
7 collection points where looted goods were assembled and distributed to
8 mainly soldiers of the Croatian army and transported away in either their
9 own personal vehicles or in the vehicles belonging to the Croatian army.
10 "The majority of the burning done in Kistanje was undertaken by
11 units wearing the -- in the Croatian army wearing uniforms. And, as all
12 movements through Kistanje were controlled by combined military and
13 civilian police check-points, it was beyond any doubt who could be the
14 initiators of the fire.
15 "We are now approaching the western end of the town of Kistanje
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, before we proceed --
17 MR. WAESPI: Yes.
18 JUDGE ORIE: -- there appears to be a transcribing error, page 81
19 line 14, where it says occurrence, I heard appearance although it was
20 transcribed as occurrence.
21 Let's move on to the next clip.
22 MR. WAESPI: Just one second. For ease of reference we have seen
23 four clips. The first one was taken from 65 ter 3763, and the next three
24 came from 65 ter 3764, and the last clips are all from the third video,
25 65 ter 3765.
1 [Videotape played]
2 "SL: We approach the church of Kistanje
3 It is significant to notice that the church is untouched and it was
4 untouched throughout all the burning and looting done in August 1995. It
5 carried a sign on the door of the church saying, HV protecting this
6 facility, and many days also guards were placed.
7 "As one will see, the burning and the looting took place in the
8 immediate vicinity of the church. Interviewing many Croatian army guards
9 around the churches, ECMM and other international organisations learned
10 that the soldiers acted on orders from General Ante Gotovina, commander
11 operational zone Split
12 and with strict orders to protect the churches from looting or
14 "The soldiers did not, however, intervene in destruction taking
15 place next to them. The facility we are now seeing to the left was used
16 as a camp, a barracks, mini-barracks for Croatian soldiers, and we
17 witnessed many of them doing the actual burning of Kistanje town in the
18 first two weeks following Operation Storm, and they lived in the barracks
19 we just saw."
20 [Videotape played]
21 "SL: My name is Soren Liborius. I worked for the ECMM during
22 and after Operation Storm in August 1995. Today is the 19th of May,
23 1997. We're now in the village of Ocestevo
24 August, 1995, my patrol saw smoke coming from Ocestevo while we were
25 driving from the area of Padinje south-west. After a few minutes,
1 arriving on this spot where we are now observing, we saw two houses on
2 fire. The first one, the large one we see now, and a small group of
3 soldiers coming out from that house, walking across the lawn down to the
4 smaller house we see in the centre now where approximately ten people
5 were coming out after having set it on fire.
6 "My patrol stopped on this spot as the soldiers assembled at the
7 gate we see now in the centre, and after a few minutes, they drove off in
8 two vehicles. The details are covered in the report from the date of the
9 24th of August, 1995."
10 [Videotape played]
11 "IJH: 21st May 1997
12 road in the town."
13 [Videotape played]
14 "IJH: We are still in Plitvicka Ulica in Donji Lapac."
15 JUDGE ORIE: Someone is waiting for ...
16 MR. WAESPI: Yes. Can I go on? I thought you were listening to
17 the French transcript. I apologise, Mr. President. I just wanted to put
18 on the record that the last clip, the comment was not by Mr. Liborius but
19 Mr. Marker-Hansen who will also testify shortly here, so the reference
20 here or previously SL was not by Mr. Liborius.
21 If we can continue.
22 [Videotape played]
23 "SL: My name is Soren Liborius. I worked for the ECMM during
24 and after Operation Storm in 1995.
25 "Today is the 17th of May, 1997. We are now standing on the road
1 leading up to the hamlet of Guglete, some eight kilometres east of
2 Obrovac. At this spot, my team on patrol on the 22nd of August 1995
3 an HV military police car, BMW mark 520, accompanied by an INA fuel truck
4 heading down from the hamlet of Guglete.
5 "The reason for us approaching the village was that we were on
6 patrol on the main road just south of here, and seeing suddenly a big
7 cloud of black smoke arising from the village of Guglete
8 this road and as the smoke was building up, we met with the two vehicles
9 coming down.
10 "The details about the two vehicles are contained in the ECMM
11 daily report from the 22nd of August.
12 "We are now in the northern end of the village Guglete and this
13 was the place where we saw the first house on fire. Later on, more
14 houses were put on fire.
15 "The house in the picture now, with the roof being collapsed, was
16 on ... one-third of the roof was on fire when we reached this point and
17 it took another half an hour before the entire roof structure had
19 "And in the picture now, we see a close-up of the house as it is
21 "This is the most eastern part of the hamlet or village Guglete,
22 filmed today, the 17th of May, 1997."
23 [Videotape played]
24 "SL: My name is Soren Liborius. I worked for the ECMM during
25 and after Operation Storm in August 1995.
1 "Today is the 17th of May, 1997. We are standing in the Cicevac
2 area in the Golubic feature.
3 "On the 1st of September 1995, myself and my team member,
4 Eric Hendriks were on patrol in the Golubic area. We have just been in
5 the Milici hamlet north from here and as we were driving on the main road
6 we saw big clouds of black smoke arising. We immediately drove to the
7 spot where we are standing now called the Cicevac hamlet, and what we saw
8 was one large house on fire. And as we approached the hamlet, I took one
9 photograph where the smoke was coming up from. We continued further down
10 the road we are standing on, and as we approached the little hut with the
11 triangular opening, one HV-dressed soldier approached our Land Rover. He
12 made signs that we could not proceed any further. I would -- noticed
13 that he was wearing the HV military police triangle, the golden triangle
14 with the eagles and the white Sam Browne belt. As he was detaining our
15 patrol, we witnessed soldiers coming out from the house, the big house
16 where the fire was started, and they were turning to the left when they
17 exited the house and went further down in the valley as they were
18 shooting cows and horses that were on stray in the valley.
19 "On the place here where the soldier detained us, I phoned our
20 CC operations centre out in Zadar informing them that we were detained
21 and that we could hear shots in the valley and see animals being put to
22 the ground.
23 "We saw further down next to the big house burning, a red
24 four-wheel drive, a red Cherokee, and also two ... at the end of this
25 road here, we saw the other four-wheel drive the soldiers were driving,
1 it was a black Mitsubishi Pajero. We noted down the HV licence numbers
2 and they got included in our team report from that day.
3 "It is visible now that more houses have been burned than it was
4 the situation in the 1st of September."
5 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, these were the videos. Just one
6 correction from our side that was, of course, not Mr. Marker-Hansen but
7 Mr. Ib Jul Hansen who was speaking on that video. He is an OTP
8 investigator and his name appears in paragraph 35 of Mr. Liborius's
9 witness statement of 19 May and 19 June, 2008.
10 And I would like to move these clips, nine clips into evidence
11 and as I explained before, because the other videos show similar
12 occurrences and indeed give you a very good view of the area around Knin.
13 It's, as I said, a little bit more than three hours but I believe it is
14 very useful for Your Honours to -- to look at these videos.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic.
16 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, if I -- I have no objection to the
17 actual video portion coming in. If the statements on the video are going
18 to be submitted for the truth of what is being said on the videos, then I
19 believe that would be additional statements from the witness and I would
20 ask the appropriate 92 ter proceedings, if the witness has looked through
21 everything and made the appropriate attestations regarding what is being
22 said on the video.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Now, I just have to look back whether or not some of
24 it ...
25 One second, please.
1 Mr. Waespi, did you ask the witness whether he had reviewed these
2 videos? And did he review them?
3 MR. WAESPI: Yes. I believe I have asked him whether during the
4 proofing session and at another time when he came to The Hague he had a
5 chance to review the video. Again, it is contained in paragraph 35 of
6 his May/June 2008 statement, when the witness says and I quote him: "I
7 can authenticate the videos as I was present on the 17th, 18th, 19th,
8 20th, and 21st May, 1997, but not on the 16th May, which is referred to
9 in the first part of the video marked V000-1177. I commented on the
10 videos when they were first filmed and there were also comments by the
11 two ICTY investigators."
12 And he has additional comments in paragraph 36, I believe.
13 JUDGE ORIE: That is it part of the attestation, not all of it.
14 MR. WAESPI: Yes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Liborius, one question, Mr. Waespi, I think
16 earlier the witness said that he reviewed them during the proofing
17 session and in June.
18 MR. WAESPI: Yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: We could ask him --
20 Mr. Liborius, did you review all the videos in June?
21 THE WITNESS: I reviewed the videos sessions and I was given a
22 chance to see them on DVD
23 some of the unintelligible words that was in the transcript. So I
24 understand the transcript, yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: And that was in June.
1 THE WITNESS: Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of this year.
3 Now, the comments you made, I don't have to ask you whether this
4 is accurately reflected in the transcript because we can check that
5 ourselves, but did you make them to the best of your recollection in
6 accordance with the truth?
7 THE WITNESS: Yes.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So if you were asked to make comments today,
9 they would come down to --
10 THE WITNESS: The same.
11 JUDGE ORIE: -- the same comments.
12 Mr. Misetic.
13 MR. MISETIC: I have no further objection, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, I take it we have nine clips but
15 these are several DVDs, I take it. Can you assign numbers to it; if not,
16 would there be a way of working this out with the Prosecution tomorrow
17 morning, so that the first thing we could do is to decide on admission
19 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, for purposes of completeness of the
21 record, the Chamber invites you to file tomorrow a list, because that's
22 not yet on the record, a list of those portions played. You can just
23 copy it from what I saw already on screen, together with the ERN number,
24 so to say from this ERN number or from this 65 ter number, those portions
25 would be played. If you would file that, if you would give a courtesy
1 copy already to Madam Registrar, then she will assign numbers to the
2 whole of the videos and we can then decide on admission tomorrow, first
3 thing in the afternoon.
4 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Then it's 7.00.
6 Mr. Liborius, I could like to instruct you, again, that you
7 should not speak with anyone about your testimony, whether already given
8 or still to be given and we'd like to see you back tomorrow at quarter
9 past 2.00.
10 We adjourn until Wednesday, the 10th of September, quarter past
11 2.00, Courtroom I.
12 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.02 p.m.
13 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 10th of
14 September, 2008, at 2.15 p.m.