1 Friday, 20 February 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
6 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning to
8 everyone in the courtroom. This is case number IT-06-90-T, The
9 Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
11 Before we invite you to continue, Mr. Russo, a few matters.
12 First, the Chamber urges you to see how far you will come today.
13 If you would need one day and two sessions, then certainly we couldn't
14 finish this witness Monday, and that would then -- since we have on
15 Tuesday, we have a videolink. That would mean that we would have to stay
16 over. The Chamber is still exploring possibilities on sitting Monday
17 morning as well but that's not yet final, and we'll see at the end of the
18 day what is appropriate to give you as extra time. That also depends on
19 how you use your time today. That is one issue.
20 Another matter is that the Chamber has invited the Prosecution to
21 reduce the size of the statements given by the accused. I think 1200
22 pages were tendered, and we couldn't imagine all 1200 were so relevant
23 that we should keep all of them. But we haven't heard from the
24 Prosecution since then.
25 MR. RUSSO: Yes Mr. President. We are preparing a submission for
1 the court regarding that. However, we did indicate in the motion that it
2 was the 300 pages that we had selected was what we believed the Court
3 should focus on; however, we did include the entire interview in fairness
4 both to the accused and to all counsel. But I'm sure we can resolve
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The question is when.
7 MR. RUSSO: It's my understanding, Your Honour, that we filed
8 last night and it will be distributed today.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Then we will have a look at it.
10 Thank you. Any other matter? Mr. Misetic.
11 MR. MISETIC: Just on that last point, Mr. President, we have --
12 the time is running on our response. Should -- will we get extra time to
13 comment on --
14 JUDGE ORIE: The selection --
15 MR. MISETIC: Yes.
16 JUDGE ORIE: -- or on the admission of the statements as such?
17 MR. MISETIC: Both.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. MISETIC: So --
20 JUDGE ORIE: You'll understand that if we wait to have the
21 response and only then say we'd like to have at least the size reduced
22 then, of course, that would take all together quite a bit of time. How
23 much time would you need for a response?
24 MR. MISETIC: The issue, Mr. President, is although they're not
25 our statements we may have some comment on -- and there's been litigation
1 about this in this Tribunal in the past, about comments from one person
2 and how they impact against the co-accused. We would have to go through
3 that transcript and then point out where we object. We can't do that
4 until we see what the final product is going to be from the Prosecution.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, you are in a position to assess that.
6 Does the issue of not being able to cross-examine on the statement where
7 an accused who gave a statement is not called as a witness in his own
9 MR. MISETIC: Correct.
10 JUDGE ORIE: That's the issue.
11 MR. MISETIC: Yes, Mr. President.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Just put in short.
13 I see your point. I could even imagine that you raise
14 fundamental issues already and that you give further details at a later
15 stage, but, just as I said to Mr. Russo, the "when" is important for the
17 Could you give us an estimate on when you think you could --
18 MR. MISETIC: Well, at this point and based on the current filing
19 we would try to get something filed by next Thursday which is, I think,
20 the 14 days would expire then. If the Court wishes to proceed in the
21 manner that we give the general position and if there is anything
22 specific that we need to comment on after the Prosecution has made its
23 selection, if the Court would indulge us by allowing us a brief
24 submission on those points and that's how we --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think we could resolve that in a practical
1 way. I suggest that we have communication through legal officer about
2 what we expect when.
3 Is that -- all parties agree with that.
4 Thank you for that. Any other matter?
5 Mr. Kehoe.
6 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President, just one issue with regard to
7 redirect and just efficient uses of time. I do have some standing in
8 that regard given my expertise in the questioning about striped underwear
9 or wearing it, I'm not sure.
10 In any event, we're talking about the revisiting the 92 ter
11 statement, Mr. President, I mean, let us be honest. The most efficient
12 use of our time at this juncture is to operate with the 92 ter statement
13 in front of the Chamber, in front of the witness.
14 We inquired last night or yesterday afternoon as to the
15 Prosecution's intentions concerning redirect on the 92 ter statement. I
16 will tell you I have -- visually it's difficult to see, but the vast
17 majority of this as I've underlined are areas that the Prosecution has
18 said that they may cover during redirect examination. That will
19 significantly protract the period of time that this witness will be here
20 and before the Chamber. So ...
21 Again, I represent -- given the testimony yesterday and how we
22 have presented this, I submit to the Chamber that the most efficient way
23 to do this is: Let's go back to the 92 ter statement and let's go embark
24 from there, and then we can cut out or we can certainly limit the amount
25 of time this witness is here. And certainly, you know, I would think
1 that the Chamber needs, when you're gauging time, how much time the
2 Prosecution intends to use during redirect because if it's yet another
3 three hours, then that changes the dynamics of this dramatically.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I see that. I took from your estimate of
5 perhaps 45 minutes, that you'd go through the 92 ter statement rather
6 quickly, and, of course, the Chamber reads it.
7 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
8 JUDGE ORIE: And I can imagine but that's, I would say, a general
9 experience that the party that cross-examines or the party that responds
10 to evidence which was produced under 92 ter, usually takes far more time
11 than the 92 ter statement itself takes. That's understood. And I can
12 imagine that under those circumstances you would need a bit more time as
14 MR. KEHOE: I appreciate that Mr. President, but I don't know if
15 the chamber has read the 92 ter statement.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 MR. KEHOE: I think Your Honour would agree with me that many of
18 the issues that we discussed over the past couple of days, we could have
19 used the 92 ter statement as a jumping-off point to just get some clarity
20 or some additional questions on that.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Well, whether or not that's the case, I do not
22 express any opinion on that.
23 I take it that Mr. Russo would consider his approach a better one
24 than to start with the 92 ter. Mr. Russo, is that well understood?
25 MR. RUSSO: My position is the same with respect to the order,
1 Mr. President. However, I should clarify, last night I was -- or
2 yesterday --
3 THE INTERPRETER: Please turn off all unnecessary microphones,
4 thank you.
5 MR. RUSSO: Yesterday, I was asked by the Defence to indicate to
6 them what portions of the 92 ter statement I believed fell outside of the
7 scope of my direct. I did provide with them that information yesterday.
8 However, I think there is a miscommunication with respect to what that
9 meant. I was simply indicating to them the matters within the statement,
10 I believed, fell outside of my direct examination but not that I was
11 intending full cross-examination on all of those matters.
12 I am not going to be going forever on redirect.
13 JUDGE ORIE: No, would you not be allowed to go forever.
14 If there's any chance of miscommunication, perhaps communicate
15 again during the next break. And let's then get started. Unless there
16 is any other matter at this moment, Mr. Kehoe. The mere fact that the
17 Chamber is exploring further time may be an indication already that the
18 Chamber is aware that the way in which the testimony is presented of this
19 witness might not be easily concluded in one session in one day.
20 MR. KEHOE: I understand, Judge. And I will address with
21 Mr. Russo what we believe in the 92 ter statement falls outside direct
22 examination and possibly we can shave that down a bit, so we will do
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We should take care that not a discussion
25 of -- on what is within and what is outside the scope of a certain matter
1 takes more than the few questions that might be put in that respect.
2 Mr. Kehoe, any other matter?
3 MR. KEHOE: No, Mr. President.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. Russo, are you ready to continue your
6 MR. RUSSO: I am, Mr. President.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher could you please escort the witness into
8 the courtroom.
9 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, one small matter.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I know that the Chamber is awaiting the
12 remaining Turkalj submission. The -- we have agreed, Ms. Mahindaratne
13 and I, on the revisions, and I'm just going to -- all I need to do is
14 formalise the stipulations so we can get that to the Chamber, Your
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's appreciated.
17 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
18 [The witness entered court]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Rajcic.
20 Mr. Rajcic, I would like to remind you that the some declaration
21 that you gave at the beginning of your testimony still binds you. That
22 may be clear to you.
23 Mr. Russo will now continue his examination-in-chief.
24 Mr. Russo, you may proceed.
25 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
1 WITNESS: MARKO RAJCIC [Resumed]
2 [Witness answered through interpreter]
3 Examination by Mr. Russo: [Continued]
4 Q. Good morning again, Mr. Russo.
5 A. Good morning.
6 Q. I'd like to --
7 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness approach the microphones,
9 JUDGE ORIE: Would you come a bit closer to the microphone,
10 Mr. Rajcic.
11 MR. RUSSO:
12 Q. Mr. Rajcic, I'd like to pick up today where we left off yesterday
13 with your indicating targets in Knin that were fired upon.
14 MR. RUSSO: If we could please have Exhibit P62.
15 Q. And I believe at the end of the day yesterday we left off with
16 your indication of an area of cross-roads; although, you were uncertain
17 as to which cross-roads specifically it was.
18 I'd like to now move on from that --
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. -- and ask you to please indicate, in addition to any of the
21 targets that you've already circled in the town, if you could tell us
22 what other targets in the town were actually fired at on 4 or 5 August?
23 A. As far as the corps artillery is concerned, the Tvik factory was
24 fired at, as well as the Senjak barracks, Milan Martic's residence, and
25 the already mentioned area around the hospital.
1 Q. You just mentioned the already mentioned area around the
2 hospital. Were you referring to there the two circles that you indicated
3 yesterday, or another location?
4 A. Yes. I was referring to one of the two circles, not both.
5 Q. Yes, thank you.
6 Now, the other places that you've indicated --
7 MR. RUSSO: Mr. Registrar, if we could please enlarge the image
8 in the area where it says "Knin general supply," about the middle of the
9 photograph. Yes.
10 Q. Now, Mr. Rajcic, you indicated the -- the Senjak barracks. If
11 can you see here, there is an area marked "Knin general supply." Does
12 that area conform to the location -- yes?
13 A. Yes, I believe so. I -- based on what I can see from -- from
14 this aerial image. But I would have to check the coordinates from the
15 table of targets.
16 Q. Yes, I understand that. And immediately to the right of that
17 area marked "Knin general supply," is that the area, that factory
18 complex, is that the area that you understand to be the Tvik factory?
19 A. Yes. That should be the factory complex called Tvik.
20 Q. Thank you. And the final target you mentioned was Milan Martic's
21 residence. Are you able to indicate for us where that residence is
23 A. Hit, yeah. It was hit. I can't be certain. I could identify it
24 by finding the police station, because I believe it was one of the
25 housing blocks near the police station.
1 MR. RUSSO: Now, if we could move the photograph a little bit to
2 the left -- I'm sorry, to the right. Little bit more. Yes, thank you.
3 Q. Now, you marked for us yesterday, Mr. Rajcic, the area of the
4 police station, which I believe is a bit below and to the left of the
5 sign that indicates Knin general supply. Do you recall that?
6 A. Yes, I do remember, and I believe I showed this particular
8 Q. Are you able to tell, since you can recognise where the police
9 station is, are you able to tell us the general area or the building, in
10 fact, that you believed was Mr. Martic's residence?
11 A. Mr. Russo, I wouldn't like to speculate. I would have to see the
12 coordinates from the table and then compare it to the map. I can see
13 that there are several large residential blocks around the police
14 station, and I never went to that flat personally.
15 Q. That's fine. We'll come back to that a bit later.
16 So is there -- or were there any targets in addition to the ones
17 that you've circled on this map and the ones that you've indicated here
18 today, those being the Senjak barracks, the Tvik factory, and the
19 residence of Milan Martic. Those three targets, plus the areas that you
20 marked on the maps yesterday, anything else in the town of Knin
21 fired at on 4 or 5 August, and I'm asking not just about the corps
22 artillery but about any artillery of the Croatian forces on 4 or 5
24 A. Yes. There were other areas that were targeted.
25 Q. And if you can tell us, please, what those areas were.
1 A. The area of the roundabout.
2 THE INTERPRETER: Can the witness please repeat the last part of
3 what he said.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Rajcic, the interpreters had difficulties in
5 hearing exactly what you said.
6 You were talking about a roundabout. Could you please repeat
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was referring to the roundabout
9 area. In the course of combat activities, 130-millimetre cannons fired
10 upon the places where, according to the intelligence received and
11 electronic reconnaissance, Martic was present.
12 MR. RUSSO:
13 Q. Can you tell us what area of town that was?
14 A. The area around his flat and the area close to the railway
15 station, that general swathe, so to speak. I would again have to look at
16 the coordinates to be precise.
17 I think that the area was called Stara Bolnica, old hospital, or
18 something like that.
19 Q. And a bit earlier before you were asked to repeat your answer,
20 you mentioned the area of the roundabout.
21 MR. RUSSO: If we could please move the photograph a little bit
23 Q. And, Mr. Rajcic, do you see the roundabout you're talking about
24 in the photograph?
25 A. Yes, I can recognise it.
1 Q. Can you please circle that and label it with an R.
2 A. As far as I'm able to tell, that's it.
3 Q. Thank you. Were there, to your recollection, any other areas in
4 Knin that were fired at about either corps artillery or any other
5 artillery of the Croatian forces on 4 or 5 August?
6 A. In downtown Knin, I think I marked all the relevant places or
7 areas that were fired upon from 130-millimetre cannons of the corps
8 artillery, and BM 21 launchers of 122-millimetres of the brigade missile
9 weaponry as well as from 122-millimetre D-30 Howitzers.
10 I believe it was the -- it was on the 5th of August that several
11 rounds were fired by the 4th Guards Brigade from its -- or, rather, its
12 artillery rocket battalion fired upon the Slavko Rodic barracks, or the
13 northern barracks. Out in the periphery, to the best of my recollection,
14 there was the bridge across the Butiznica river that we discussed
15 yesterday, Mr. Russo, and you didn't show it to me on the image, and it
16 was also targeted, as well as the intersection, or the cross-roads, of
17 the periphery road leading to Cetinska, Dolina, and Vrlika. That's the
18 extent of what I can tell you now without looking at the table of targets
19 and the reconstruction I made.
20 Q. Thank you, Mr. Rajcic.
21 MR. RUSSO: If I could offer this into evidence, Mr. President.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, could we ask the witness whether the old
23 hospital area could be marked on the map as well.
24 Do you see, Mr. Rajcic, the -- I think you said the Stara Bolnica
25 area on this map?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As part of the final preparations,
2 I did not deal with the old hospital area, and I might inadvertently show
3 the wrong area.
4 The area of the old hospital was a sudden target, which emerged
5 in the course of combat and had not been planned. And you'll, I hope,
6 understand if I do not mark it on this aerial image because I do not want
7 to be imprecise and I would rather draw upon the Y, X, Z, coordinates, if
9 JUDGE ORIE: Then any objection against the marks tendered?
10 MR. KEHOE: [Microphone not activated]
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will become Exhibit P2337.
13 JUDGE ORIE: P2337 is admitted into evidence.
14 Please proceed.
15 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
16 Q. Mr. Rajcic, just going on what you just told His Honour, Judge
17 Orie, you indicated that this area that was fired at, the area of the old
18 hospital, "was a sudden target that emerged in the course of combat and
19 had not been planned."
20 I would like you to please tell us what it was about that, that
21 required artillery fire?
22 A. The flow of information coming from intelligence and electronic
23 reconnaissance led us to learn that Milan Martic was in that area. I
24 received the coordinates for the area, and, based on that, it was decided
25 that several rounds should be fired at the area, and this is how it was
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic.
3 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, if could I ask the witness to take
4 his headphones off, please.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Rajcic, would you please take your earphones off
6 for a second.
7 MR. MISETIC: Just, I'm following him in the original, and there
8 may be a different ways to translate the word he's using which may
9 actually have quite a bit of relevance. He is use the word "prostor" in
10 Croatian which can be translated as "area," but there is also a different
11 translation, and in the context of artillery --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, I take it that you will seek further
13 explanation as to what he refers to if he says that several rounds were
14 fired at "this area."
15 MR. RUSSO: That was my intention, Mr. President. Thank you.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My apologies, I didn't hear the
18 interpretation from the start, and I'd like to hear that so that I'm not
19 missing out on something. And I'm referring to the moment when I put my
20 headphones on.
21 JUDGE ORIE: As far as I'm aware, you were the only one who spoke
22 since you had your headphones on, so there should be no problem.
23 Mr. Russo will put his next question to you.
24 MR. RUSSO:
25 Q. Mr. Martic -- sorry, Mr. Rajcic. Please forgive me for that.
1 When you indicated that you received --
2 A. It is human to make mistakes.
3 Q. I appreciate that. You indicated that you had received
4 intelligence that Mr. Martic was in a certain area. You were given
5 coordinates for that area. When you describe it as an area, can you be
6 specific for us and indicate whether it is a particular building, an area
7 of town, or anything like that?
8 A. No, I'm speaking in general terms about an area. I'm not using
9 artillery terminology.
10 Q. I understand that. What I'd like to know is what you receive the
11 coordinates for, and I understand that you can't be exactly precise. But
12 are you able to tell us whether you were firing at a building you
13 believed Mr. Martic to be in, or a particular section of town next to
14 certain buildings that you believed him to be in?
15 A. Mr. Russo, at the time the fighting was at its highest intensity,
16 the intelligence body or official brings to the operations centre the
17 data concerning a target in the form of X, Y, Z coordinates, and next to
18 the coordinates, the word "Martic." To me, as an artillery officer, what
19 matters at that point is whether this refers to a building or an open
20 area, open space. I was told that it was a building, and we proceeded to
22 Q. Thank you for clearing that up, Mr. Rajcic.
23 Now, are you able to tell us, if you can recall, at what time of
24 the day it was that this happened? Was it very early in the morning,
25 sometime in the afternoon, later in the evening, and on what day?
1 A. You mean which time of day or which particular date?
2 Q. Both pieces of information, if you can provide it. And I'm
3 asking you specifically about when you were given the X, Y, and Z
4 coordinates in this area of the old hospital to fire on Mr. Martic?
5 A. I recall it happening on the 4th of August. It was in the early
6 evening, but I have to place a caveat there, because in August the sun
7 sets shortly before 2100 hours; that's to say, 9.00 in the evening.
8 Q. Thank you for that information. We're going to come back to this
9 a bit later, but I'd like it move on for now.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, perhaps just one clarifying question.
11 By that last observation, did you intend to say that it was still
12 light, or that it was dark already when you received that information, or
13 that you don't know?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. It was still
15 day-time. But I said roughly late afternoon/early evening, because
16 certain things, if mistaken, could easily lead to wrong conclusions.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
18 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
19 Q. Mr. Rajcic, I'd like to move now to the reconstruction you did
20 regarding what you describe as the second and third organisational levels
21 of artillery.
22 MR. RUSSO: And if we could please have 65 ter 7067.
23 Q. And, Mr. Rajcic, I notice you don't have your binder with you
24 today. Do you know where that is?
25 MR. RUSSO: My apologies.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're right.
2 Q. Now, if we could, please stay on the first page in the English
3 version but go to the third page in the B/C/S version, although,
4 Mr. Rajcic, I believe your first page is also the first page in B/C/S.
5 A. Yes, please.
6 Mr. Russo, I have the first page in the binder, where it says the
7 analysis, not reconstruction.
8 Q. Can you check one of the other tabs?
9 A. All right.
10 Q. Thank you. Do you recognise this as the -- your reconstruction
11 that you did on the second and third levels of organisation for
13 A. This is for the first establishment level.
14 MR. RUSSO: Is it okay if I take his binder for a moment and find
15 where it is?
16 JUDGE ORIE: If you give it back, Mr. Russo.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was assisted in finding this.
18 JUDGE ORIE: So you have got in front of you now what you see on
19 your screen. Is that ...
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Now have I it.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
22 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President. My apologies to the court
24 Q. Is this the reconstruction that you drafted?
25 A. Yes.
1 MR. RUSSO: And if we could turn to the second page in the
3 Q. And for you, Mr. Rajcic, I believe that would be -- in the B/C/S
4 would be page 4. And I'm looking at the last sentence of the second
5 paragraph in the introduction.
6 A. It's the second page for me.
7 Q. Yes, Mr. Rajcic. My apologies for that. The problem is that in
8 e-court we have two additional pages at the beginning which do not appear
9 in your binder because they're just cover sheets, so when I call out the
10 B/C/S page, I'm calling it out for the registrar and then you can deduct
11 two pages from that to find it in your binder, and I'm simply going to
12 give you the section as well, so you can find it by the section number,
13 if that will work?
14 A. It seems to me that I heard it was the fourth page for me, or in
15 my case.
16 Q. My apologies for that. We're looking at the --
17 A. "Errare humanum est" as I already said.
18 Q. If we could look the last sentence of the second paragraph in the
19 introduction, and there you state:
20 "The artillery of the 4th Guards Brigade and the 7th Guards
21 Brigade, we classify as minus third level. The method used in this
22 review ensures the understanding of real use, role, and impact of
23 artillery and rocket weapons of the 4th Guards Brigade and the 7th Guards
24 Brigade in the Operation Storm (Kozjak 95). This reconstruction is not a
25 supposition or estimate, but a review of the real event, which is
1 corroborated by authentic documents produced before, during, and after
2 the offensive operation.
3 "There were neither modulations nor specific artillery
4 organisation at the second level of command of the operations groups,
6 Now, Mr. Rajcic, can you please explain these two organisational
7 levels that you refer to, the second and the third, and explain how they
8 relate to the corps artillery?
9 A. Before that, I would like to say that the interpretation was
10 incorrect. It concerns the bold section in the text, which says at the
11 second level of commander of the operations group, there was no
12 modulating or purpose organisation of artillery, and not the second level
13 of command.
14 Q. And can you please explain to us what you mean when you said that
15 at the second level of command of the operations there was no modulating
16 or purpose organisation of artillery? What does that exactly mean, in
17 layman's terms, if you could?
18 A. When one organises all actors in one operations group or in all
19 operation groups or in other forms of organising troops of purposeful or
20 special purpose organising, since operations groups are also special
21 purpose organisations they're not establishment units.
22 Following from that, all organic parts of operations groups --
23 or, rather, brigades, regiments, or independent battalions, they all have
24 in their establishment, they also have artillery. If we put into a
25 system of subordination, the relationship between the command of the
1 Military District and the operations group, then operations group in
2 terms of its level, the first subordinated formation, so it's first
3 subordinated to the commander of the Military District. In other words,
4 in my reconstruction, I marked that as the second level. The first level
5 would be the command of the Military District.
6 In the time immediately preceding Operation Storm, when the
7 activities are the most intensive and the pace is the quickest, after
8 commander's order, the main commander's order, on the way and model of
9 the carrying out of the operation on organizing the overall resources --
10 Q. Mr. Rajcic, I'm sorry, I don't mean to cut you off but we're a
11 bit limited in time.
12 I do understand from your answer that this second level was a
13 level immediately below the Military District --
14 A. [In English] Okay.
15 Q. -- and that it did not have its own specific artillery groups, if
16 that's correct?
17 A. [Interpretation] They had their own artillery, but they didn't
18 modulate of special purposes organisations of artillery so that
19 operations groups commanders could have, so to speak, executive and
20 discretionary right to direct such artillery.
21 Q. And that being in contrast to what was done at the corps level.
23 A. No, it's different. It doesn't have to be contrary.
24 Q. Yes, that's perhaps a better designation. It was not the same
25 type of organisational artillery as existed at the corps level. Is that
2 A. That's different organisation.
3 Q. Thank you.
4 MR. RUSSO: If we could move to section 3.1.1, which appears on
5 page 3 in the English version, and page 5 of B/C/S on e-court.
6 Q. Mr. Rajcic, that may appear on page 3 of your version. That's
7 section 3.1.1.
8 In this section, you indicate the activities of the ...
9 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
10 Q. The activities of the 7th Guards Brigade in the artillery
11 preparation on 4 August 1995
12 122-millimetre self-propelled rocket launchers, 112 rockets at three
13 targets in Knin, according to the map, Ivancica. The first target you
14 mention is S15 which you do not specifically identify. The second is
15 S16, which you identify as the Slavko Rodic barracks. And the third
16 target is S54, which you identify as the command post and communications
18 Do I have that correct, Mr. Rajcic?
19 A. It was a bit unclear to me. I'm not sure whether it was clear to
21 Your Honours, if you allow me before answering, I would comment
22 this material, if allowed.
23 JUDGE ORIE: If you could briefly do so. Please proceed.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is not the final version of my
1 MR. RUSSO:
2 Q. Did you draft another version and provide it to the government of
4 A. The last version, the consolidated version of this material,
5 which did not contain typos, as far as I could notice, there are some
6 other details which do not correlate. I rectify those in the final
7 version, and apart from that, work on the -- producing this
8 reconstruction was a process characterized by regular influx of new
9 materials, reports, or new information from the preparational executive
10 part of the operation.
11 I'll try to recall the date. In January this year, I think it
12 was the 28th or the 29th of January, I signed the final draft of that
13 reconstruction, and I still believe that the final draft itself is not
14 final or complete. That was left with the criminal investigation
15 department of the Zagreb
16 MR. RUSSO:
17 Q. And other than the criminal investigation department of the
19 final version of the reconstruction to anyone else?
20 A. Mr. Russo, I do not deliver. The government was my employer; I
21 used to work for the government. And the material that I prepared, not
22 as it stands here but in the version that I prepared, with respect to
23 that, I did not have the right to distribute that to anybody and I signed
24 official secret statement in the minister of defence's office.
25 Q. Thank you. Well, if there's anything that I ask you about here
1 in the report that you changed between this version in front of you and
2 your final version, please let us know that. You indicated there were
3 some typos and other materials which did not correlate. If we touch upon
4 any of those in my questions, if you would please point those out to us.
5 But for now, I want to concentrate on this area, section 3.1.1 and the
6 three targets that that you mentioned there S15, S16, and S54?
7 Is that correct, Mr. Rajcic?
8 A. As far as I can remember, the S15, S16, and S54 are marks for the
9 targets, the code map Ivancica used by the 7th Guards Brigade.
10 Here I would like to ask Their Honours if I were to be given some
11 homework for the break, to go through this version because this is not
12 the final version. I waive my right to a break so that can I go through
13 this version and do my homework.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Well, it doesn't often happen that it's offered
15 spontaneously, Mr. Rajcic. If you would --
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] For the sake of clarity, Your
18 JUDGE ORIE: Then we gladly accept your offer to go through this
19 version. Not to say that we haven't -- at least, Mr. Russo, I take it
20 you don't have later versions?
21 MR. RUSSO: We were not provided with a later version,
22 Mr. President. However, I would simply request that if the witness is
23 going to do us the favour of going through this reconstruction that he do
24 so in writing and simply write down what he thinks needs to be changed so
25 that we don't --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Of course, it would be even better to have, on an
2 urgent basis, the new version. That avoids all kind of -- if there is
3 any way to get it -- otherwise, it's appreciated, Mr. Rajcic, if would
4 you read through it. If it's just a matter of five or six corrections,
5 then, first the thing is to establish where and what kind of corrections
6 are needed, and then we'll see whether we'll make them in court or
7 whether there will be any other way of -- of --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I cannot do so
9 without basic documentation, which was used to generate this
10 reconstruction. I cannot find any radical differences. I don't have the
11 processing or memory capacity in my brain to memorise all of these.
12 I noticed one detail here, which doesn't seem correct to me,
13 although it goes for a work -- working version, which is not a final, but
14 acting in good faith, and to prevent misinformation to be published, I'm
15 willing, in order to do so, to go through this material during the break
16 and rectify it, wherever possible.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Again, if this takes one or two days in court,
18 then it doesn't make much sense to do it. Then, of course, we'd invite
19 to you write it down in one way or another or to perhaps someone to
20 assist you in dictating what is wrong so that we have a -- the most
21 recent information. But I've got no idea about how much work that would
23 Whenever Mr. Russo asks you questions, and if you're uncertain as
24 to whether the questions are related to parts of the report that might
25 not be the most accurate version, please, indicate that so that we can
1 then move on and limit ourselves at this moment to what is not in
3 Mr. Russo.
4 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
5 Q. Now, Mr. Rajcic, again, the targets that you've indicated in
6 section 3.1.1, that is target S15, S16, which you identify as the
7 Slavko Rodic barracks, and the third target, S54, which you identify as
8 the command post and communication centre. Were those targets actually
9 fired at by the 7th Guards Brigade, with 122-millimetre rockets on the
10 4th of August?
11 A. They open fire at S15, S16 and S54. I repeat, I remember in my
12 work having insight into the documentation of the 7th Guards Brigade,
13 which was at my disposal, there were some doubts as to the target S16, in
14 terms of the presentation of the target. I remember a personal diary of
15 a lower-ranked commander, I think it was the calculator's diary. And
16 this is why I put in parenthesis in this working version, Slavko Rodic
18 As far as I can recall what stood there to the right of S16. And
19 for that to be precisely reconstructed, I had to put myself in the shoes
20 of that person, who, at that time, indicated the target, and we will all
21 agree this is tantamount to science fiction. True, those dilemmas where
22 the areas where I exhausted myself fully. I did, however, use that as an
23 anchor, the coded map Ivancica, and in the aforementioned diary, it
24 states the S16 target, which still has not sunk in, in my own mind.
25 Therefore, I cannot claim with 100 percent certainty that this was it.
1 Q. I think we need a correction on the transcript line 25. Yes,
3 Let's have a look at the Ivancica map, Mr. Rajcic.
4 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I would like to call this exhibit up.
5 However, I was instructed to advise the Court when it is one of the
6 documents that is not on the 65 ter list. This is annex 12 to the
7 particular reconstruction that we're looking at.
8 JUDGE ORIE: It was not on the 65 ter list. When did you receive
10 MR. RUSSO: We received it on the 10th of October, 2008
11 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections against adding this document to the
12 65 ter list.
13 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President. The stated objections we raised
14 previously, yes.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE ORIE: This was an annex to a report which was on the 65
17 ter list, Mr. Russo.
18 MR. RUSSO: This is an annex to the report which we -- which is
19 already in evidence, P2326.
20 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber grants leave to add it to the 65 ter
22 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
23 If I could please have 65 ter 6124.
24 Q. Mr. Rajcic, do you recognise this as the coded map, Ivancica?
25 A. Yes, it is stated so, coded map, Ivancica.
1 Q. Thank you. And if we could focus on the area to the north-west
2 of the S, of the large S in bold, right there. I'm going to ask that
3 that be significantly enlarged. A bit more. That's fine. Thank you.
4 Now, Mr. Rajcic, you can see the target area, 16. It's the
5 second one immediately above the word "Knin" on the map.
6 Do you see it there?
7 A. Yes, northwards, above the word "Knin." I can see it. To the
8 left 13; to the right 22.
9 Q. Yes, thank you for describing that.
10 Now, the target area, 16, you can see that it covers a little bit
11 of main road there in red and then covers the area to the east of the
12 main road.
13 Do you see that?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Now, the Slavko Rodic barracks is actually west of that main
16 road, isn't it?
17 A. No. To the north-west.
18 Q. Meaning a bit north and west of the position of -- the target
19 area S16?
20 A. Yes. These maps were made, as far as I know, with the final
21 modifications in 1996 or 1998. The former JNA did not plot its
22 installations into military maps.
23 Q. Can you tell me why the 7th Guards Brigade would be firing on the
24 target area 16, with multiple-barrel rocket launchers?
25 A. Mr. Russo, the diary that I read and I believe you have within
1 the material you received, reads to the right of S16. And I'm not
2 referring to my material. I'm referring to the material taken out of the
3 archive or obtained in another manner.
4 This material that I made was not made for your purposes but for
5 the purpose of the government of the Republic of Croatia
6 something I brought to the attention of the representatives of the
8 As far as S16 is concerned, if you look at it in my
9 reconstruction and if you seem puzzled by what you see in brackets,
10 S. Rodic barracks, let me tell you that, based on the indicated target,
11 I - this is to the right of S16 - I subjectively identified the barracks
12 in that particular sector. I do urge you to look at that diary at some
13 point, because I used it to precisely define the location where rockets
14 were supposed to land.
15 Q. I just want to make sure I understand you --
16 A. Excuse me. Mr. Russo, I have to make this observation, and if
17 I'm mistaken, please correct me.
18 When you look at the map as it stands, what is on the right-hand
19 side seems in a different way to us than as it appeared to the commander
20 who issued the order to attack. He had a different perspective of it
22 Q. I'm not certain if you're mistaken about that, Mr. Rajcic. I
23 don't know that I can speak to that. But I would like you to explain
24 what that means. First of all, the commander who issued the order to
25 attack, can you tell me who it is exactly you're referring to there, and
1 what perspective he had of this map?
2 A. Always where artillery is used, before, during, and later,
3 through different techniques of use an operation of -- and direction of
4 artillery fire, left, right, proximal, distal, this is something that
5 refers to the trajectory of the shell, or a rocket, a missile.
6 When a commander decides -- we're speaking in hypothetical terms.
7 Where a commander decides to prepare for an artillery attack and where
8 it's been decided that as part of preparations for the artillery attack,
9 an attack should be launched to the right of S16, then it is the task of
10 all those who are part of the chain of command to recognise and
11 understand what it is all about. Standard operative procedures and
12 methods of work relating to the way in which the target is indicated, the
13 way in which the coordinates are taken, unless they're there, in my
14 personal view, in this particular instance there were no X/Y coordinates.
15 Rather, a coded map was used to indicate the target and quite
16 legitimately so.
17 In answer to your question then, the lowest rank -- the lowest
18 ranking or lowest level officer knows that along his axis of attack this
19 is to the right of S16, and he will enter into this area of the
20 Slavko Rodic barracks.
21 Q. Now, where you indicate -- I understand your explanation with
22 respect to S16, and we're going to go back to your reconstruction about
23 that. I do understand it now, as it relates to another section I wanted
24 to ask you about.
25 But for now, since we have the map in front of us, the targets
1 S15 and S54 that were also indicated as targets in section 3.1.1 of your
2 reconstruction, were those targets fired at or are we also now talking
3 about firing to a different angle of those?
4 A. We are not talking about anything different here. As an
5 artillery man myself, so to speak, when I visualise plastically, the area
6 where the multiple rocket launchers were positioned in the Grahovo area,
7 and when I find my bearings, which I believe I'm quite good at, then the
8 target S15 is merely the continuation of that direction, of course if it
9 is within range; whereas, target S54 has a deviation from that central
10 line of fire, or trajectory, in relation to the other two targets. It's
11 a deflection to the left, the vantage point being the direction of fire
12 by some two to three degrees, approximately speaking, of course. There
13 is a technique employed to measure the deflection, and there are
14 instruments to do that.
15 Q. I do appreciate that explanation, Mr. Rajcic. I just want a very
16 simple answer, if you can give me one; and if you can't, please let me
18 Did the 7th Guards Brigade fire multiple-barrel rocket launchers
19 on the target S15 and S54, if you know?
20 A. Yes. That's what I said at the start, when we started analysing
22 Q. Yes. Referring to what had you already written in section 3.1.1,
23 that is correct. Am I right about that?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I would offer 65 ter 6124.
2 JUDGE ORIE: That being admitted to the 65 ter list. Are there
3 any objections against admission?
4 MR. KEHOE: Yes, the objection still remains the same, whether it
5 was added to the list or not, about late disclosure, about the prejudice
6 to the Defence, et cetera.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It will be MFI'd and the Chamber will decide
9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will become Exhibit P2338,
10 marked for identification.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
12 Please proceed, Mr. Russo. Although we are close to a moment
13 when we usually have a break. If you want to start on a new subject ...
14 MR. RUSSO: I'm going to stay on this subject, Your Honour, but
15 it's probably a good time for a break.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Then we have a break, and we resume at five minutes
17 to 11.00.
18 --- Recess taken at 10.28 a.m.
19 --- On resuming at 11.02 a.m.
20 JUDGE ORIE: I would like to inform the parties that the Chamber
21 has booked Monday morning, in addition to the existing schedule. Whether
22 we need it or not, we'll know at the end of today's session.
23 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
24 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
25 If we could please go to 65 ter 7067.
1 Q. And this is, again, your 4th and 7th Guards Brigade
2 reconstruction, Mr. Rajcic. And I'd like to focus on section 4.1.1.
3 This appears in the English version on page 12, and in B/C/S, in e-court,
4 on page 11.
5 Now, if we go to the bottom of the page in English, and I wanted
6 to ask you about this, Mr. Rajcic, which I think correlates to what you
7 were explaining to us earlier, with respect to the target that we looked
8 at on the Ivancica map.
9 In the third paragraph there of that section -- are you with me
10 on section 4.1.1?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Now, in the third paragraph it indicates that the 4th Guards
13 Brigade fired rockets on the 4th of August at the Slavko Rodic barracks
14 in the town of Knin
15 coded map, Ivancica, the unit spent 89 rockets."
16 Is that what you were explaining to us earlier that what appeared
17 between those target circles is what was actually fired at?
18 A. Yes, that should be it. I would have to have the map Ivancica on
19 the screen, though, because from the four positions, the target which is
20 fired at, is being located.
21 Q. Thank you. I'd like to move a few pages back.
22 MR. RUSSO: Well, if we can go to section 3.2.1.
23 Q. And at the bottom of the page in English, that's page 4 in the
24 English, I wanted to ask you about the timing in this paragraph,
25 Mr. Rajcic.
1 It indicates that the 7th Guards Brigade -- indicates that the
2 7th Guards Brigade on the 5th of August, fired 40 rockets at target S54
3 on the Ivancica map at 0400 hours and 40 rockets at the Slavko Rodic
4 barracks at 0500 hours.
5 I wanted to ask you specifically about the times. Is the time of
6 0400 hours correct?
7 A. From the document that I had at my disposal, that appears to be
9 Q. Thank you. If we could move now to section 3.3.1 which appears
10 in the English on e-court on page 5. And this covers -- it's under the
11 section for covering 6th August 1995
12 second paragraph that there was a 152-millimetre Howitzer was seized in
13 the town of Knin
14 Now, there's no citation of attachments for that particular
15 section. I'd like to ask you what you -- what you base that on, the
16 seizure of that piece of artillery in the town of Knin.
17 A. While I was working on this document, I had a request to make of
18 the minister of defence. Specifically, I wanted him to give me his
19 approval to talk with the active officer, Brigadier Zdravko Jakov who, at
20 the time, the position of chief of artillery of the 7th Guards Brigade.
21 From my conversation with him and to the best of my recollection, I knew
22 that the 7th Guards Brigade, on their arrival in Knin, on the way into
23 town, found a 122-millimetre [as interpreted] D-20 Howitzer, which was
24 left behind. The forces seized the artillery piece, and together with
25 the other assets belonging to the same brigade, everything was
1 transferred to the area of Grahovo, in order to provide reinforcements
2 and reinforce that -- the right flank of our forces in the direction of
3 Drvar and Grahovo. Brigadier Jakov confirmed this to me verbally.
4 For that reason, in relation to the 6th of August, I indicated
5 this as one of the methods of work I employed while I was working on this
7 Q. I think we may need a correction on line 12 of page 33.
8 Did you indicate, Mr. Rajcic, that it was a 122-millimetre or a
9 152-millimetre D-20 Howitzer?
10 A. 152 D-20. If I misspoke, then I apologise.
11 Q. Thank you. In and in speaking with brigadier Zdravko Jakov
12 regarding the seizure of this piece of artillery, did you gain any
13 information as to, first of all, the exact location where it was found,
14 and, second of all, whether it was dug in, in position, or simply
15 abandoned on the road? Can you give us any information with respect to
17 A. I think that it was abandoned on the road. In the area called
18 Kovacic, Kovacic is the toponym covering several neighbourhoods in the
19 periphery of Knin.
20 Q. Thank you for that information.
21 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I would like to move into evidence 65
22 ter 7067.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections?
24 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President. My understanding is this -- this
25 was not one of the ones that was initially presented. Is that right?
1 MR. RUSSO: It is one of the ones in the motion to add
2 Mr. Rajcic.
3 MR. KEHOE: Okay. And -- with this particular report?
4 MR. RUSSO: Yes.
5 MR. KEHOE: Your report to us has it italicised as just the
6 opposite, but I just take your word for it. If it's part of that initial
7 motion was made to you -- to the Court, then we have no objection to
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Since there seems to be disagreement the
10 Chamber will admit the exhibit into evidence, but on the basis of
11 information -- of the information provided by Mr. Russo. If that
12 information turns out not to be correct, the Chamber would like to be
13 informed and then we will reconsider which is not the same as not to
14 admit, but then we will reconsider on the basis of the correct
15 information, whether it should be admitted, yes, or not -- yes or no.
16 Mr. Registrar.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will become Exhibit P2339.
18 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
21 Q. Now, Mr. Rajcic, you created another corps level reconstruction
22 which is similar in many ways to the 1st Corps level reconstruction that
23 we looked at earlier. I'd like to take a look at that now.
24 MR. RUSSO: If we could have 65 ter 7064.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honours. I
1 had -- and did my homework during the break.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And that causes you to tell us what?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When we discussed the document
4 about -- and the working material about the second and third
5 establishment level, paragraph 3, 3.1.1.
6 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... on the screen
8 MR. RUSSO: The section being referred to is on --
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's page 3 in my version.
10 MR. RUSSO:
11 Q. Thank you.
12 MR. RUSSO: It also begins at the bottom of page 3 in the English
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Paragraph 3.1.2, artillery support
15 to attack, the words "used 151 rockets," that would be paragraph 1 of
16 that subsection, item, or paragraph, whichever term you use.
17 As far as I can recall, this is an mistake stated here which was
18 subsequently corrected. I think -- I think it was 70 to 80 rockets which
19 later has implications for the paragraph 3.1.3, total spent ammunition on
20 the day, 4th of August, 1995, by the artillery of the 7th Brigade.
21 Rockets, 122-millimetre, 9M22U to 63, as quantity is not stated, but the
22 value should be lower.
23 Then on my page 5, paragraph 4, total ammunition spent, brigade
24 artillery rocket group, from the 4th of August to the 8th of August,
25 1995, rockets, 122-millimetres, 9M22U, that value should be changed, and
1 by the same token, the quantity expressed in combat sets.
2 Your Honours, this was as far as I could notice from my memory,
3 given the time that I was given, and comparing this version with the last
4 working material that I prepared.
5 Thank you very much. I don't have any other observations for the
6 time being, or corrections, so we can go on, given the limited time that
7 was given to me.
8 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ...
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And everything should be verified,
10 based on source documents, in my opinion.
11 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. Rajcic, it
12 is for us to thank you.
13 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
14 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
15 Q. And thank you for that, Mr. Rajcic.
16 Now, I'd like to move to the second corps level reconstruction
17 that you did.
18 MR. RUSSO: That's 65 ter 7064.
19 Q. I believe this should be the second tab in your binder.
20 Now, this reconstruction addresses the same level of artillery.
21 Do you have the same one in front of you that appears on your screen?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Thank you. This reconstruction also addresses the first level of
24 artillery, the corps level of artillery, as did the very first
25 reconstruction of yours that we looked at, and I'd like to you explain to
1 us why you did this second version.
2 A. Because the first version was done on the 17th, if I'm not
3 mistaken, 17th of October, and this is the 28th of November; those are 40
4 days apart. And in that period, military police personnel kept bringing
5 new materials to me, from which I drew new knowledge, new information.
6 And, of course, all such new information which was relevant for the
7 activities of artillery or the use of artillery of the first level or the
8 corps artillery, of course, then, the first version had to be amended.
9 Q. Thank you. Now, the attachments to this particular
10 reconstruction differ from the attachments to the first reconstruction,
11 near as can I tell, for only two documents and those you specifically
12 label as Attachment 6A and Attachment 9A, and I'd like to take a look at
13 one of those.
14 Well, first, let's turn to page 11 in the English here,
15 section 4. If you could find section 4, Mr. Rajcic.
16 MR. RUSSO: And on e-court, that's B/C/S page 6.
17 Q. Now, in this section, where you address the command, use, and
18 activities of the corps artillery in the offensive operation Kozjak 95,
19 you describe the command of that artillery, and you reference Attachment
20 6A there at the bottom which does not appear in the first reconstruction.
21 So I wanted to take a look at that particular document.
22 MR. RUSSO: If we could have --
23 Well, first, Mr. President, this attachment is not on the 65 ter
25 JUDGE ORIE: And was received when?
1 MR. RUSSO: This was received on 11th December 2008.
2 JUDGE ORIE: And it was attached to a document which was on the
3 65 ter list.
4 MR. RUSSO: It is attached to a document which is now on the 65
5 ter list. However, when we received it, it came along with this
6 reconstruction, and this was the reconstruction which we move to add,
7 along with the motion to add Mr. Rajcic.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
9 MR. KEHOE: Basically the same objection, Your Honour. We
10 admitted back in February four documents, the 65 ter, because they were
11 limited documents not considering all these attachments.
12 So our objection to that score still stands, because certainly
13 the Chamber didn't contemplate adding all these annexes to the 65 ter
14 list at that time, nor was it requested to do so.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber grants leave to have it added to the 65
17 ter list.
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President. And that is 65 ter 7065.
20 Q. A copy of this also appears in your binder, if I can find it for
21 you, if you like.
22 MR. RUSSO: Actually, I'm sorry, it does not -- I did not include
23 it in there, and I did that for the reason that Your Honour had not yet
24 included it on the 65 ter list, so I didn't want to show it to the
25 witness. So we're going to have to make do with what's on the screen.
1 My apologies for that.
2 Now, if we can turn from here to page --
3 Q. Well, first, Mr. Rajcic, looking at this document here on the
4 screen, do you recognise that as the Attachment 6A to your 2nd Corps
5 level reconstruction?
6 A. Yeah.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. RUSSO: And if we could move to page 8 in the English
9 version. That is on B/C/S page 5.
10 Q. And while we're waiting for that to come up, Mr. Rajcic, can you
11 please explain why you created this particular document?
12 A. I drafted this because, apart from the documents that were
13 available from the artillery groups 3 and 4, to prepare a more quality
14 reconstruction. Given that I had at my disposal operational diaries from
15 the Sajkovic command post of the Operations Group Sibenik and, to a
16 lesser part, from the Zadar Operations Group. And some parts of the war
17 diary of the Sector 1 which, according to the information contained
18 therein, was in the area of Stari Grad, Seline, Maslenica.
19 The purpose of this attachment was also to confirm, on the basis
20 of those documents, and to establish correlations in the system of
21 command and control over artillery and rocket groups and artillery
22 groups. Here we defined them as being of the first level, meaning corps
23 artillery, and to express the relationship of subordination between the
24 chief commander and subordinated units, and the coordination in
25 horizontal sense, at the horizontal level.
1 Q. Thank you. Now, the way you've put this together you've
2 essentially reproduced portions of the diaries that you mentioned, and
3 then you've interlineated your own comments with respect to particular
4 entries. And we can see those divided by the lines. And I'd like to
5 focus on this page on the entries for 0555 hours and also the entry for
6 0625 hours, and that appears on the same page.
7 And there in those two entries we can see above where the actual
8 entry in the diary is; for example, in 0555 hour it indicates chief of
9 artillery orders TS 2 that 203 guns should open fire against Drnis.
10 And below that you have interlineated: TS-2, and in parenthesis
11 you put TS-4, did not care out this order because the OG chief of
12 artillery was not authorised to command TS-4. At that time 0550 hours,
13 TS-4 fired two rounds from a Howitzer, 230-millimetre gun at the repeater
14 on Promina and you make a similar comment with respect to the entry at
15 0625 hours.
16 First, I want to clarify the portion where it says TS-2 and then
17 you have TS-4 brackets. What are you attempting to signify there? Was
18 there a change in the numbering of that artillery group?
19 A. This is an equal understanding of the Artillery Group 2, and
20 Artillery Group 4, respectively. The operations deployment of the
21 Sibenik Operations Group, according to the plan of use that I had, that
22 artillery group in the Operations Group Sibenik was designated with
23 the -- with the numeral 4. And I think that on the first day I said that
24 before Operation Storm, training was conducted and preparations were
25 conducted for possible attacks. That was a period preceding the time
1 when Croatian forces launched attack beyond the Dinara mountain, along
2 the Drvar-Grahovo axis.
3 That documentation, before that time, was prepared in the Sibenik
4 Operations Group, which existed in terms of organisation and operations
5 before that time, and plan documents were put in an envelope and,
6 according to those plans, Artillery Group 2 was referred to there. And
7 the artillery group after the action on the Dinara mountain, at the time
8 when the decision had not yet been taken for the forces of the Croatian
9 Defence Council to be co-opted among the forces of the Croatian army for
10 Operation Storm, and for that reason we have those changes; whereby,
11 looking from right to left, Artillery Group 1 becomes Artillery Group 3;
12 Artillery Group 2 becomes Artillery Group 4; and the Artillery Group 3
13 becomes artillery rocket group.
14 And for that reason, during the first stages of the attack, the
15 chief of artillery of the Sibenik Artillery Group suffered from a
16 misunderstanding, in terms of the numbers being attached to certain
18 Q. Thank you. And just to clarify, the corps level artillery group
19 that was operating in the physical area of responsibility of the
20 Operational Group Sibenik was TS-4. Correct?
21 A. [Indicates]
22 Q. Thank you for the thumbs up.
23 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President I would like to offer into evidence 65
24 ter --
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise. This was a non-verbal
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and is understood as an "okay."
3 Mr. Kehoe, same objection?
4 MR. KEHOE: With regard to this exhibit, yes. If can I go back
5 to the exhibit that was on the screen prior to this which is 65 ter 7064,
6 I will say that the disclosure made by the Prosecutor on that exhibit
7 is -- to the Defence is not the exhibit that was placed on the screen.
8 There have been some translations prior to setting this through e-court.
9 We're not, certain, but it's certainly not what we received.
10 MR. RUSSO: I'm not certain I understand --
11 MR. KEHOE: What I'm saying to you is that -- what was given to
12 us as 65 ter 7064 to which this was an attachment, is not the 65 ter 7064
13 that the Prosecutor put on the screen. It's as simple as that. I don't
14 know if there was a changes in translation. If it was -- the translation
15 was altered in some fashion, I don't know.
16 MR. RUSSO: I'm not certain where --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please try to sort that out. Of course,
18 the Chamber sees what is on the screen, what apparently is uploaded under
19 a certain number, and to say "yes" or "no," it depends -- it needs a
20 comparison between what you have and what was shown on the screen. And
21 however it may be to sort that, at the same time the Chamber can't do it
22 and can't do it at this moment. Therefore, the parties are invited to
23 see whether there was any mistake there, and perhaps in a tete-a-tete Mr.
24 Russo with Mr. Kehoe, this goes better.
25 MR. RUSSO: Yes, Mr. President. I would simply ask for the
1 Defence to e-mail us with the ERN number.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, then you send them an e-mail. Fine. Do
3 it as quickly and as accurately as possible.
4 Mr. Registrar, Mr. Russo tendered the document.
5 MR. RUSSO: That was 65 ter 7065.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's the one as we have it now, and if that
7 has to be replaced by anything else or whether we need any further
9 MR. RUSSO: Actually, Your Honour, this -- 7065 is the document
10 currently on the screen. I will also be offering into evidence 7064,
11 which is the document which Mr. Kehoe was referring to.
12 JUDGE ORIE: And Mr. Registrar, could they be assigned a number
13 and be marked for identification.
14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 65 ter number 7064 becomes Exhibit
15 P2340, marked for identification. And 65 ter number 7065 becomes Exhibit
16 P2341, also marked for identification.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
20 Q. Now, I'd like to move back to the first corps level
21 construction -- reconstruction that you did, Mr. Rajcic. That's P2336.
22 And that should be the first document in your binder.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, could you assist the witness.
24 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
25 If we could move to section 5, which is in English at page 10;
1 B/C/S page 8.
2 Q. I believe that also corresponds to your copy, Mr. Rajcic.
3 Now, looking at section 5, you discuss the firing activities of
4 TS-3 and TS-4 from the 4th to the 9th of August, 1995. And looking
5 specifically at section 5.1.1(a) where you discuss artillery preparation
6 fire on that date by artillery group TS-3, you indicate that that
7 artillery group fired 90 projectiles of 130-millimetre as artillery
8 preparation fire at six targets in the town of Knin. You list
9 Slavko Rodic barracks, Main Staff of the Army of Republic of Serbian
10 Krajina, the post office, the railway station, and the police station,
11 and the bridge over the river Butiznica as targets in Knin?
12 MR. RUSSO: Now, if we could move to the next page in the English
13 version, and I believe also to the next page in B/C/S --
14 Q. We see at the top the documents that you cite as the source for
15 information for the targets that were fired at in section 5. We have
16 listed here four documents; that's the TS-3 diary; the Ivancica map,
17 which we have previously viewed; the operations diary of the 4th Guards
18 Brigade; and the war diary of the Sajkovici forward command post.
19 I'd like to take a look at those.
20 MR. RUSSO: Before doing that, I need to advise Your Honours that
21 these documents are, as can you see, attached to this reconstruction.
22 However they are not on the 65 ter list.
23 My apologies, one of them, the war diary of the Sajkovici forward
24 command post, is on the 65 ter list. However, the other two are not.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE ORIE: Leave is granted to add them to the 65 ter list,
2 Mr. Russo. They were attachments.
3 MR. RUSSO: Yes, Mr. President.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
5 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
6 Q. We'll begin with the diary of TS-3.
7 MR. RUSSO: Mr. Registrar, if we could please have 65 ter 7060.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, Mr. Kehoe, I took it - since you are not
9 on your feet - that the same objections would apply. That's the basis
10 for the objection.
11 MR. KEHOE: That's correct, Judge.
12 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... thank you.
13 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
14 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
15 Now, if we could turn to English page 3, B/C/S page 2.
16 Q. Now, under where it says 4 August 1995, a few lines down, it
18 "Medo fired at Knin and Drvar at 0500 hours, 30 pieces."
19 First, Mr. Rajcic, can you explain to us what "Medo," or "Medo"
21 A. That's a code-name for the commander of TS-3.
22 Excuse me, and for the 130 cannon unit.
23 Q. Thank you for clearing that up.
24 Now, how can you tell from looking at this entry -- or can you
25 tell from looking at this entry, or for any of the entries in 4 August in
1 this diary, what it was exactly that was fired at 0500 hours?
2 A. In this regard, since I had this very document at my disposal, I
3 also used the table of targets from one of the staff documents of all the
4 targets in the town of Knin
5 selection and were indicated as planned targets for the start of the
7 Since I was present at the forward command post in Sajkovici, I
8 was in direct contact with the operations centre of TS-3. I already said
9 that I used the document we have here in the reconstruction I made. My
10 memories of these events made me certain that none of the 130-millimetre
11 cannons of TS-3 and TS-4 fired a single round without my knowledge.
12 Q. And the tables of targets that you referred to as what you had at
13 your disposal, are those the target lists that we've looked at here in
15 A. We also had a list, Mr. Russo. And when you asked me to show you
16 which of the targets were fired at, we were looking at that table.
17 Now, because one of the targets was unclear and could not be
18 clearly indicated, you asked me to indicate which of the targets were not
19 fired at. The targets contained in that particular table and the targets
20 that came out of the selection process in the staff were the constituent
21 part of the database of all the targets. What came out of that process
22 was one single table of targets for Knin itself, which I myself made, and
23 the units of TS-3 and 4 had that particular list. The list is identical
24 in the X, Y, Z coordinates, and nothing out of the -- that table of
25 targets could be fired at, and I'm referring to the preparations and
1 artillery support. Combat is a different matter altogether.
2 Q. That last document that you mentioned, the list that you prepared
3 yourself and that the units of TS-3 and TS-4 had, I don't find that list
4 in your attachments to this document. Is that correct? Did you attach
5 that particular document to this reconstruction?
6 A. No. I didn't have it at the time I was making the
8 Q. Have you subsequently seen that document?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Can you tell us when the last time you saw that particular target
11 list was?
12 A. Excuse me. I think it was in 1996, in the month of December,
13 when General Ante Gotovina ordered, and an organisational order was
14 written to gather the war material for all the operations carried out by
15 the Split Military District and the operations jointly carried out with
16 the Croatian Defence Council.
17 Q. Thank you for explaining that, Mr. Rajcic.
18 Now referring back to the diary that's on the screen, we can see
19 a few lines below the line we just read, it indicates:
20 "Every three minutes salvos at Drvar and Knin."
21 Can you give us any information, first of all, as to how many
22 projectiles were fired at each salvo?
23 A. It says: "Every three minutes salvos at Drvar and Knin," if I
24 can make this out.
25 Calculations have to be made, this has to be analysed and
1 compared. When the unit after this particular combat task set out to
2 deal with other situations, newly arisen situations, or new targets, we
3 would have to look into all that. Otherwise, I can't give you a specific
5 Q. Thank you. Now, do you know why -- or what the purpose was of
6 firing every three minutes? Is there a purpose behind that particular
8 A. I know.
9 Q. I'm not sure I understood your answer. It seems to indicate "I
11 Did you say that?
12 A. I do know. I know why.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please tell us, Mr. Rajcic.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It may take some time, though. May
16 JUDGE ORIE: Well, if you would first give us the short answer.
17 If we then need further details, we'll ask you for those details.
18 So if you could give us a brief answer, to start with.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a typical combat action,
20 which has the purpose of disturbing, distressing the enemy.
21 MR. RUSSO:
22 Q. Thank you, Mr. Rajcic, for that brief answer.
23 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, at this time I would move for the
24 admission of 65 ter 7060.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
1 MR. KEHOE: It's the same objection --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Same objection.
3 MR. KEHOE: -- Mr. President. Yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: The document will be marked for identification.
5 Mr. Registrar.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will become Exhibit P2342,
7 marked for identification.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
9 Could I ask one or two further details on the salvos.
10 The salvos, what were you firing, in order to achieve this
11 result, disturbing, distressing the enemy?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We were firing shells from
13 130-millimetre cannon. There were two cannons because the salvo includes
14 two projectiles every three minutes on specific targets, and I believe
15 that, time-wise, it lasted one hour. I'm not sure.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Is anything more known about the targets?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, all the available
18 information about the targets must be gathered. I spoke about the
19 tactical and technical characteristics of a target on the first day of my
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I see that. But if you fire at a target 20
22 times in one hour, what would be, apart from disturbing the enemy, or
23 distressing him, what would be the military advantage, as far as the
24 target itself is concerned? The structure, the area, the -- whatever the
25 target may have been.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, destroying as one of
2 the combat actions cannot be included into this one. The -- the aim
3 involved here, which was a strategic aim, was the Main Staff of the army
4 of the Serbian Krajina, the operations centres, then the operational
5 level, the Slavko Rodic barracks, the communications centres, their
6 purpose is to disturb or harass the command structure, to exhaust him, to
7 tire them, and to make it impossible for the adversary to engage in the
8 smooth functioning of coordination, command, and planning.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In this way, a military advantage
11 can be gained.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
13 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
14 I'd now look to show the -- one of the other attachments that you
15 had cited in your reconstruction. That is the OPS or operations diary of
16 the 4th Guards Brigade.
17 Mr. President, this is also not on the 65 ter list but is an
18 attachment to the analysis, Mr. President.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, same objection.
20 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Leave is granted to add it to the 65 ter list.
23 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
24 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
25 If we could have 65 ter 7142. And we'll be going to page 28 in
1 the English version, and from page 28 to page 29 in the B/C/S.
2 Q. Now, looking first at the entries for 4 August, the entries
3 between 5.00 a.m.
4 Now looking first on this page, Mr. Rajcic, can you find any
5 indication of what the Artillery Group TS-3 was firing at?
6 A. I can't give you an answer to that because I would have to have
7 other documents to compare this against.
8 Q. Let's just turn to the next page in B/C/S and also to the next
9 page in English.
10 We can see the entry for 0700 hours --
11 MR. RUSSO: Actually, it's not -- in the B/C/S if we could move
13 Q. See the entry for 0700 hours indicates:
14 "ED reported that our forces that were hitting the barracks in
15 Knin were doing a good job."
16 Can you tell us, Mr. Rajcic, if you know, which barracks that is
17 and which artillery group or brigade level artillery unit is doing that
19 A. Based on this, the only conclusion I can draw is that we were
20 doing a good job. Who it was, I don't know.
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I would offer 65 ter 7142 into
24 MR. KEHOE: It's the same objection. It's not on the list,
25 et cetera.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Kehoe.
2 Mr. Registrar, could you assign a number and have it MFI'd.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will become Exhibit P2343,
4 marked for identification.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
6 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
7 Q. Now, we've already looked at the Ivancica map, Mr. Rajcic, so I'm
8 not going to take to that particular citation. So I want to move to the
9 war diary at the Sajkovici forward command post.
10 MR. RUSSO: That is 65 ter 397, please.
11 For the court's information, this is also an annex to the first
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, same objection.
14 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President.
15 MR. RUSSO: I'm sorry, Mr. President, this one actually is on the
16 65 ter list.
17 JUDGE ORIE: This is on the 65 ter list, then we don't have to
18 deal with that at this moment.
19 MR. RUSSO: If we could move to the third page in the English,
20 and I believe it's also the third page in B/C/S. I'm sorry, that's the
21 page in B/C/S we wanted.
22 Q. Looking at this entry, Mr. Rajcic, are you able to give us any
23 information about what the Artillery Group TS-3 fired at on 4 August?
24 A. From the reconstruction, you can see what the background was. I
25 can't really tell you anything off the cuff. You focussed me on the IZM
1 Zadar, the 4th of August. I can only see Sibenik-Skradin, two
2 projectiles, Vodice, and our disposition.
3 Q. Let's move to the next page, just to be sure we're not missing
5 Now taking a look at that, Mr. Rajcic, I'll ask you also if you
6 don't see any information in here about what TS-3 fired at?
7 A. No, I don't see anything.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. RUSSO: If we could go back to the first entry that we looked
10 at, at page 3.
11 Q. I just want to ask you one question about one of the entries
13 It indicates at the second line:
14 "Following the artillery preparation, the MiG 21 aircraft bombed
15 the radio relay station Celavac very efficiently."
16 Now, can you tell the Chamber, first of all, why the Celavac
17 radio relay station was bombed?
18 A. This was the radio relay hub, or node. It's one of the main
19 systems used by the army of the so-called Republic of the Serbian
21 Q. Can you identify for us what the other main radio relay stations
23 A. When it comes to our area of responsibility, the link with
24 Celavac was the radio relay Cumina [phoen] or the repeater at Promina.
25 That was in the area where the enemy was deployed.
1 As far as the area where we were deployed, there is one at
2 Labisnica, then to the south toward at Dubrovnik at Sveti Ilija. Further
3 on, on Peljesac and deep behind Dubrovnik
4 Molunat where there was a radar station as well; and all of the latter
5 fell within our area of deployment.
6 Excuse me, this is the infrastructure of the radio communications
7 system, which was installed in the former Yugoslavia and which was
8 predominantly used by the JNA.
9 Q. And those radio relay stations and repeaters that you have
10 mentioned, were all of those attacked with aircraft or with a combination
11 of aircraft and artillery or by some other means?
12 A. Mr. Russo, all of those that I listed are the overall system of
13 communications in the area from the Mount Velebit to Dubrovnik
14 of those relay nodes or relay hubs, the Celavac node and Promina, were
15 used by the enemy, the adversary. Those two relay nodes were the target
16 of attacks.
17 Q. Thank you for that explanation.
18 Now, I'd like to move back to your reconstruction.
19 MR. RUSSO: That's P2336.
20 Sorry, I think I neglected to offer 65 ter 397 into evidence.
21 MR. KEHOE: Same objection, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Kehoe.
23 Mr. Registrar, could you assign a number marking it for
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, this will become Exhibit P2344,
1 marked for identification.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
3 Please proceed.
4 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
5 Q. At your original reconstruction, P2336, that's the first document
6 in your binder, I'd like to go to section 5.8.2.
7 MR. KEHOE: Well, before we do that if I may just interrupt, and
8 if can I ask the witness to take the headphones off because I don't want
9 to make an objection without that.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Rajcic, could you please take off your
12 Mr. Kehoe.
13 MR. KEHOE: Mr. President, as we're on P2336, and we have been
14 talking about page 10 as well as the -- going through the sources of
15 information that were in P2336, starting from page 10 going up to page 11
16 in the English, and we have been dancing around the issue as to whether
17 or not these -- these entities fired without authorisation -- fired on
18 targets without authorisation, and it's incumbent upon the Prosecution to
19 put that -- put their case to the witness, not dance around this issue.
20 Put the case to the witness and ask him the questions based on what they
21 just went through: Did they fire on authorisation, and did they fire on
22 targets that were not predesignated targets pursuant to an X, Y, Z
23 coordinates and a tabular textual table.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.
25 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, this is a direct examination. The
1 requirement to put a case to a witness is under Rule 90(H) which applies
2 to cross-examination. The witness cited these four documents as the
3 basis for indicating what was fired at. We took a look at those
4 documents. That's the point I wanted to make. If Mr. Kehoe wants to
5 make another point, he is free to do it during cross-examination.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
7 MR. KEHOE: Mr. President, then invite the Chamber to do it. The
8 issue here through this point being made by the Prosecution is that there
9 was some type of unauthorised fire that was done not pursuant to
10 predesignated targets.
11 Now, if in fact the Prosecution wants to find out what this
12 witness has to say about that and what the bottom line is, they should be
13 asking that question. They certainly can take him through the documents
14 as they have done, but what is the bottom line? The bottom line is that
15 question which they fail to ask.
16 They're the Prosecution. They should be putting their case to
17 the witness.
18 MR. RUSSO: If I could just respond briefly, Your Honour.
19 First of all, I'm not going to argue my case right now. I'm
20 certainly not going to argue it with the witness. The evidence is what
21 I'm interested in at this point. The inference is that we wish to draw
22 arguments we wish to make based on the evidence, do not necessarily
23 conform to what Mr. Kehoe is putting to the Court.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, Rule 90(H) specifically mentions the duty
25 to a cross-examining party to put its case to a witness. A similar
1 rule certainly is not to be found in any other rule. Any legal authority
2 for this application?
3 MR. KEHOE: No, Your Honour. I agree that the rule itself
4 obligates the Defence to do that or anybody that's engaged in
5 cross-examination; however, I would in this particular point at this
6 particular trial, I believe that in the interests of justice which puts
7 the Prosection --
8 JUDGE ORIE: That's not what I asked you.
9 MR. KEHOE: No, no. I --
10 JUDGE ORIE: I asked you whether there was any legal authority.
11 MR. KEHOE: And I will give you the legal authority.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. KEHOE: The legal authority is that Your Honour can craft and
14 make rulings in the interest of justice as Your Honour and the Chamber
15 has done throughout this. Certainly, this falls into that category which
16 is a penumbra of rights and privileges that the Chamber has and can so
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, since you're inviting us to go into areas
20 where we have no written, legal authorities, the Chamber would prefer to
21 have an early break.
22 And we will resume at a quarter to 1.00.
23 --- Recess taken at 12.22 p.m.
24 --- On resuming at 12.49 p.m.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, Mr. Kehoe, you invited the
1 Chamber to give certain instructions to Mr. Russo. The Chamber has
2 considered your request and finds no basis for such an instruction in the
3 Rules, and, further, considers that the interests of justice do not
4 require to give such an instruction to Mr. Russo.
5 Therefore, Mr. Russo is free to proceed as he wishes in that
7 There's another matter, Mr. Mikulicic, and I'm addressing you.
8 The Chamber will issue a written decision on your request to be present
9 at the other side of the line in a videolink, and already for practical
10 purposes, I inform you that that decision will be -- will deny your
12 MR. MIKULICIC: All I can say, that I'm -- that I'm not happy
13 with it, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: No, no. If you ask for something, just without
15 giving full reasons, it is --
16 MR. MIKULICIC: I see the point.
17 JUDGE ORIE: It is in line with the guidance as we find it one of
18 the early Tadic decisions, so it's -- but you'll find the exact reasons
19 in the decision which is important enough [Overlapping speakers] ...
20 MR. MIKULICIC: So I'm exceptionally denied to be present at a --
21 exceptional circumstances.
22 JUDGE ORIE: As a matter of fact, Mr. Mikulicic, you'll find all
23 the reasons whether what is exceptional or not and what is an exception
24 to an exception, wait until you have seen the decision. We just gave you
25 already this decision in order to accommodate you.
1 MR. MIKULICIC: I'm grateful, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, you may proceed.
3 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
4 Q. Mr. Rajcic, I'd like to return to the issue of the targeting of
5 Mr. -- Mile Martic, which we had talked about a little bit earlier this
7 First, I want to be -- I'd like you to clarify for us whether you
8 were targeting Mr. Martic himself or you were targeting the building that
9 he happened to be living in?
10 A. His flat in the building that he was living in.
11 Q. I do understand that. However, I'm trying to get at the
12 distinction of what it was you were attempting to achieve. If he wasn't
13 in the flat would you still be shelling the flat?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Thank you. And I'd like to show you one of the target lists that
16 we've been looking at, the one you indicated that you had drafted.
17 MR. RUSSO: If we could have P1271.
18 Q. And focussing on target KV 610, which is a little bit below what
19 we see here, the designation of that target is apartment building
20 complex. Are you able to tell us whether this building is the building
21 that you believed Mr. Martic -- to be living in?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Thank you.
24 MR. RUSSO: If we could now have Exhibit D1261.
25 And if we could, please, focus on the target KV 610, which
1 appears -- there. Yes.
2 Q. Now, Mr. Rajcic, do you agree that this represents the location
3 in Knin of the quarters of Mr. Martic?
4 A. I cannot agree whether this facility was the one where Mr. Milan
5 Martic resided. I have the coordinates, and the coordinates were solely
6 relevant for me.
7 Q. I understand that. And just to advise you, this is what has been
8 agreed between the parties, relatively speaking, as to where the target
9 coordinates for KV 610 actually fall in Knin.
10 Now, you mentioned earlier that you would need to see the area of
11 the police station, because you believe it was close to that. I can tell
12 thought circle which appears directly above KV 610, if you can see that,
13 that is a circle of the location of the plotted coordinates of the police
15 So looking at that, relative to looking at the cross where KV 610
16 falls, can you tell me if you generally agree that this is the layout of
17 how close or how far away the quarters of Milan Martic were from the
18 police station?
19 A. When I said that this was close, this is relatively close.
20 Relativity is what I spoke about.
21 MR. RUSSO: If we could please have -- well, one moment.
22 [Prosecution counsel confer]
23 MR. RUSSO:
24 Q. Mr. Rajcic, have you -- are you personally familiar with the
25 building in which Mr. Martic lives? Have you ever seen the building
1 where he lived?
2 A. Never, until that point. Until the time it was targeted. Later,
3 I had no interest in seeing where he lived.
4 Q. And when you saw it, are we talking about seeing it on a map or
5 did you actually see the building in Knin itself?
6 A. I understood your question about seeing as whether I know the
7 building, whether I had been in it before, during or after the operation.
8 This is how I understood the question.
9 Q. Well, my question is not necessarily whether you have been inside
10 the building but --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, apparently you want to know whether the
12 witness ever personally observed the building which was believed to be
13 the building in which Mr. Martic lived.
14 Did you ever see that with your own eyes; that is, not on a
15 photograph, not on a list, but just look at it.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
18 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
19 Q. Now, Mr. Rajcic, can you first tell us -- well, you've never seen
20 the building. What sources of intelligence did you have to indicate the
21 location of Mr. Martic's flat?
22 A. Intelligence sources were processed and collected in the Military
23 District's intelligence bodies. As far as I know, the collection of
24 intelligence from such sources went through aerial photography, taken by
25 pilotless drones. I think that also cadastral plans for that area were
1 available, so documents which were not typically of military origin. I
2 presume - I'm not sure - that there was word of mouth, somebody who had
3 lived in that area, imparted information. That's one of the ways to
4 collect information. Then visual. Visually there was no clear line of
5 sight of the settlement of Knin before the operation started. I presume
6 that intelligence officers determined the coordinates, X/Y, on of the
7 basis of information and intelligence gathered in the way that I
9 Q. Now, it is an apartment building complex. Do you know how many
10 flats were in that building?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Do you know how many people were living in that building besides
13 Mr. Martic himself?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Do you know by any chance how many storeys high the building is?
16 A. I can only presume.
17 Q. Now, can you explain for us what you believed your chances were
18 of actually injuring or killing Mr. Martic by firing artillery at his
20 A. Very slight.
21 Q. And "very slight." Using artillery, can you tell us what were
22 your chances of -- in any given situation firing artillery either from
23 the 130-millimetre guns or from the 122-millimetre rocket systems, firing
24 with either one of those weapons -- you're indicating no. Is there one
25 of those weapon systems was not used?
1 A. 130-millimetre cannon. Only the 130-millimetre cannon.
2 Q. I understand, that when you were targeting Mr. Martic himself, it
3 was only with this 130-millimetre gun.
4 A. To the best of my knowledge, yes.
5 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness kindly speak into the
6 microphone. Thank you.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Rajcic, could you come a bit closer to the
8 microphone. Interpreters have difficulties in hearing you.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise. I tend to come too
10 close and then too far away. I haven't found the optimum spot.
11 MR. RUSSO:
12 Q. Now we discussed at the beginning of your testimony somewhat the
13 relative inaccuracy of artillery weapons, and the fact that when
14 artillery is fired at a particular building, it is inevitable that some
15 projectile also not actually hit the building but will in fact fall next
16 to it. Correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And I think you indicated earlier that there were other parts in
19 the town, other areas in the town that you fired at; for example, this
20 old hospital building because you believed Mr. Martic to be in there; is
21 that right?
22 A. Yes. Pursuant to intelligence sources and electronic
23 surveillance, this is the information that was given to me.
24 Q. And when you indicated that your chances of actually killing or
25 injuring Mr. Martic by firing artillery at his building, if you knew
1 those chances were very slight, can you tell us why it is you,
2 nevertheless, decided to employ artillery in that fashion?
3 A. The goal was to make the main commander of the adversary
5 Q. Was there any goal other than making him insecure by use of
7 A. That was a possible goal by using artillery and analysing its
8 impact, and, if possible, if results would have been the killing of Mile
9 Martic by shelling, that would have given us a significant military
11 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I'd like to -- I don't know if this
12 microphone is working.
13 THE INTERPRETER: It's working.
14 MR. RUSSO: I'd like to show Exhibit P1265 --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask one other question.
16 Mr. Rajcic, you mentioned electronic surveillance as one of your
17 sources of knowledge. Was that attached to the person, attached to a
18 vehicle? How do I have to -- was it a kind of a GPS-oriented system?
19 I don't need a full explanation but just to better understand
20 what "electronic surveillance" would have meant here.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was a platoon for electronic
22 action. They had the necessary equipment. They eavesdrop on the
23 electronic communications of the enemy.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So electronic surveillance was mainly trying
25 to overhear any electronic communication rather than a system by which
1 you could spot where exactly a vehicle was or by a GPS system. That was
2 not in place?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that this was no such
4 equipment, only on the basis of radio communications, intercepted, and
5 listening in on telephone conversation and the reactions contained
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you for assisting me in understanding
8 what "electronic surveillance" means in this context.
9 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
10 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
11 Q. First taking one last look at the target plotting for KV 610
13 MR. RUSSO: I'd like to bring up on Sanction Exhibit P1265.
14 Q. Now, Mr. Rajcic, you can see, this is a representation of Knin
15 taken from the aerial map, the aerial photograph which you've previously
16 marked, and this is an interactive function, and I'm going to be
17 attempting to go direct to the area where KV 610 falls. First I need to
18 focus in.
19 Now that's the Senjak facility which you have already pointed
20 out, and looking at the -- this area here that I'm indicating, there
21 is -- can you see a line of buildings which are a bit staggered from one
22 another. And next to that, three large apartment complexes. And it's in
23 this area here that --
24 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, Judge, I object this. I mean, this -- he
25 can't lead -- go into this and start telling him. It's up to the witness
1 to say what is [Overlapping speakers] --
2 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know what Mr. Russo is going to tell him.
3 But, Mr. Russo, of course, if you were asking whether you see some trees
4 there is or -- that's -- but if it is any sensitive information, which
5 would lead the witness to the answers of the questions you put to him,
6 that's, of course, not what are you expected to do in chief.
7 MR. RUSSO: I understand that, Mr. President. I'm just asking
8 the witness to take a look at that, the layout of this, so that he can
9 relate it to the next image that I'm going to show him.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. RUSSO:
12 Q. And, again, Mr. Rajcic, focussing on this line of buildings here
13 that are somewhat scattered, we can use that as a reference point for
14 what appears next to it. And what we're looking at here is a picture of
15 a view taken from the Knin fortress, and I'd like to focus on that area.
16 Now, the image is a bit blurry. But I do have a more finer
17 image. But I want you to notice here that same line of buildings that's
18 a bit staggered. And next to it, you can see there are several apartment
19 complexes; one here, one behind it, and several others.
20 Now, looking at this, can you say whether or not this is the area
21 which is plotted as KV 610 and the area that you knew Mr. Martic's
22 quarters to be in?
23 A. I cannot confirm.
24 Q. That's fine.
25 Now, Mr. Rajcic, given that you were targeting only Mr. Martic
1 and not the building that he was living in, can you explain to us what
2 consideration was given in the decision to use artillery on that
3 building, or at him, while he's in that building, can you explain to us
4 what consideration was given for the civilians who were also in that
5 building on the 4th of August?
6 A. Rules of use of artillery ...
7 Q. I'm not certain I understand your answer. Can you explain that?
8 MR. KEHOE: If I may, Judge, it also presupposes that were there
9 civilians in that building at that time, so ...
10 JUDGE ORIE: I do agree with you that that is included in the
11 question, in that respect it's leading.
12 Mr. Russo, I think the right way of putting the question is: Can
13 you explain what consideration was given to the civilians that may have
14 been present in those buildings at the time.
15 Could you explain your reference to the rules of use of
16 artillery. What do they teach us, exactly, in terms of attacking a
17 building in order to hit a person, which is supposed to live in one of
18 the apartment blocks in relation to others that may live in that same
19 apartment block, and which were not targeted but may have been civilians?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We took into consideration the
21 rule of distinction, or apparent difference in, and the rule of
22 proportionality. In Croatian we say "uravno tejo nostvo" [phoen],
23 balancing out, because it is a non-disputable fact that in such a context
24 civilians can also be found. If necessary, I can expound on this
1 JUDGE ORIE: I leave it to Mr. Russo whether he needs -- he is
2 seeking further clarification.
3 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
4 Q. I think your answer is clear, Mr. Rajcic.
5 MR. RUSSO: I'd like to now ask you a couple of more questions
6 about the planning that went into the use of artillery for Operation
7 Storm. I know we've discussed in some detail the planning for Knin. I
8 wanted to focus a little bit more on the planning for Benkovac, Obrovac,
9 and Gracac.
10 You already indicated to us that at some point you developed a
11 plan for artillery use in those three towns; correct?
12 A. Yes. To certain delimitations, as opposed or as different from
13 in the case of Knin.
14 Q. And can you tell us when exactly it was that you began planning
15 for the use of artillery, as an offensive operation, for the use of
16 artillery against targets in those three towns?
17 A. On the first day, when we discussed the target table for Knin, I
18 said that this was a continuous process of processing the state of
19 affairs on the battlefield when I discussed the target list after the
20 incident in Biograd when our civilians and our soldiers were killed on
21 the beach. The process of preparing the targets is a continuous process.
22 Q. I understand the process, Mr. Rajcic, what I'm trying to
23 determine is when the process began, in terms of finding targets in
24 Benkovac, Obrovac, and Gracac that you may want to consider for artillery
25 fire for an offensive operation.
1 A. All the facilities which bore the character of military targets
2 in those settlements - and I'm not going to list all of them - when I
3 came in 1993 from the area of Dubrovnik
4 Gotovina, as early as then we defined such military facilities and
5 determined the coordinates for them. And except for this part which does
6 not have a category of military facility, they, later on, were just
7 supplemented, until the eve of the operation -- of the attack, Operation
9 Q. Thank you. And I understand that that's -- 1993 is when you came
10 under the command of General Gotovina. That's when you picked -- or some
11 of the targets in those towns, you located them.
12 Can you tell us now when the decision was made to go ahead and
13 actually use artillery against the targets in Benkovac, Obrovac, and
15 A. When the activity status on the drafting of the order for attack
16 of Operation Storm.
17 Q. And that was when, time-frame?
18 A. As far as I remember, my contribution to that plan bears the date
19 of 2nd of August, and on the 1st of August, we made the necessary
20 analyses for the selection of targets.
21 Q. Thank you. I'd like to talk now a little bit about your
22 knowledge of the command relationship that General Gotovina had with his
24 Let me first focus on the General. Can you tell, give the
25 Chamber some idea of what kind of a commander General Gotovina was. Was
1 he a strong commander, a weak commander? Can you explain some of that to
3 A. My impression of General Gotovina is that he was a top-notch
4 professional, strict -- and a strict and just commander.
5 Q. Did the officers and troops under General Gotovina's command
6 respect him?
7 A. According to my knowledge, they held him in a high esteem and had
8 great respect for him.
9 Q. And as far as you're aware, were General Gotovina's orders always
11 A. It was very dangerous not to comply with an order from General
13 Q. Thank you. Now, with respect to Operation Storm in particular,
14 was General Gotovina the highest operational commander in Operation
16 A. What do you mean? Operation Storm is an operation covering the
17 entire area except for Slavonia
18 Q. I'm referring to the entire Operation Storm. Who was the highest
19 operational commander in that operation?
20 A. According to the military structure and subordination and the
21 system of the Croatian army, that was the chief of the Main Staff for
22 this particular operation, and in combat of such a level, it is the
23 president of the state who is the chief commander.
24 According to the Law on Defence of the Republic of Croatia
25 according to the Law on the Armed Forces, in war operation it is the
1 president of the state who is the Commander-in-Chief.
2 Q. Yes. I do understand that President Tudjman was the
3 Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. What I'm attempting to discover
4 is -- I'm not sure if you understand my distinction of the operational
5 commander in terms of who was the highest authority during the operation
6 as to who was doing what, where, and how?
7 MR. KEHOE: Again, Mr. President, I think that the witness asked
8 for some clarity between Sector North and Sector South, so if we could
9 clear that up.
10 MR. RUSSO: That's fine. I will ask him to simply limit his
11 answers to the area of the Split Military District, and the area which
12 also includes the special police forces.
13 A. That's why I asked if you referred to Operation Storm as a whole
14 or to Operation South alone. Operation South is an operational level and
15 Operation Storm is on a strategic level. When we're referring to the
16 special units under the command of General Markac and the Split Military
17 District, the way it unfolded and the way it was stated in the order, the
18 forces of General Markac were the left neighbour to the Split Military
19 District. That's how we refer to that.
20 Q. Now, with respect to the relationship between the forces under
21 the command of General Markac and those under the command of General
22 Gotovina, during this operation, could General Gotovina order special
23 police to engage in certain tasks? Could he tell them where to go or
24 what to do or what not to do?
25 A. No.
1 Q. And similarly could -- as far as you know, could General Markac
2 tell any HV troops which were operating along his border and of his area
3 of responsibility what to do or what not to do?
4 A. He could not. General Markac only had an attached unit in his
5 area of responsibility.
6 Q. An attached unit of the HV?
7 A. Mr. Russo, we've already discussed one very small element of
8 artillery pieces from the organic formation of the Split Military
10 Q. Yes, and I believe your testimony regarding that was that General
11 Gotovina had ordered you to detach certain artillery pieces from what was
12 TRS-5 and to attach them to the forces of the special police. Is that
14 A. Yes, that's right. It was attached.
15 Q. Now, I know you've explained this relationship to me before, but
16 I just want to be clear in this particular context.
17 With respect to that attached -- those attached pieces of
18 artillery, was there any dual command or dual use of those particular
19 pieces of artillery?
20 A. I do not accept the dual model of command, and there was none.
21 Q. Does that mean that once you attached those artillery pieces to
22 the forces of the special police that General Gotovina could no longer
23 tell those particular pieces of artillery what to fire at or what not to
24 fire at?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Thank you. Now, can you tell us, if you know, where was General
2 Gotovina on the 4th of August? I'd like you to -- if you're able to,
3 place for us his movements on that day. Where was he when the attack
4 first began?
5 A. He was at his command post, and that was the forward command post
6 in Sajkovici at the start of the day.
7 Q. Can you tell us - and I understand you may not be able to tell us
8 every place he went on that day - but so far as you know, can you tell us
9 about his movements on the 4th of August?
10 A. I cannot describe for you the entire day, but I do know that he
11 went, as far as I remember, and it's much easier for me now because I
12 read the operations diary of the Sibenik operations group, and I know
13 that the General toured the commands of operations groups, in order that
14 he himself may see what the pace of the execution of combat tasks was. I
15 would also see him in his office in the building in Sajkovici. I saw him
16 there on the day, and that was the location where we had our forward
17 command post.
18 Q. And, as far as you know, was he being advised of the situation in
19 the populated towns that were under artillery fire, specifically, Knin,
20 Benkovac, Obrovac, and Gracac?
21 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, if we could add Drvar as well. I mean,
22 that's the list that we're talking about, under attack.
23 MR. RUSSO: That's fine.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Do you want to exclude that.
25 MR. RUSSO: I'll include it this time.
1 Q. If you know, Mr. Rajcic, can you tell us whether or not General
2 Gotovina was during the day or evening of 4th of August being advised of
3 the situation in the populated towns of Drvar, Knin, Benkovac, and
5 A. I believe so.
6 Q. And can you tell us, if you know, whether he was advised that the
7 civilian population was leaving any of those towns?
8 A. I think that General Gotovina had information, even before the
9 start of Operation Storm, that the civilian population was moving out of
11 Q. I understand that. But there were people leaving Knin prior to
12 the operation. What I'd like to know is, as far as you know, was he
13 being advised of the large exodus of people that were leaving not only
14 Knin but Benkovac, Obrovac, and Gracac on the 4th of August?
15 A. I can't talk about them, mass exodus, and the information that
16 General Gotovina may have had in relation to that because we were not on
17 the same premises. I was in the operations centre and he was in his
18 office, and he was directly in touch with the intelligence department.
19 Q. Now, the intelligence department, were there officers of the
20 intelligence department operating in General Gotovina 's area of
22 A. I want to make it quite clear: Are you referring to the
23 intelligence administration of the Main Staff of the Croatian army?
24 Q. I'm referring to the security and intelligence service. Were
25 there SIS officers operating in the area -- Gotovina's area of
2 A. General Gotovina had his assistants for -- assistant for security
3 in the area across the front line, all the way to Zadar, Livno, they had
4 subdepartments for security.
5 Did I say security services or zones? I'm sorry.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic.
7 MR. MISETIC: Yes, just for the sake of clarity, Mr. Russo went
8 from the intelligence departments to SIS. So he is shifting different
9 sectors, and I just wanted him to be aware of that in his questioning.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.
11 MR. RUSSO: Well, I'm trying to discover who, in terms of
12 intelligence, was reporting to General Gotovina.
13 Q. Mr. Rajcic, the -- what intelligence officers from whatever
14 branch, can you tell us, were reporting to General Gotovina during the
16 A. What do you mean, intelligence officers from whatever branch?
17 Q. What I mean is anyone who is collecting intelligence for this
18 particular effort in the operation, whether it be the intelligence
19 service of the Main Staff, or some other intelligence service, can you
20 tell me who was providing information and reporting about the
21 intelligence they received to General Gotovina?
22 A. Reports from the intelligence body on the intelligence gathered
23 were given by officers who were leading these departments in the Military
24 District. They were submitting these reports to General Gotovina. And
25 the reports also arrived from intelligence administration of the
1 Main Staff. These were reports which had to do with the area covered by
2 the operation, under the command of General Gotovina, in the area that
3 was allocated to him.
4 Q. In your answer you said "reports from the intelligence body."
5 What intelligence body are you referring to there?
6 A. Well, reports, information. The intelligence administration of
7 the Main Staff does not submit reports to the lower structures. It
8 provides them with information or intelligence concerning the enemy in
9 the area of responsibility they cover.
10 Reports are produced up the chain as a rule. Intelligence
11 reports would be submitted to the Main Staff, as one of the many reports
12 submitted to the Main Staff, not just the intelligence ones.
13 Q. And would General Gotovina receive a copy of those reports or be
14 advised of the contents of those reports?
15 MR. KEHOE: Mr. President I think we just need a bit of clarity.
16 JUDGE ORIE: One second.
17 MR. KEHOE: I think we just need a bit of clarity as to reports
18 going up and down. I'm not sure that there is -- the questioning has
19 ascertained what reports Mr. Russo is discussing at this juncture, in any
21 JUDGE ORIE: It might assist the Chamber, Mr. Russo, if you would
22 do so. At the same time, I'm looking at the clock and I want to deal
23 with a few matters.
24 Therefore, I suggest, unless this would be a very unsuitable
25 moment --
1 MR. RUSSO: I think this is fine Mr. President.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 Mr. Rajcic, we'd like to see you back on Monday, and I'm now
4 addressing the parties as well, we have reserved additional time Monday
5 morning. That means that unless I hear that one of the parties is
6 unavailable and could not attend because then, of course, we would have
7 to consider how to resolve that. But since I do not hear any such thing,
8 Mr. Rajcic we would like to see you back Monday morning, 9.00 in the
9 morning, and we might have a long day that Monday.
10 I would again like to instruct you -- I see you are raising your
11 eyebrows. We should need a court reporter for the body language alone,
12 Mr. Rajcic. I instruct you again that you should not speak with anyone
13 about your testimony whether given already or still to be given, and I'll
14 ask Madam Usher to escort you out of the courtroom.
15 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
16 [The witness stands down]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, could you give us an indication on the
18 time you would still need?
19 MR. RUSSO: I think can I finish within one session,
20 Mr. President.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Within one session.
22 Could you give us an estimate already, if perhaps after your
23 tete-a-tete with Mr. Kehoe and perhaps after you have considered the 92
24 ter statement that will be tendered by the Gotovina Defence, how much
25 time you would need for re-examination?
1 MR. RUSSO: I don't want to caveat this too much, Mr. President.
2 I think the Court appreciates how studied the witness is in answering
3 questions. I'm going to estimate one session at this point, based on the
4 92 ter submission.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 As far as the other Defence teams are concerned, any further
7 estimates, any changes?
8 MR. KEHOE: Mr. President I said 45 minutes based on some of the
9 discussions today. I'll probably increase that by about 15 minutes or
10 to, an hour. Not much more than that that.
11 JUDGE ORIE: That would be one hour.
12 Ms. Higgins.
13 MS. HIGGINS: Still no questions [overlapping speakers], Your
15 JUDGE ORIE: Still no questions.
16 Mr. Mikulicic, at this time.
17 MR. MIKULICIC: Your Honour, I remain to my further -- my
18 previous assumption. That means within one session.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Within one session.
20 That means that, if we would sit on Monday, and the provisional
21 schedule is now from 9.00 to quarter past 1.00, and then from quarter
22 past 2.00 until 7.00, that it should be possible to finish the testimony
23 of this witness on Monday. If that would be impossible, but it seems
24 fairly possible at this moment, we would have additional time on Tuesday
25 as well, but I take it that there will be a joint enterprise to finish
1 with the witness on Monday.
2 Mr. Misetic.
3 MR. MISETIC: Just, Mr. President, in the interests of saving
4 time on what may become a debate on Monday about what is and is not
5 outside the scope of the direct, in the Defence 92 ter, I just wanted to
6 alert the Chamber that that might become an issue. And so over the
7 weekend we certainly will go over it, I'm sure the Prosecution will, and
8 in case we have to have an argument, the Chamber should be prepared
9 that -- we may have a discussion about what does or doesn't fall within
10 the scope of the direct examination.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, to the extent that the parties could agree on
12 that, that, of course, will save a lot of time in Court. If not, finally
13 the Chamber will have to take its responsibilities.
14 We then adjourn.
15 Yes, Mr. Russo. Yes.
16 MR. RUSSO: Sorry, I wanted to raise one matter -- actually, two
18 JUDGE ORIE: I -- there is a specific reason why I would not even
19 steal the three our four minutes I sometimes to.
20 MR. RUSSO: Understood.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Could you do it very brief, or could you leave it
22 until Monday?
23 MR. RUSSO: I can take care of it on Monday.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Then we adjourn, and we'll resume on Monday, the
25 23rd of February, Courtroom I, 9.00 in the morning.
1 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.47 p.m.
2 to be reconvened on Monday, the 23rd day of
3 February, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.