Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 22716

 1                           Thursday, 8 October 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.08 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 and around the courtroom.  This is case number IT-06-90-T,

 9     the Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina, et al.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

11             Is the Cermak Defence -- Mr. Misetic.

12             MR. MISETIC:  Sorry --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  You're not a Cermak Defence but since you're on your

14     feet, I take it that there's something out.

15             MR. MISETIC:  I just wanted to ask a question after the Court

16     finishes with the preliminaries, just a procedural question.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  What do you consider to be the preliminaries.  We

18     have dealt with it, I take it.

19             MR. MISETIC:  I was waiting for the Court to see if we were going

20     call the next witness.

21             We just on behalf of the Gotovina Defence wanted to just ask that

22     the Court consider the lineup of cross-examination with respect to the

23     next witness.  We understand that there will be a process here and the

24     witness will be giving his evidence in direct.  There are -- there are

25     likely to be based on the proofing note we got, changes to one of his

Page 22717

 1     statements.  That will and has impacted our time estimate that we

 2     originally gave the Chamber.  The Court will recall that we originally

 3     asked for three sessions of cross-examination.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  That will now be less.

 5             MR. MISETIC:  Sorry.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  That will now be less.

 7             MR. MISETIC:  Well, presumably, yes.  But that was based on our

 8     -- what we believed our 90(H) obligation to be, with respect to certain

 9     portions of the statement.

10             I have had a conversation with the Prosecution.  I suspect in

11     their cross-examination they will be challenging the changes to the

12     statement which then again depending on what happens in their

13     cross-examination could lead to a need for an extensive redirect -- a

14     recross, I should say, by the Gotovina Defence depending on what happens

15     in their cross.

16             So in terms of the efficiency of how we're going to do this, I

17     just wanted to put out there to the Chamber that it may be more efficient

18     if the Prosecution in this one instance goes first with cross-examination

19     so that we know exactly what it is we're supposed to be cross-examining

20     on.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  And what is the position of the Prosecution in this

22     respect?

23             MS. GUSTAFSON:  Your Honour, we see no reason to change the

24     normal order of cross-examination, and I don't think it would increase

25     the efficiency.  If Mr. Misetic wants to deal with the statement as it

Page 22718

 1     stands, he is free to do that; if he wants to address any changes, he is

 2     free to do that.

 3             There's a good reason, Your Honour, that the Prosecution goes

 4     last, and I don't see any reason to change that here.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  We'll consider the matter.

 6             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, just on the last point, Your Honour, we've

 7     actually looked into it, and I don't know that's in the rules that the

 8     Prosecution gets to go last.  It's just sort of the practice that has

 9     been accepted, and there's been no objection to it, but I don't think

10     there is any rule that actually lays that out in that fashion.  And in

11     this particular case let me also add that it actually does affect how we

12     would cross-examine.  Obviously I'm not going to cross-examine a witness

13     on matters that the witness, on direct examination, says he didn't say

14     and doesn't stand by.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

16             MR. MISETIC:  So ...

17             JUDGE ORIE:  There are several elements in the question and the

18     answer.

19             First, Ms. Gustafson, I noticed that you didn't say we object to

20     it, but that you said that there are no good reasons for changing it.

21     Second is that you addressed two matters.  The first is the efficiency

22     and then you continued to say that the Gotovina Defence, of course, could

23     cross-examine as they wish.  I think no one disputes that right, but

24     whether that that's efficient or not, of course, is something still to be

25     considered.  And finally you said there were good reasons why we have

Page 22719

 1     adopted this practice.  Of course, the issue is whether those good

 2     reasons, if spelled out, would lead to the conclusion that, under the

 3     present circumstances, we should not proceed as suggested.  I'm not

 4     giving any opinion at this moment yet, but I just noticed that there are

 5     a few loose ends still in the -- what was submitted to the Chamber.  Both

 6     -- also from Mr. Misetic, of course, we do not know exactly what he has

 7     on his mind.  I don't know what he wants to cross-examine the witness on,

 8     so, therefore, quite many loose ends.

 9             MS. GUSTAFSON:  I'm sorry, Your Honour, I should have been more

10     clear.  I think the good reasons and the efficiency are one in the same

11     in the sense that many times the other cross-examinations -- the

12     cross-examinations of the other Defence teams need to be addressed by the

13     Prosecution in cross-examination, so it is efficient and makes sense that

14     the Prosecution goes last.  I don't see any reason that that should

15     change in that case.

16             Thank you.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  We'll see how matters develop.

18             Mr. Kay, are you ready to call your next witness, who I

19     understand is Mr. Pasic.

20             MR. KAY:  Yes, Your Honour, I call Mr. Pasic.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Madam Usher.

22             Mr. Kay, could I draw your attention already to the following.

23     There is a suggestion that a document, which is a minutes of the

24     government session to be added to the 65 ter list, and I take it that you

25     want to do that, in order to tender that document.

Page 22720

 1             Now, in view of what happened yesterday, would you please

 2     consider whether D1634 would do as good as adding a document to the

 3     65 ter list and then tender it into evidence.

 4                           [The witness entered court]

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning -- good morning, Mr. Pasic.  You're

 6     looking in a direction where the speaker is not to be found.  I'm the one

 7     who speaks at this moment, Mr. Pasic, yes.

 8             Mr. Pasic, before you give evidence, the Rules of Procedure and

 9     Evidence require that you make a solemn declaration that you will speak

10     the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.  The text is now

11     handed out to you by Madam Usher, and I would like to invite to you make

12     that solemn declaration.

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

14     speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Pasic.  Please be seated.

16             Mr. Pasic, you will first be examined by Mr. Kay.  Mr. Kay is

17     counsel for Mr. Cermak.

18             Please proceed, Mr. Kay.

19             MR. KAY:  Thank you, Your Honour.

20                           WITNESS:  PETAR PASIC

21                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

22                           Examination by Mr. Kay:

23        Q.   Good morning, Mr. Pasic.

24        A.   Good morning.

25        Q.   I'd like you to look at a document, first of all, which is a

Page 22721

 1     record of the statement that you gave to the Office of the Prosecution in

 2     2001 and 2002.

 3             I see you've got some papers in front of you there, and looking

 4     at them, they seem to be the hard copies of what we're going to look at

 5     on a computer screen.  On the right-hand side, you will see in a moment a

 6     document come up, 2D00-722.

 7             If you just put those other papers away in front of you, just put

 8     them in the folder, and if you need to refer to them, you can do, and ask

 9     -- ask the Court's permission.

10             Now, what you will see on the screen coming up in a moment is a

11     statement in two languages.  On the right-hand side, is your own

12     language, but on the left-hand side is a statement in the English

13     language and is a record of that interview in 2001 and 2002.  And can you

14     see your signature on that document?

15        A.   I can.  It's on the left side in the English language copy, but I

16     cannot see it in the Croatian copy.

17        Q.   Yes, that's all right.  It's the English document that was

18     signed.  I'm going to ask to you look at a series of these documents and

19     just identify them for us.

20             MR. KAY:  If we can just turn to the last page of the --

21     second-to-last page of the English document, page 9.

22        Q.   And, again, can you see your signature there at the end of this

23     statement?

24        A.   I can't see my signature in the Croatian version; only on the

25     English copy.

Page 22722

 1        Q.   Yes.  It's the English copy that we're looking at for these

 2     purposes.

 3             And do you confirm that you signed this document that the Office

 4     of the Prosecution produced with you on the 3rd of March, 2002?

 5        A.   Yes, that's my signature.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  And your signature is on the bottom of each page in

 7     between.

 8             The next document I want to look at is 2D00-712.

 9             This is a document, when it comes on the screen, which is a

10     record of an interview you gave to the Defence, first in the year 2007,

11     then in the year 2009.

12             MR. KAY:  And if we can look at the Croatian version, please,

13     this time down at the bottom --

14        Q.   Do you confirm your signature on the first page of this document?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Thank you.

17             MR. KAY:  If we turn to the last page, page 7.

18        Q.   This is the last page of that record of the interview you gave

19     with the Defence on the 23rd of April, 2009, when it was signed.  And do

20     you identify there your signature on the last page?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Thank you.  Your signature is also on the pages in between, and

23     I'm going to ask you some questions now.

24             The statement that you gave to the Office of the Prosecution, did

25     you read that statement and make some corrections to that document in the

Page 22723

 1     statement that you gave to the Defence and signed in 2009?

 2        A.   Yes, I did.

 3        Q.   And when you signed this statement for the Defence, did you read

 4     through your Defence statement to ensure that that content was true and

 5     correct to the knowledge of your -- best knowledge of your belief?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  The next document I want you to look at is document

 8     2D00-763.  And you can see a document here, which is headed: Supplemental

 9     Information Sheet and contains corrections to that statement you

10     originally gave to the Office of the Prosecution that you wanted made on

11     the 2nd of September, 2009.

12             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, I believe the document in e-court isn't

13     signed.  There -- this has been signed and uploaded into the system, so

14     we're looking at a document that is to be perfected.  It was signed

15     yesterday.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Kay.  Unless there is any reason to doubt,

17     and I see no reason whatsoever, that it would be the same document but

18     now signed that we could proceed for the time being on the basis of what

19     we see on our screen.

20             MR. KAY:  Thank you, Your Honour.  The signed document will be

21     attached to this, I'm told, within the system.

22        Q.   If you can just look at that document there, Mr. Pasic, in your

23     own language and look at the matters raised within that supplemental

24     information sheet.  Do you confirm that these were corrections that you

25     gave to the Defence concerning that statement to the OTP when we met on

Page 22724

 1     the 2nd of September, 2009?

 2        A.   Yes.  If you allow an explanation --

 3        Q.   I want to look at page 2 of this before you say anything, just to

 4     confirm the information on page 2.

 5             If you look at page 2 on your screen, do you confirm there those

 6     matters that you raised with the Defence, and you wanted to make

 7     corrections to the statement of the Prosecution?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   Is everything that you said within this supplemental information

10     sheet, to the best of your knowledge and belief, true and correct?

11        A.   Yes, it is.

12        Q.   And do you confirm that you have read through this supplemental

13     information sheet and that you signed this document yesterday?

14        A.   Yes, in its entirety.

15        Q.   Thank you.  I want you now to look at a second supplemental

16     information sheet.

17             MR. KAY:  Can 2D00-764 be placed on the screen.

18        Q.   Do you see there on the right-hand side in your own language a

19     further supplemental information sheet?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Do you confirm that on the 6th of October, when you met me to

22     discuss and confirm your statements, that you requested further

23     corrections be made to your statement to the Office of the Prosecution,

24     which was signed on the 3rd of March, 2002?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 22725

 1             MR. KAY:  Again, Your Honour, there is a signed version of this

 2     because it had to be typed up overnight, signed yesterday, which has been

 3     uploaded into e-court and we await its connection with the document.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, you said it had to be typed up, does that mean

 5     that the witness has not seen the final result?

 6             MR. KAY:  He has seen it, Your Honour.

 7             JUDE ORIE:  He has.

 8             MR. KAY:  I'm just about to ask him that.  I was just informing

 9     Your Honour that we were in the same procedural issue.

10        Q.   Can you look at that page of the document, Mr. Pasic, and confirm

11     that you have read this document and signed a statement for that document

12     yesterday?

13             If you look at the first page, do you confirm that?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   And I believe you have copies with you in court today in the

16     paper form; is that right?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   And if we just look at page 2, can you confirm when you signed

19     this document yesterday that you read this page?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   If we turn to page 3, can you confirm that when you signed this

22     document yesterday that you read this page?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   Can we turn to page 4.  Can you confirm, when page 4 is on the

25     screen, that you have read this and signed this document yesterday?

Page 22726

 1             Is that correct?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  And page 5, can you confirm that you read this in

 4     your own language and signed it yesterday?

 5        A.   Yes, I do confirm that.

 6        Q.   And page 6, I believe, in the Croatian version as well, do you

 7     confirm you read that and signed that?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   To the best of your knowledge and belief, is the information

10     contained within this second supplement, true and correct?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Now, Mr. Pasic, looking at the information within these four

13     documents, taking into account the corrections made in documents that

14     were produced after the Prosecution statement, if you were to be asked

15     these questions again in court today, would you give the answers as

16     corrected within these statements and provide the same information to the

17     Court?

18        A.   With the corrections, yes.

19             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, that concludes the 92 ter procedure, and I

20     ask that the four documents be made exhibits.

21             Your Honour, the Court will recollect that one of these had been

22     produced earlier in the proceedings and was marked for identification.

23     That's the document which was the original Prosecution statement, which

24     had been marked for identification as D1307.

25             I believe it was eventually vacated from the list, so --

Page 22727

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  We have to check that --

 2             MR. KAY:  Perhaps new numbers should be given to all four in

 3     sequence, might be a more satisfactory way of dealing with the matter.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Mr. Kay, Mr. Registrar will certainly, at this

 5     moment verify whether D1307 was vacated.

 6             I would have one question for you.  Do you consider the B/C/S or

 7     Croatian cover page of the 2001/2002 statement to be a full translation

 8     of the original English version?

 9             MR. KAY:  All can I say is, Your Honour, this will have come off

10     the document system.  I don't have a copy of that just in -- in front of

11     me.

12             The original statement is the English statement and the other

13     document has been translated later into Croatian.

14             MS. GUSTAFSON:  I might be able to assist, Your Honour.

15             The cover page actually extends onto the second page of the

16     document.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  But even including the second page, do you consider

18     this to be a full translation of the English original?

19             I hope you will be forgive me for being a bit suspicious.  When

20     looking at the layout, I see that there are some difference.

21             First of all, and that might not be of great importance, I do not

22     see in the B/C/S version any telephone numbers or addresses, which I find

23     in the English original.  But it seems to me - but please correct me when

24     I'm wrong - when I'm looking at the languages, I see three entries in the

25     original, the first one is languages spoken.  There it says, Croatian.

Page 22728

 1     And languages written, if different from spoken, where, in the original,

 2     says that that's Croatian, but in the translation it seems that no answer

 3     to that question is given at all.

 4             Now, it could well be that the whole of the document is well

 5     translated, but, apparently, someone, apart from being what I consider,

 6     at this moment, to be most likely sloppy by just leaving out a part of

 7     the information, some, perhaps by mistake, that is, the written language

 8     different from spoken, to be Croatian.  Of course, it's not different;

 9     it's the same.  But that's, I would say, the sloppiness of the one who

10     drafted the document.  But apparently for one reason or another the

11     interpreter also considered it appropriate to leave out addresses,

12     telephones numbers.  Of course, I do not know what elsewhere in this

13     document the translator considered to be appropriate to leave out or ...

14             I see that it's not what I expect, and I'm looking both at you,

15     Mr. Kay, and Ms. Gustafson, you intervened as well.  What I expect from a

16     translation, that it literally in every respects reflects what the

17     original says.  And that's apparently not the case with this cover page.

18     Unless would you disagree with me.  And therefore --

19             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, I totally agree, otherwise -- [Overlapping

20     speakers] ...

21             JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers]... Yes, and then of course --

22             MR. KAY:  -- we're not able to comprehend.

23             JUDE ORIE:  It could just that it's just the cover page, and it's

24     perhaps even very likely, but nevertheless, it seems that someone

25     considered that it was right to not do what I would expect that person to

Page 22729

 1     do, is that just to reflect in the other language what the original says.

 2             MR. KAY:  Yes.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  For this reason, I would like to draw the attention

 4     of the parties to it, that it should be carefully checked whether similar

 5     problems arise elsewhere in the document, which, of course, I cannot

 6     verify.  The only way for me to look this is cover pages that still -- I

 7     can decipher those, but not the text itself.

 8             MR. KAY:  The second supplemental information sheet in

 9     paragraph 16 deals with an issue of test that was in the English original

10     that is not in the Croatian translation.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

12             MR. KAY:  And that's a point -- made there.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm encouraging and more or less insisting on great

14     precision in this respect, because otherwise we end up in all kind of

15     problems, where the problems -- the real problems we have are big enough

16     not to be further -- we're not in need of any additional problems.

17             MR. KAY:  Yes.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, for the time being, Mr. Kay, and I

19     would like to have this verified.

20             MR. KAY:  Yes.

21             Your Honour, shall we deal with the exhibit numbering through the

22     Registry at this stage.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I take that the Registrar has by now verified

24     D1307.

25             Mr. Registrar.

Page 22730

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  Yes, Your Honours, D1307 was marked for

 2     identification on 13th February 2009 and subsequently vacated on

 3     3rd March 2009.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could you please assign numbers to the

 5     documents Mr. Kay has uploaded and put to the witness.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter number 2D00-722 becomes

 7     Exhibit D1706; 65 ter number 2D00-712 becomes Exhibit D1707; 65 ter

 8     number 2D00-763 becomes Exhibit D1708; and 65 ter number 2D00-764 becomes

 9     Exhibit D1709.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, and we are talking about the statement given to

11     the Prosecution, statement given to the Defence, first and second

12     additional information sheet.

13             MR. KAY:  Yes.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Gustafson.

15             MS. GUSTAFSON:  There's no objection, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Then D706, D707 -- no D1706, D1707, D1708, and D1709

17     are admitted into evidence.  And the Chamber expects the parties to

18     carefully review original and translation, specifically in relation to

19     the statement given to the Prosecution.

20             Please proceed, Mr. Kay.

21             MR. KAY:  Thank you, Your Honour.

22             Within the statements, there are certain documents referred to

23     that I would seek to make exhibits.

24             The first one concerns 2D00-713, which is in the exhibit D1706.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  One second, please.

Page 22731

 1             MR. KAY:  And page 3 --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Apart from numbers --

 3             MR. KAY:  Page 3, paragraph 3.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  But if you could just briefly say -- in your

 5     motion you -- you refer to a description of the document.  I'm -- just

 6     numbers, you're talking to a letter to Serbs, letter to Franjo Tudjman.

 7     Which one --

 8             MR. KAY:  This one is PP1.  Which Your Honour will see in

 9     paragraph 3 of page 3.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  And that is what?  I could, of course, check, but I

11     would rather talk --

12             MR. KAY:  I'm sorry, Your Honour, I was missing what Your Honour

13     was saying there.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, because in your --

15             MR. KEHOE:  In Mr. Pasic's letter to the Serbian citizens in Knin

16     before the start of the Geneva negotiations, and that would refer an OTP

17     statement which we felt should therefore be seen by the Court.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

19             MR. KAY:  May that be made an exhibit, please, Your Honour.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1710.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections, Ms. Gustafson, I take it.

23             Then D1710 is admitted into evidence.

24             Next one, letter to Franjo Tudjman, I take it, 5th of August.

25             MR. KAY:  Yes.  Page 3, paragraph 6, Your Honour.  It's marked

Page 22732

 1     PP2.  And it's 2D00-714, referred to in exhibit 1706.  We ask that that

 2     be made an exhibit, please, Your Honour.

 3             MS. GUSTAFSON:  No objection.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 5             Ms. Gustafson, whenever you say no objection, I take that

 6     implicitly Mr. Kay has asked for adding it to the 65 ter list and that no

 7     objection extends to that as well.

 8             MS. GUSTAFSON:  Correct, Your Honour.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Then, Mr. Registrar.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1711.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

12             Letter of protest concerning appearance of Split county chief of

13     6th of August, Mr. Kay, I see as next one in your motion.

14             MR. KAY:  2D00715, may we add this to the 65 ter list,

15     Your Honour, and my apologies for not following my script and requesting

16     permission previously.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Gustafson.

18             MS. GUSTAFSON:  No objection to that, or to it being made an

19     exhibit.  Thank you.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will become Exhibit D1712.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  D1712 is admitted into evidence.

23             Mr. Kay, the last one in your motion are the minutes I earlier

24     referred to, and I would really like to avoid similar events that

25     happened yesterday.

Page 22733

 1             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, what this is, is an extra part of the

 2     document that's -- that's not reflected in the exhibit D1634 which was

 3     connected to it.  And it's an annex to it, and that is the part that we

 4     were essentially adding to it, but we had an entire document.  We haven't

 5     taken it apart, so what the Court will have is a conjoined document with

 6     both parts together.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 8             MR. KAY:  In those circumstances, should we make it an exhibit, I

 9     think it might be preferable to have the full document.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  At least, and that's the difference with

11     yesterday, we know what we are doing, and that's -- Mr. Registrar, the

12     number would be?

13             MR. KAY:  We're talking about document here 2D00-716.

14             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will become Exhibit D1713.

15             MS. GUSTAFSON:  No objection.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  D1713 is admitted into evidence.

17             MR. KAY:  Thank you, Your Honour.  For references purposes,

18     that's page 4, paragraph 14 that is referred to.

19             The next document, Your Honour ...

20             Your Honour, those are the documents that we need to tender and

21     make exhibits, and I will now give a short summary of the nature of -- of

22     Mr. Pasic's evidence, with the court's leave.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Please do so.

24             MR. KAY:  Mr. Pasic was the government commissioner, also called

25     the trustee, for Knin.  He took -- took on that position from 1992 and

Page 22734

 1     was appointed on the 6th of January of that year.

 2             He was the government's representative dealing with issues prior

 3     to the liberation of the occupied territories.  And upon the liberation

 4     of Knin and the occupied territories, he went to Knin to take on his

 5     civil duties.  He arrived in Knin and soon connected with General Cermak,

 6     and the two of them set about tasks for the normalization of life in

 7     Knin.  His evidence refers to the fact that General Cermak helped him do

 8     his work and, as he understood it, that was General Cermak's job in Knin,

 9     which was to help the civilian authorities to organise the return of

10     people to Knin and create normal conditions of life in Knin.

11             His evidence refers to the nature of the work they undertook,

12     dealing with the public services, establishing a bus line, dealing with

13     essential matters that were needed to both feed and look after the people

14     who had come to the area, as well as who were working in the area.  And,

15     in those circumstances, him and Mr. Cermak worked together, and

16     Mr. Cermak's position as the garrison commander, helped Mr. Pasic in the

17     performance of his tasks.

18             Your Honour, that is a brief summary of the nature of the

19     witness's evidence, and in view of the fact that he has made his

20     statements, I have no further questions to ask of him.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Kay.

22             MR. KAY:

23        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Pasic.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  If you would just give me one second.

25                           [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]

Page 22735

 1             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, I'm -- pointed out to me that there was

 2     one other document on the OTP statement.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I was just asking about the fifth document

 4     which is 65 ter 3481, which was mentioned in the Appendix B to your

 5     motion which was already on the 65 ter list, but what you indicated that

 6     would you tender that document as well.  And that was a letter by

 7     Mr. Pasic to the police in Zadar and Knin, concerning the theft of

 8     grapes.

 9             MR. KAY:  Yes.  It's not a -- it's a document from the

10     Prosecution 65 ter list.  That's --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but it was already on their list.

12             MR. KAY:  Yes. [Overlapping speakers]... Your Honour, that is

13     found at page 5, paragraph 7, of his OTP statement, and I ask that that

14     be made an exhibit.

15             MS. GUSTAFSON:  No objection.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will become Exhibit D1714.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  D1714 is admitted into evidence.

19             I take it, Mr. Kay, that it doesn't change your summary in any

20     way.

21             Now we are at a point of having to decide on the sequence of

22     cross-examination.

23                           [Trial Chamber confers]

24             JUDGE ORIE:  The Chamber would like to take a minute to consider

25     the request by the Gotovina Defence.  Now, that would be Prosecution

Page 22736

 1     first - that's at least your suggestion - but I haven't heard about any

 2     reasons for the Markac Defence.

 3             First of all, is there any need to cross-examine the witness?

 4             MR. MIKULICIC:  Your Honour, Markac Defence would have no

 5     questions on that witness.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So that problem doesn't arise.

 7             The Chamber will take a minute to consider the matter, how to

 8     proceed, and the parties are expected to remain stand by.

 9                            --- Break taken at 9.56 a.m.

10                           [The witness stands down]

11                           --- On resuming at 10.04 a.m.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  The Chamber has considered your request,

13     Mr. Misetic, to change the usual order of cross-examination.  Your

14     request is denied.

15             At the same time, the Chamber adds to this, that the Chamber will

16     be liberal - I wouldn't use the word generous - but if you would raise

17     matters in re-cross, which were left out from your initial

18     cross-examination, because at this moment have you no reasons, although

19     you have already warned the Chamber that they might be very relevant and

20     might take considerable time in re-cross if Ms. Gustafson deals with

21     those matters and if she challenges portions of the original statement.

22             MR. MISETIC:  Very well.  Thank you, Mr. President.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Then could the witness be brought into the

24     courtroom.

25                           [The witness takes the stand]

Page 22737

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Pasic, we bothered you with all kind of

 2     procedural technicalities for quite a while.  We hope that we can now

 3     further focus on your testimony.

 4             You'll now be cross-examined by Mr. Misetic.  Mr. Misetic is

 5     counsel for Mr. Gotovina.

 6             Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

 7             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 8                           Cross-examination by Mr. Misetic:

 9        Q.   Good morning, Mr. Pasic.

10        A.   Good morning.

11        Q.   I'd like to ask you just as a preliminary matter just a few

12     questions on some of the changes made to your 2002 statement.

13             Could you explain to the Court why it is that you only made these

14     changes upon your arrival to The Hague?

15        A.   For a long time, I didn't read the statement that I had given to

16     the OTP closely, and when I felt that the time of my travel to The Hague

17     was moving close, once I was informed of the date when I should appear

18     here, I understood the seriousness of the situation, and I analysed every

19     paragraph thoroughly.  It was then that I noticed that some things that I

20     had said then were not correct, and that I couldn't give the solemn

21     declaration of speaking the truth and the whole truth and nothing but the

22     truth if I stand by those parts of my statement.

23        Q.   Well, let me show you a couple of documents first and then I

24     would like to get back and ask you a few questions on this topic.  But --

25     let me see.

Page 22738

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Just one moment, Mr. President.

 2             If I could have 65 ter 1D2983 on the screen, please.

 3        Q.   Mr. Pasic, while this is coming up, do you believe that there was

 4     an official policy of the Croatian government to allow criminal activity,

 5     including burning, looting, and murder to take place in the territory of

 6     former Sector South after Operation Storm?

 7        A.   No.

 8        Q.   I'd like to turn your attention to some comments attributed to

 9     you in 1996, and this is from a news organisation known as AIM, which I

10     believe, Mr. President, is an NGO news letter.

11             The article is titled:  Deserted roads of Knin, it's dated the

12     5th of April, 1996.  And there are some quotes from you.  It talks about

13     the fact that you had been replaced as the commissioner for the town of

14     Knin and then appointed to the post of commissioner of the newly

15     established municipalities of Kistanje, Ervenik, Orlic, and Civljane, and

16     that's in the second paragraph.

17             And then it says -- the next paragraph says:

18             "To a question about recent quarrels with the local leaders of

19     the Croat Democratic Community HDZ who had 'asked for his head' for

20     months, Mr. Pasic answers that tensions were directed against him 'not as

21     a man who just wishes to help, but as a man who was not a member of the

22     rule party and a man of Serb nationality.'"

23             And then this is the quote I want to ask you the question about:

24             "When the last opportunity was given to those people in

25     negotiations in Geneva, I was the one who addressed them and asked them

Page 22739

 1     to stay in their state, to finally see how tragic everything is that

 2     their self-proclaimed leaders brought them to, which resulted in the

 3     exodus they were pushed into.  I wished those people to remain, and an I

 4     now [sic] advocate that these people be given the right to a normal life.

 5     Individual excesses do not reflect the stance of the official policy,

 6     Mr. Pasic ends his statement."

 7             Can you explain to the Court what you meant when you said that

 8     "individual excesses do not reflect the stance of the official policy"?

 9        A.   Irrespective of the security situation in the town of Knin, it

10     was always possible for individual incidents to happen.  The -- it

11     depends on people who are prone to cause incidents.  Some were probably

12     based on ethnic rivalry or hatred, but those were individual incidents.

13     I stand by my statement that this wasn't encouraged from the

14     Croatian Government or authorities or any official institutions.

15        Q.   In that same paragraph I want to ask you to clarify.  You said --

16     you asked them to stay in their state to finally see how tragic

17     everything is that their self-proclaimed leaders brought them to, which

18     resulted in the exodus they were pushed into.

19             Can you clarify what you meant when you said that they were

20     pushed into an exodus.  Who pushed them into an exodus?

21        A.   On that day, that was the 17th or 18th of August, when the first

22     roadblocks were put up, when the Croatian independence was proclaimed

23     among some -- in some quarters in the Serbian community, there was this

24     negative attitude toward the Croatian state and the Croatian people.

25        Q.   Just so we clarify, you say 17 of August, you're referring to

Page 22740

 1     1990; correct?

 2        A.   That's correct.

 3        Q.   Okay.  You can continue your answer, please.

 4        A.   After that, unfortunately, in the territories mostly populated by

 5     Serbs, the so-called Republic of Serbian Krajina was created which

 6     disgruntled the Croats.  And that is why these negative attitudes or

 7     tensions were more pronounced than they should have been.

 8             I was appointed commissioner of the Croatian government.  I must

 9     correct Mr. Kay, not on the 6th of January but on the 4th of January.

10     And at that time I wasn't being discriminated against.  I was -- I was a

11     citizen of Croatia of Serb ethnicity.  I was a member of the SDP party

12     then, and I even said in a broadcast that I was a atheist which at the

13     time was not a popular thing to say.

14             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter didn't catch the last sentence

15     the witness said.  Could he please repeat.

16             MR. MISETIC:

17        Q.   Could you repeat the last sentence; the interpreter didn't hear

18     what you said.

19        A.   As a citizen of Croatia of Serbian ethnicity, I was a member of

20     the SDP and a atheist.  Among the candidates for the post of

21     commissioner, I was appointed.  So there was no negative discrimination

22     toward me as a Serb.

23        Q.   Okay.  I -- I stopped you because I want go back to the specific

24     question, if can you recall.

25             When you said that the Serbs had been pushed into an exodus, do

Page 22741

 1     you recall who or what pushed them into an exodus?

 2        A.   The Serbs had, for a long time, be linked for the then Yugoslavia

 3     and the Yugoslav People's Army, and they couldn't accept the existence of

 4     an independent state of Croatia.  I personally consider that their

 5     leaders who were there already pushed them into that exodus.

 6        Q.   Okay.  Continuing on this exhibit, two paragraphs beneath that,

 7     you said -- you were asked:

 8             "To a question whether the Serbs are returning and how many of

 9     them have actually returned, Petar Pasic says that 'in the territory of

10     the town of Knin 420 citizens of Serb nationality have remained and more

11     than 300 have already returned.  I am not at all in favour of the return

12     of those who have committed crimes, nor those who have participated in

13     demolition of democratic Croatia.  By their arrival and mere appearance,

14     they would create uneasiness among the Croats who have returned and they

15     would disturb the good relations between the Croats and the Serbs.'"

16             And if we go into the next paragraph:

17             "This was, after all, the epicentre of the rebellion against the

18     Croat state, and when the Serbs do return here, it is necessary to take

19     great care who should be allowed to come, and in what way, says

20     Mr. Pasic.  What is being said now, what Babic and Mikelic have been

21     doing lately, I think it is pure deception of those people again, because

22     they have done it all the time, all four years.  I think they probably

23     expect some kind of humanitarian aid to use those people, or use it only

24     for themselves, as they have done here."

25             Now a few questions on this -- these passages.

Page 22742

 1             First, do you recall when you said, "... what Babic and Mikelic

 2     have been doing lately," what you were referring to?

 3        A.   I don't know.  Could you please repeat the question.

 4        Q.   Well, in this quote you say:

 5             "What is being said now, what Babic and Mikelic have been doing

 6     lately, I think it is pure deception of those people again."

 7             And you said this in April of 1996.  Do you recall what it is

 8     that Babic and Mikelic were doing lately?

 9        A.   In accordance with the information I have, there was a talk about

10     the establishment of some provisional authorities of the Republic of

11     Serbian Krajina in the territory of the Republic of Serbia.

12        Q.   Okay.  Now, you reference in this passage that 300 Serbs had

13     already returned.  Do you remember where they had returned from?

14        A.   When I saw the documents they had upon them when they returned, I

15     saw that most of their personal ID, including passports, were issued in

16     Vukovar and Beli Manastir.  And as those towns are close to Serbia, I

17     supposed that they returned from the Republic of Serbia.

18        Q.   Okay.  As the commissioner in the town of Knin, can you tell us

19     whether there were obstacles put in the place of these 300 people to come

20     back?

21        A.   No.

22        Q.   Did you have any involvement in caring for or housing these

23     people, once they had returned from Serbia or Eastern Slavonia?

24        A.   We assisted in the cooperation with the Social Welfare Centre at

25     Knin.  We provided initially some financial assistance and, later on, we

Page 22743

 1     gave them also some clothes and shoes.

 2        Q.   As the commissioner in Knin, after Operation Storm and through

 3     March of 1996, did you feel that there were obstacles being put in the

 4     place -- in place to prevent people from coming back?

 5        A.   No.  Not as far as I know.  There weren't any obstacles for those

 6     who were willing to return, who had expressed the wish to return, to

 7     return.

 8        Q.   Explain to us what you meant when you said "this was, after all,

 9     the epicentre of the rebellion against the Croat state.  And when the

10     Serbs do return here, it is necessary to take great care who should be

11     allowed to come and in what way."

12        A.   Since the town of Knin had been settled by ethnic Croats from

13     Banja Luka who had been expelled from there and also Croats from the

14     surroundings of Knin, I considered that it wouldn't contribute to

15     building up good relations as they had existed before, to include the

16     ring leaders of the rebellion or those who had perpetrated crimes into

17     the process of return.

18        Q.   Okay.

19             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I ask that this exhibit be marked

20     and I tender it into evidence.

21             MS. GUSTAFSON:  No objection.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

23             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1715.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  D1715 is admitted into evidence.

25             Please proceed.

Page 22744

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 2        Q.   Mr. Pasic, the reference to Babic and Mikelic in April of 1996, I

 3     asked you what you recalled of that, in terms of why you reference them.

 4     But let me now show you Exhibit D1610, and that will come up on your

 5     screen.

 6             And this is an article that appeared in the same news -- news

 7     organisation, one month prior to the interview that you gave.  So this is

 8     7th of March, 1996, and the article is titled:  Mr. Mikelic leading the

 9     way.  Mr. Mikelic, as you know, was one of the leaders of the Krajina

10     Serbs.

11             MR. MISETIC:  If we could turn to page 2 in the English and

12     page 2 in the B/C/S, please.  I'm looking at the last two paragraphs on

13     both pages.

14        Q.   It says:

15             "Dr. Milan Babic who claims that he had not met Borislav Mikelic

16     since the exodus of the Serbs from the Krajina and that he, therefore,

17     knew nothing about the intentions of the committee, but what he was told

18     by third parties, says as follows:

19             "I am not in favour of individual solutions of the problem of

20     return, because it would mean Croatisation of the Serb returnees, which

21     would jeopardize collective rights of the refugees and blur the problem

22     of the Serb people in exile.  I am in favour of collective return,

23     collective security, and collective rights of the Serbs which implies

24     resolution of their political status.  Because the Serbs from Krajina -

25     Dr. Babic continues - have the political right to the territory of

Page 22745

 1     Krajina.  If the committee of Borislav Mikelic approaches the problem of

 2     resolving the return of Serb refugees in this way, there will be no

 3     conflicts between us - Dr. Babic says - adding that the government of the

 4     Krajina operates in exile and that a special commission was established

 5     within it to deal with the issues of the status and rights of the

 6     refugees, cooperation with various organisations and institutions, so why

 7     not Mikelic too."

 8             Do you recall whether your comments a month later were directed

 9     at what Mr. Babic and Mr. Mikelic were -- I should say, Mr. Babic was

10     talking about in terms of collective return as opposed to individual

11     return of refugees?

12        A.   No, this is the first time I have seen this.

13        Q.   Well, let me ask you, Mr. Pasic, we saw in the exhibit that was

14     just admitted where you said that individual excesses do not reflect the

15     stance of the official policy.  And you've said the same thing

16     essentially in the proofing statement that you signed yesterday, that you

17     did not believe that it was government policy to allow for criminal

18     activity to take place.

19             Your 2002 statement, however, has a passage where - and let me

20     find it - this is page 8 in the English version.

21             MR. MISETIC:  This is Exhibit D1706, page 8.  I believe it's

22     page ...

23             Yes, this is the second-to-last paragraph on the page in English.

24     And let me ...

25                           [Defence counsel confer]

Page 22746

 1             MS. GUSTAFSON:  I think it's page 14 of B/C/S, if that's what

 2     Mr. Misetic --

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, thank you, counsel.

 4             It's page 14, the second paragraph.

 5        Q.   Now, in your 2002 statement, it's recorded as you having said:

 6     "I believe that the looting and destruction that took place was planned

 7     from above.  It was anarchy in Knin, only the president could have

 8     stopped it."

 9             My question to you is: In 1996 you had said that -- and I

10     understand that, obviously, sir, you that say that that is not accurate

11     and you don't believe that, and that's what you said in your proofing

12     statement.

13             My question to you is: In 1996, you had said publicly you didn't

14     believe it was official policy to condone such activity.  You said the

15     same thing now in 2009.  Can you tell us how it is that that conclusion

16     came up in 2002?

17        A.   I think -- well, I don't think I said anything like that.

18        Q.   Okay.

19             MR. MISETIC:  I'm sorry, Mr. President.  I did not have my eye on

20     the clock, and this might be a good time for a break.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, it is time for a break.

22             We will have a break, and we resume at 11.00.

23                           --- Recess taken at 10.34 a.m.

24                           --- On resuming at 11.08 a.m.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, please proceed.

Page 22747

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 2        Q.   Mr. Pasic, I'd like to continue by asking you some questions

 3     about some documents that have been already admitted into evidence.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, if we could have Exhibit D56 on the

 5     screen, please.

 6        Q.   Mr. Pasic, do you recall having meetings with a gentleman named

 7     Husein Al-Alfi, in the period after Operation Storm?

 8        A.   [In English] Yes.

 9        Q.   This is a document which purports to record the results of

10     Mr. Al-Alfi's meeting with you and Mr. Cermak on the 18th of August,

11     1995.  And you'll see that -- in the first paragraph, Mr. Al-Alfi reports

12     that:  "This morning I had a meeting with ... Petar Pasic, the mayor of

13     Knin."  He also records who else was present at the meeting.

14             If you look on your screen, I think you might be able to see the

15     document.

16             Do you recall this meeting where Mr. Djakovic and Mr. Vidovic

17     were also present?

18        A.   [Interpretation] Yes.

19        Q.   Okay.  If we turn to page 2, which is subparagraph (f).

20             Mr. Al-Alfi says:

21             "I brought to the attention of the mayor, the reports about

22     continuing burning of villages and looting until this time.  The mayor

23     expressed his understanding of this problem and informed me that the

24     military and civilian authorities are having regular meetings to put an

25     end to such acts.  He further regarded such a behaviour as a crime for

Page 22748

 1     which the perpetrators should be prosecuted."

 2             My question, Mr. Pasic, is:  Can you explain to the Court what

 3     meetings you were referring to when you said that regular meetings were

 4     taking place between the military and civilian authorities?

 5             MS. GUSTAFSON:  Sorry, I'm just not sure that that question

 6     reflects what's in the memo which talks about civilian and military

 7     authorities are having regular meetings, not necessarily between

 8     themselves, and I just think the question might be a bit confusing.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, I think Ms. Gustafson is right, that

10     the text does not give that detail, but we perhaps could inquire with the

11     witness what he meant here.

12             MR. MISETIC:  I disagree with that interpretation --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  But let's ask him.  Then we don't have to rely

14     anymore on our interpretation but what the witness can tell us.

15             MR. MISETIC:

16        Q.   Mr. Pasic, it says that military and civilian authorities are

17     having regular meetings to put an end to such acts.

18             What meetings are you referring to, or were you referring to,

19     when you had this discussion with Mr. Al-Alfi?

20        A.   I was referring to the meetings between General Cermak and the

21     commissioners of the Government of Croatia, with the other participants,

22     and they were the utilities company, the centre for social welfare, the

23     Croatian Red Cross, and my associates.

24        Q.   Okay.  And were you present at such meetings?  And I mean

25     specifically at meetings held to "put an end to such acts"?

Page 22749

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   Can you tell us what steps you know of that were taken to "put to

 3     end to such acts," or were being discussed to put an end to such acts?

 4        A.   We asked that in places where -- in places liberated after

 5     Operation Storm that, at the check-points there, control be stepped up,

 6     entrance and exits, and the in-flow of people coming into Knin or leaving

 7     Knin.  So basically control.

 8        Q.   This meeting was on the 18th of August, and I'd like to turn your

 9     attention to Exhibit P988.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Before doing so, Mr. Misetic, could I seek one

11     clarification.

12             You were asked about meetings the military and civilian

13     authorities were engaged in.  When asked with which authorities you

14     referred to, you said -- which meetings you were referring to, you said

15     Mr. Cermak meeting with, et cetera, et cetera.  When talking about

16     military authority, were you exclusively pointing at Mr. Cermak, or were

17     there any other military authorities involved in talks on these matters;

18     that is, to end such acts?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.  The other officers or persons

20     in authority did not attend those meetings.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

22             Please proceed.

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

24             Again, Mr. President, it's P988, and I'm interested in page 7 of

25     the English.  But if we could first show the cover page so the witness is

Page 22750

 1     aware of what this is.

 2        Q.   This is a report, Mr. Pasic, of the International Helsinki

 3     Federation for Human Rights about a fact-finding mission it conducted

 4     between 17th and 19th of August, 1995.

 5             MR. MISETIC:  And if we go to page 7 of this report.  This is

 6     paragraph 5.1.  I'm sorry, the next page, please.  There we go.

 7        Q.   Now, the Helsinki Federation met with you as well on the same

 8     date as your meeting with Mr. Al-Alfi, on the 18th of August, 1995.  And

 9     there the Helsinki Federation records the results of your conversation

10     with the Helsinki Federation as follows:

11             "We asked Pasic questions concerning the burnings and lootings.

12     He replied with evasive and contradictory statements.  He said that most

13     of the destruction taking place is being carried out by civilians taking

14     revenge.  However, he did not elaborate or explain how he had come to

15     that conclusion.  We asked what measures he was taking to stop these

16     civilians taking revenge, and he answered, I can do nothing, should we

17     shoot them or what?  Pasic also claimed" --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

19             MR. MISETIC:  "Pasic also claimed that the 4th and 7th

20     professional HV Brigades were not involved in any burning or looting but

21     that individuals from the 6th Reserve Brigade were responsible."

22             The next paragraph says:

23             "When we asked Pasic about the man beaten at his apartment by

24     HV soldiers and the elderly woman robbed by HV soldiers, he replied, I

25     cannot guarantee anybody's safety."

Page 22751

 1             And then the next statements attributed to you are:

 2             "I do not apologise for what has happened here.

 3             "I could not prevent this from happening.

 4             "The position of the Croatian Government is that these people

 5     should say.

 6             "They need Croatian citizenship to come back."

 7             Now, first, let me ask you as a preliminary matter, do you recall

 8     meeting the Helsinki Federation on the 18th of August, 1995.

 9        A.   I don't remember that there were those representatives.  I knew

10     -- I know that one of the representatives wrote a column in Drago Pilsel.

11        Q.   Do you recall Petar Mrkalj being present at the meeting?

12        A.   The name doesn't ring a bell.  It -- perhaps.

13        Q.   Would it refresh your recollection if I told you that Mr. Mrkalj

14     was the president of the Croatian Helsinki Committee at the time?

15        A.   Perhaps.

16        Q.   Do you recall any of the conversation or having a conversation

17     with the Helsinki Federation?

18        A.   I don't think so, no.

19        Q.   Well, they record you as giving evasive and contradictory

20     statements.  Do you wish to respond as to whether you were being evasive

21     and contradictory at the time?

22             MS. GUSTAFSON:  Your Honour, the witness has said he doesn't

23     remember having this conversation.  I'm not sure there is a basis for

24     this question.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

Page 22752

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, this is cross-examination.  I'm

 2     entitled --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But if I say, I have no recollection of a

 4     meeting with Mr. A or B, then to ask where it took place, et cetera, of

 5     course, doesn't make much sense.  It is about reporting.  Of course, we

 6     could ask the witness whether he remembers that he ever, in any

 7     conversation, has been evasive, but if he has no specific recollection on

 8     this conversation, it's -- I do not see how he would have any knowledge

 9     which would allow him to -- to --

10             MR. MISETIC:  Well, Mr. President --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, to comment perhaps in a more general way

12     that's appropriate --

13             MR. MISETIC: [Overlapping speakers] ...  I will ask him more

14     generally then, but I'm going to put it to him:

15        Q.   Mr. Pasic, do you recall having any reason at the time to be

16     evasive terms of what you were representing to the public as to what was

17     taking place in Sector South at the time?

18        A.   No, there was no reason.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Just to come back for one second to the exchange,

20     apparently Ms. Gustafson understood at the time, being during the

21     meeting; whereas, you may have referred to at the time as a period.  And

22     that perhaps explains the exchange the views on this matter.

23             Please proceed.

24             MR. MISETIC:

25        Q.   Let me ask you, although you don't recall the specifics of this

Page 22753

 1     meeting, was it your view on or around the 18th of August, or in that

 2     time-period, that the 4th and 7th professional HV Brigades were not

 3     involved in any burning or looting?

 4        A.   Yes, I'm certain of that, because I toured the settlements around

 5     Knin, and it was said that this was not done by the members of the 4th

 6     and 7th Guards Brigade.

 7        Q.   Well, did they tell that you it was the 6th Reserve Brigade, the

 8     6th Home Guard Brigade?

 9        A.   As for the 6th Reserve or Home Guard Brigade, I hadn't heard of

10     it.  As far as I was concerned, there were only the 4th and the 7th

11     Brigades.  And there were a number of regiments, Home Guard Regiments,

12     which took part in this operation, but I've never heard of this

13     6th Reserve Brigade.

14        Q.   Okay.  Let me show you, Mr. Pasic, Exhibit P2319.  This is an

15     interview purportedly conducted with Petar Mrkalj and apparently

16     involving Drago Pilsel in terms of how the interview was conducted.

17             MR. MISETIC:  If we could go to page 3 in the English.  This is

18     page 1 in the Croatian, and it's the middle column, the third column.

19     Yes.

20        Q.   There's a question posed to Mr. Mrkalj who claims to have been

21     with the Helsinki Federation fact-finding mission.  He says -- he asked:

22     What information did you obtain from the representatives of the Croatian

23     authorities?

24             Do you see that on the page, Mr. Pasic?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 22754

 1        Q.   Okay.  It says:

 2             "Mr. Petar Pasic told us that these were isolated cases and that

 3     he did not have detailed information.  He also said that the houses were

 4     torched under somewhat emotional pressure.  And finally he said that the

 5     Serb houses were not torched by the professional but Home Guard units of

 6     the Croatian Army.  The head of the defence office in Knin told us the

 7     same thing, saying that there were four or five suspects and that there

 8     was no hard evidence for their arrest or for initiating any proceedings

 9     against them."

10             Now, I know you don't recall the specifics of this meeting,

11     Mr. Pasic, but if in fact you had had information that these houses --

12     first let me ask you this question.

13             Was it your view at the time that these burnings were isolated

14     cases, or was it a widespread phenomenon?

15        A.   They were isolated cases.

16        Q.   And why do you say they were isolated cases?

17        A.   Because, at the same time, nothing else was happening in a

18     village.  Well, there would be one house burning, and then perhaps in

19     another settlement, there would be one or two houses burning.

20        Q.   Okay.  You were the government's commissioner for Kistanje as

21     well; is that correct?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   The Chamber has had -- heard evidence of burnings that took place

24     in Kistanje, speaking now up to the date of the 18th August, which is

25     when you had these meetings with the Helsinki Federation.

Page 22755

 1             Were you aware as the government's commissioner that there had

 2     been burnings in Kistanje, up to that point?

 3        A.   Up to that point, I don't think there was any large-scale burning

 4     in Kistanje.

 5        Q.   When did large-scale burning in Kistanje take place?

 6        A.   I would have to say something before that, with your permission,

 7     and to explain something.

 8             Most of the people from Kistanje worked in the Sibenik area, and

 9     they worked at the metal factory there, for the aluminum industry.  It

10     was the TLM, Sibenska, Slobodna Plovidba, and the port of Sibenik.

11     Unfortunately, immediately after the first barricades that were set up,

12     they were set up between Sibenik and Kistanje at a place called Plancnik

13     [phoen].  And it was at those barricades that those same people were seen

14     who otherwise worked in the locations I mentioned earlier on, in the

15     various factories.  And when I said -- well, there's a term that I like

16     to use, mental revenge, or retaliation and then what probably happened

17     was, that the people that they worked with, when they were forced out of

18     their homes and expelled, and when five or six years later they went back

19     to their homes and found that their houses no longer existed but that

20     trees were growing, fig trees or whatever, out of their yards and houses,

21     they couldn't resist burning.

22        Q.   I appreciate the answer, Mr. Pasic, but my question, though, is

23     you have said that up until the 18th, there wasn't large-scale burning in

24     Kistanje.  And my question is:  When did the large-scale in Kistanje

25     start, from your knowledge?

Page 22756

 1        A.   If there wasn't any until the 18th, probably it was later, but I

 2     cannot tell you when it took place or how long it lasted.

 3        Q.   Well, Mr. Pasic, I'm going to suggest to that you if you're the

 4     government commissioner in Kistanje for that area, you probably have a

 5     general understanding of when a significant number of houses was burned

 6     down in an area where you are the government commissioner.  And I will

 7     put to you that the Chamber has received evidence from a report of the

 8     United Nations Military Observers that roughly 150, approximately, houses

 9     out of approximately 500 houses in the Kistanje municipality were burned,

10     and my question to you is:  Can you tell the Chamber when the majority of

11     that -- those 150 houses were burned?  I know you said after the 18th,

12     but do you have any more specific information?

13        A.   Let me first tell that I, indeed, was the commissioner for

14     Kistanje, but I must also say that I was a government commissioner for

15     four more municipalities, namely, Civljane, Biskupija, Ervenik --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Can you please focus your answer on the question

17     that was put to you.  Mr. Misetic was not asking whether you had other

18     functions.  Mr. Misetic asked you when, what was reported as large-scale

19     burning, when, according to your knowledge, that took place.  If you know

20     tell us; if you don't know, tell us as well.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  One of your earlier answers was that you don't think

23     that there was any large-scale burning in Kistanje before the 18th.  What

24     made you think that there wasn't any large-scale burning in Kistanje

25     before the 18th of August?

Page 22757

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because those were the reports that

 2     were received from the people.  Down there at Kistanje, there was a

 3     police station, and they received reports about the situation on the

 4     ground.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  And -- well, apart from a police station being

 6     there, receiving reports from the ground, I think that people manning a

 7     police station would see by themselves whether there was any large-scale

 8     burning and that they would not be dependant on others reporting to them.

 9             Would you agree with that?

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I would.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

12             Now, later on, you said, If there wasn't any until the 18th, and

13     you were referring to large-scale burning, you said, Probably it was

14     later.

15             Now, first of all, do you acknowledge that there was large-scale

16     burning in Kistanje at any time in August/September 1995?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  When did you receive reports about it, or when did

19     you observe yourself this to happen?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When I was going to Sibenik,

21     because I lived there, and passed -- in passing through Kistanje, I saw

22     large-scale burning along the main road.  It may have been around the

23     20th or the 25th of August of -- because it was then that I used to take

24     that route.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  And earlier you did not take that route?

Page 22758

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.  I used to go through Drnis and

 2     Kosovo when I went to Sibenik.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And when you say on the 20th and 25th, did you

 4     see large-scale burning, houses still in flames, or did you see the

 5     result of large-scale burning?  That is, houses burned?

 6             What did you see, 20 or -- around the 20th or 25th of August?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I only saw the results.  I didn't

 8     see flames or smoke.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Well, if it would have been around the 20th,

10     would you then agree with me that it could well have been that the

11     large-scale burning took place more than two days before that date; that

12     is, before the 18th?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wouldn't say so.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Why not?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because there wasn't any.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  I do understand from your testimony that you saw the

17     results of large-scale burning on either the 20th -- around the 20th, or

18     the 25th.

19             Now -- and you also told us that what you saw is just the result,

20     not the burning itself or houses in flames.  Now, how could you conclude

21     that there was no large-scale burning at the 18th or before the 18th, on

22     the basis of this information?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I said that I

24     travelled on several occasions from Knin through Kistanje to Sibenik, but

25     I cannot say exactly whether it was on the 25th, whether it was in

Page 22759

 1     August, or at all, or in September, but I knew that when I travelled

 2     along that road, there was no large-scale burning.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Did you -- did you ever receive reports about

 4     large-scale burning in Kistanje?  Do you have any recollection of

 5     receiving reports about it?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  So you didn't see it, apart from that you saw the

 8     results which may have been either in August or in September; and you

 9     didn't ever receive any reports about that.  That's your testimony.

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

12             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

13        Q.   Mr. Pasic, while we're generally on this topic, you are aware,

14     and forgive me if it's in your statement and I have not seen it, that the

15     chief of the police of Kotar-Knin Cedo Romanic was, himself, an ethnic

16     Serb.

17        A.   There are three -- three high officials in the town of Knin after

18     Storm who were ethnic Serbs.  There was me, there was Cedo Romanic as the

19     chief of police, and --

20             THE INTERPRETER:  A third person, whose name the interpreter

21     didn't get.

22        A.   I knew that they were Serbs.

23             MR. MISETIC:

24        Q.   Okay, the third person, the interpreter didn't get the name, but

25     I think I heard you say Mr. Mihic?

Page 22760

 1        A.   Milos Mihic, the chief of police at the Knin police station.

 2        Q.   And obviously from your statements you had a good working

 3     relationship, according to you, with General Cermak as well.

 4             And my question to you is: If you can tell the Chamber or tell me

 5     if you had in fact seen crime, would there have been a reason for you not

 6     no report that crime to Mr. Romanic, to Mr. Mihic, if it involved

 7     civilian matters, or --

 8        A.   No, there couldn't have been reason for me not to report that.

 9        Q.   Did -- again, let me ask you directly.  You personally, as an

10     ethnic Serb in the area, did you feel constrained from openly discussing

11     criminal activity?

12        A.   No.

13        Q.   Okay.  Let me call up just so you -- so you have some familiarity

14     with the document.  As it document that's been admitted into evidence

15     this morning, this is Exhibit D1714.  And this relates to the issue of

16     stolen grapes and corn.  And this is page -- you discuss this at page 7

17     of your 2002 interview, which is -- it's D1706.

18             And at page 7 -- I'm sorry.  Actually, I don't know if it's at

19     page 7.  Page 5; I apologise.

20             You say that this letter is a letter you sent to the police

21     administration in Zadar and the police station in Knin, complaining that

22     people were stealing grapes and corn, and nobody was stopping them.

23     These people I listed by name in the letter and they wore -- and they

24     were in both civilian and military clothing.  As far as I know, nothing

25     was done about it, because the stealing continued."

Page 22761

 1             MR. MISETIC:  And if we could turn the page to see the names as

 2     well.

 3        Q.   Now, this document is dated the 25th of October, 1995.  And I

 4     wish to draw your attention to some observations of crime that appear in

 5     your 2002 statement.  For example, at page 7 of your statement in

 6     English, you talk about going with Mr. Cermak's deputy, Marko Gojevic, to

 7     a village called Oton Bender.  And you saw two Croatian soldiers with a

 8     tractor and trailer taking cattle away.  Gojevic asked the soldiers why

 9     they were taking the cattle, and they replied that they were recovering

10     what they had lost.

11             Also on page 7 you talk about an incident of seeing Croatian

12     soldiers collecting horses and putting them on trucks and taking them

13     away.

14             And then, I believe, there was the incident of -- which you have

15     corrected in your supplemental information sheet, about travelling from

16     Sibenik to Knin and always stopped in Drnis at a check-point where you

17     see what you have now corrected as civilians driving trucks full of

18     goods.

19             My question is:  With respect do each of these incidents, did you

20     file a report with the Knin police station or the police administration

21     in Zadar for -- where you observed goods being stolen, items being

22     looted, cattle and horses being taken, et cetera, did you file similar

23     reports for those observations as you did for -- with specific names of

24     people stealing grapes and corn, which you filed on the 25th of October?

25        A.   This report about the theft of grapes and corn wasn't drafted by

Page 22762

 1     me.  There was an office of the ministry of agriculture and forestry in

 2     Knin with two staff.  They submitted a list of those who were caught

 3     stealing grapes and corn, and I simply forwarded their letter to the

 4     police administration in Zadar and the police station at Knin.

 5        Q.   Well, your testimony -- the witness statement indicates that some

 6     of these people on this list are persons either in the Croatian military

 7     or wearing military uniforms.  I presume, and you correct me if I'm

 8     wrong, that the majority of these people, if not all of them, are ethnic

 9     Croats.

10             Am I correct?

11        A.   Well, don't hold this against me, but I really couldn't tell,

12     whether they were ethnic Serbs or ethnic Croats by the way they were

13     dressed.

14             And if I may amend, judging by the place of residence of these

15     people and by their first and last names, if I may, I would conclude that

16     most of them were ethnic Croats.

17        Q.   My point is that, on the 25th of October, you did not have a

18     problem signing your name to a document which was reporting to the police

19     theft by ethnic Croats.

20             Am I right?  You weren't afraid to do this.  Or were you afraid?

21        A.   No, by no means.

22        Q.   So to go back to my question, I understand that this report may

23     have been prepared by someone else.  But if you, for example, saw horses

24     being stolen or cattle being stolen, given the fact that you worked with

25     Mr. Mihic and Mr. Romanic and General Cermak, would there have been a

Page 22763

 1     reason why you wouldn't have reported that -- or let me ask the first

 2     question.

 3             Did you report -- the incidents that you've described in your

 4     statement, did you report them to Mr. Mihic or Mr. Romanic or anyone else

 5     in the police?

 6        A.   All the incidents that happened in the field I pointed out to

 7     Mr. Romanic and Mr. Mihic orally.

 8        Q.   Okay.  Would they take action?  Do you know if they would take

 9     action, if you reported these types of incidents to them?

10        A.   The later chief of police of Knin, because the Kotar was done

11     away with, and Mr. Mihic returned to Sibenik, so the chief of police at

12     Knin became Mr. Viroza [phoen] and I reported some events to him, some

13     incidents.  And he said to me that he -- he submitted written reports to

14     the Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Croatia.

15        Q.   Well --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, could we seek clarification of the

17     answer.

18             One of your previous answers was all the incidents that happened

19     in the field I pointed out to Mr. Romanic and Mr. Mihic orally.  Then you

20     were asked whether they took any action upon your report.  And then you

21     come with a story that someone else was, at a later stage, police chief,

22     and that -- but the question put to you by Mr. Misetic simply was where

23     you said you reported to Mr. Romanic and Mr. Mihic, whether they took any

24     action.

25             Could you please answer that question.

Page 22764

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I suppose that, due to their place

 2     in the hierarchy, it was their duty to inform their superiors in the

 3     Ministry of the Interior.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  But the question was whether they took any action,

 5     not whether they were duty-bound to do so.  Do you know that, or don't

 6     you know it?  If you don't know, tell us; if you do know, tell us as

 7     well.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't think that they took any

 9     action.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

11             MR. MISETIC:

12        Q.   You don't think they took any action which now leads to the

13     question as to why they didn't take any action.

14             Mr. Romanic specifically was someone who you would attend the

15     meetings -- with whom you would attend meetings at General Cermak's

16     office on a daily or almost daily basis; correct?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   Did Mr. Romanic ever explain why he wasn't taking any action on

19     matters that you personally had reported to him?

20        A.   No.

21        Q.   Did you ask him or follow up with him to say, Whatever happened

22     with the stolen cattle or stolen horses?

23        A.   No.

24        Q.   Let me draw your attention to page 7 of D1706, which is the

25     2002 statement.

Page 22765

 1             And there you talk about -- let me find the Croatian page for

 2     you.

 3             Here we go, it's page 11 in the B/C/S.  I'm sorry.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  If we could go to the bottom, please.  Yes.

 5        Q.   You say:

 6             "I also went to the Plavno village and saw Croatian soldiers

 7     collecting horses and putting them on trucks and taking them away.  I am

 8     aware of a woman called Marta Vujanovic being killed and she came from

 9     Oton Polje.  She was killed with her mentally-retard son.  There are

10     three hamlets in Oton, Oton Bender, Oton Brdo, and Oton Polje.  I heard

11     that this woman was killed from my uncle, Luka Pasic."

12             And I'd like to turn your attention on this incident, Mr. Pasic,

13     to Exhibit P2345, at English page 62 and B/C/S page 60, please.

14             Mr. Pasic, what we're going to see on it's screen is a report by

15     the Croatian Helsinki Committee.  It was published in Croatian in 1999,

16     and the English version was published in 2001.

17             And you can see in the Croatian version the paragraph in the

18     middle of your screen there, that begins: "At the end of August 1995."

19             MR. MISETIC:  And this is at the bottom of the English page.

20        Q.    Let me read it out to you.  It says:

21             "At the end of August 1995" -- I'm sorry.  Let me start with the

22     paragraph preceding, so we understand the context.

23             It says:

24             "The other example of a similar search ended up tragically.  A

25     day after military Operation Storm ended, a daughter of Marta Vujanovic,

Page 22766

 1     born in 1905, who lives in Germany asked about her mother born in 1905

 2     and brother's, Stevo, destiny born in 1939.  She knew that Marta and

 3     Stevo remained in the village of Oton, but the Knin authorities refused

 4     to help her.

 5             "At the end of August 1995 she wrote a letter to the Croatian

 6     Helsinki Committee asking for help.  The CHC office demanded that the

 7     commissioner of the government, Petar Pasic, help them.  Mr. Pasic did

 8     not reply to any of the written demands on behalf of the CHC.  However,

 9     he showed a letter to the international observers and said, I have more

10     important job to do than look around Knin and collect Serb corpses.  When

11     he had said that, Marta Vujnovic and her son had already been dead.  The

12     Croatian soldiers killed them on August 18th, 1995, in their own house,

13     Mother Marija, was killed inside the house, and Stevo in his own yard.

14     If Petar Pasic had listened to her daughter and sister Lubica, it would

15     be possible that they would be alive today together with other residents

16     of Oton killed that same day."

17             Now my first question, Mr. Pasic, is, do you remember any of this

18     -- did it in fact happen that there was correspondence between you and

19     the Croatian Helsinki Committee with the daughter of Marta Vujnovic?

20        A.   Based on this, I cannot confirm that what is said here is true.

21     Because, at the time, there was -- there were no telephone lines,

22     functioning telephone lines between Knin and other towns which can be

23     easily verified.

24             I personally knew the killed -- that killed person.  We are even

25     related.  So if I had known about that, I certainly would have helped.

Page 22767

 1     But it's impossible that she spoke to me over the phone, because there

 2     were no functioning phone lines at the time.

 3        Q.   But --

 4        A.   I read the Serbian news -- or, rather, the news in the Serbian

 5     newspapers, but I'm not sure what identity this was, because they talk

 6     about this story in a different way.  And mostly in the article that I

 7     read it did not refer to Petar Pasic but the problems which occurred in

 8     Donji Lapac, Benkovac, Gracac, and some other places.

 9        Q.   Well, the Croatian Helsinki Committee claims that there was

10     correspondence between you -- I'm sorry, from them to you, meaning from

11     the Helsinki -- Croatian Helsinki Committee, that there were written

12     demands sent to you by them.

13             Do you recall such written demands?

14        A.   All there is, is one written request, as far as I remember, from

15     the Helsinki Committee sent to me and that was when a convoy from a

16     barracks when on its way to Serbia, and I remember this, the number was

17     619.  That was its number.  And there was a person there called

18     Stana Grkinjic [phoen].  And along the way en route somewhere, she

19     disappeared.  And her daughter informed both me and the Helsinki

20     Committee and then -- well, it was Mr. Cicak at the time who was the

21     president of the HHO, and he simply wrote a letter to me.  He said,

22     Mr. Commissioner, please look for that person and try and find her.

23        Q.   Okay.  I'm interested also in knowing how the name of

24     Marta Vujnovic wound up in your 2002 statement.  Were you aware at the

25     time of the 2002 statement of the allegations that had been made against

Page 22768

 1     you by the HHO in its reports of 1999 and 2002, concerning

 2     Marta Vujnovic?

 3        A.   I don't know how it happened to be there in the first place

 4     because the village of Plavno, when we talk about horses and so on, this

 5     is quite a different matter -- or Konji [phoen], and there are two

 6     settlements at a distance of 15 to 20 kilometres.

 7        Q.   Well, do you know if Mr. Foster and Mr. Casey, the Prosecution's

 8     investigators, showed you the HHO, the Croatian Helsinki Committee

 9     report, at the time of the interview that you gave them?

10        A.   No.

11        Q.   No, you don't know; or, no, they didn't show it to you?

12        A.   No, no.

13        Q.   When you say no, they did not show you the report.  Is that what

14     you're saying?

15        A.   I think that's it, yes.

16        Q.   Okay.  Mr. Pasic, let me switch to a different subject.

17             This is Exhibit P822.  This is a report from an ECMM monitor.  Do

18     you recall a man named Soren Liborius of the European Community

19     Monitoring Mission?

20        A.   No, I don't remember.

21        Q.   Well, if we look at this report, if we look towards the bottom of

22     the first paragraph, it says -- he describes a meeting that he held --

23     I'm sorry, a meeting with Mr. Gambotti, between you and Mr. Gambotti.

24             Do you remember Mr. Gambotti?

25        A.   No.

Page 22769

 1        Q.   Towards the bottom of that paragraph it says:

 2             "Returning Serbs, according to Mr. Pasic more than 100 have

 3     reported from Serbia, the number growing every day."

 4             And then there's a comment:

 5             "Indeed some people are returning but only those with property

 6     secured.  The team still wait to see when an actual occupant of a house

 7     is driven out because the legal owner returned."

 8             And the date is the 27th of October of this report.

 9             My question -- I had asked you earlier at the beginning of my

10     questioning, Mr. Pasic, about the number of returned Serbs as of

11     April 1996.  Do you recall the accuracy of this report, that 100 Serbs

12     had returned from Serbia by the end of October 1995?

13        A.   Neither me nor my office were in a position to keep statistical

14     data about the number of those who returned, but what I said was those

15     who did return and came to us, many of them returned but didn't come to

16     see us.

17        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... so is it your testimony or

18     was it your report on that day that 100 Serbs had returned from Serbia

19     and had come to you, seeking help, but there could have been more?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Where would you -- where would these Serbs, these 100 Serbs who

22     had came back that you knew of, where would they be housed?

23        A.   Usually -- well, since the flats and houses in Knin were already

24     occupied most of the people who returned went back to villages around

25     Knin in actual fact because they were from those parts in the first

Page 22770

 1     place.

 2        Q.   Would they go back to their own homes, or would you put them up

 3     in other peoples' homes?

 4        A.   No.  They would see to their own accommodation, and we did write

 5     a letter and tried to put some people up in a centre, in Strmica, but all

 6     those people refused and declined collective accommodation and went back

 7     to their native villages, because most of them did have family homes in

 8     the villages but were allotted flats, socially-owned flats, in Knin.

 9        Q.   Well, are you saying Serbs who came back were also allotted

10     flats, socially-owned flats, in Knin in addition to their own homes that

11     they had in the outlying villages?

12        A.   No.

13        Q.   Well, who is it that was allotted socially-owned flats in Knin?

14        A.   Well, attached to the Government of Croatia, there was a

15     commission for accommodation, and at the request of individuals they

16     would allot flats for temporary use, temporary accommodation.

17        Q.   Okay.  Why -- you mentioned you tried to put some people up in a

18     centre in Strmica.  Why were you trying to put people up in a centre in

19     Strmica?

20        A.   Well, until their homes were refurbished we wanted to provide

21     them with temporary accommodation and our people, and I'm from the area,

22     were such that they refused to go into collective accommodation.  They

23     didn't want to do that, so they preferred to live in houses that were

24     partially destroyed and been burnt.  But with the help of international

25     organisations, they did meet the necessary conditions -- well, they were

Page 22771

 1     given the necessary conditions to be able to live in these houses until

 2     they were reconstructed.

 3        Q.   Okay.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, could I seek clarification of one of

 5     the previous answers.

 6             You first said that most of the them did have family homes in the

 7     villages but were allotted flats, socially-owned flats, in Knin.

 8     Mr. Misetic asked you whether, in addition to the homes they had, that

 9     flats were allotted.  And the answer was no.

10             I have difficulties in understanding exactly the relation between

11     flats being given to people returning, where you said it was not in

12     addition to their own homes, even if partly destroyed.

13             Who then got these flats or apartments?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't think you understood me.

15     The flats, well, after returning from Serbia, these people were not

16     allotted flats.  What I said was that they returned -- that they were

17     given these flats, allotted these flats before Operation Storm.  But as

18     families, they lived in the villages.  So they were able to go back to

19     the houses that had either been devastated or those that could still be

20     used for living.  So the returnees, or at least many of them, were not

21     allotted the flats that they had used before.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  So let me try to verify whether I understood you

23     well.

24             Those who had been living in flats, socially-owned flats, in

25     Knin, after they returned from Serbia, they preferred not to return to

Page 22772

 1     their socially-owned flats, but, rather would go to their family homes,

 2     destroyed or partly destroyed, in the villages where they originated

 3     from.

 4             Is that correctly understood?

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not quite.  Let me explain.

 6             The -- by decision of the government of Croatia, the flats had

 7     been allocated to other users now.  So the Serbs who were returning could

 8     not go back, did not go back to their former flats or to any other flats

 9     for that matter.  In their desire to return, they returned to their

10     family homes, family houses from which they -- which they left when they

11     were allotted these flats previously.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now, when these flats were allotted to them

13     and, as you told us, later being allotted to other people, would that

14     include Croatian citizens from Serb ethnicity?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could you explain that question,

16     please.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  What I would like to know, whether those who had

18     been living in those flats and apartments in Knin and upon return from

19     Serbia could not use them anymore, would there among them, people as

20     well, who were Croatian citizens but of Serb ethnicity?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of those people who left, and you

22     know that the problem the accommodation is still being resolved today,

23     nobody returned to their flats, whether they were Serbs or Croats, those

24     who left for Serbia after Operation Storm or went to Bosnia after

25     Operation Storm.

Page 22773

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  And upon return, they couldn't use the flats they

 2     previously had occupied in accordance with the normal regulations.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Neither the flats, nor any other

 4     premises, nor anything else, furniture or whatever.  They couldn't use

 5     that anymore.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Why couldn't they use their furniture anymore?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because, pursuant to a decision

 8     taken by the Government of Croatia and the housing commission, that

 9     housing space was given to other people who had come into Knin after

10     Operation Storm.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  And that included the furniture, and if someone

12     would come back and say, Well, this is my couch, or my fridge or my bed,

13     what would be the answer?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, many people didn't even dare

15     do that, knock on the door of their former flat.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Why wouldn't they dare?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, there was another tenant

18     there, another occupant.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But still their furniture.  They had paid for

20     their beds, I take it, and for their fridges and for their tables and

21     chairs.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] By decision of the government,

23     well, we had social ownership of property previously.  Now there was no

24     socially-owned property anymore.  I had a flat in Sibenik, for example,

25     and I could buy it up, I could purchase it myself, whereas these other

Page 22774

 1     flats had not been purchased.  There was no longer any socially-owned

 2     accommodation.  So it was only a question of furniture and things like

 3     that, whether somebody was willing to cede the furniture or not.  There

 4     were cases like that too.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me try to understand.

 6             You said these people left their flats they had occupied, which

 7     were socially-owned flats or apartments.  Now you say upon their return,

 8     they found these flats to be occupied.  But are you telling that it was

 9     not socially-owned anymore?  Then, if not, who had ownership of those

10     flats previously occupied by this Serb family, which wished to return?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Every flat or the flat of every

12     employer.  Let's assume he worked for the Croatian railways, for example,

13     a worker of the Croatian railways or something else, those flats belonged

14     to the Croatian railways.

15             Now, if it was a flat belonging to the utilities company,

16     everybody working in the utilities company would be allocated a flat to

17     live in by the company, and so these flats belonged to the various

18     enterprises.  And somebody taking occupancy, taking up occupancy later on

19     would get a certificate saying that he had temporary use of the flat, so

20     it didn't belong to him.  The flat still belonged to the ministry in

21     which the person worked.

22             JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... that's clear to

23     me that is it was later allotted to other persons; it may not have been

24     the ownership of the company anymore, but it was the government who

25     decided who would occupy that flat.

Page 22775

 1             Now I get back to the furniture.  The furniture was not

 2     socially-owned?  The furniture was still owned by those who had

 3     previously lived in that flat.

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  And you said people would not dare to go there and

 6     claim their own furniture.

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's how it was.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Did you assist them in re-gaining their furniture,

 9     or would you just accept that those who were now occupying the flats

10     would use the fridges, the beds, the tables, the chairs?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We accepted the existing situation.

12     Unfortunately, I have to say, that I, too, was allocated a flat for

13     temporary accommodation, but that the person who lived there before me

14     never turned up, he never asked for his furniture back or his flat back.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, you describe a situation, and we're talking

16     about an attitude towards those who left, that it was wished - that's at

17     least part of the evidence this Chamber has heard - that people were

18     encouraged to return.

19             Now, could you reconcile the fact that if you would return, that

20     you would have no furniture anymore.  Your flat would be occupied by

21     others.  What was the attractive perspective that was offered to those

22     who wished to return?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have already said that everybody

24     actually wanted to return.  There was that wish.  And every person hoped

25     that, if they returned, for example, the village I came from, that,

Page 22776

 1     ultimately, they would have the opportunity of going back to their flat

 2     at some point.

 3             But let me explain.  Every person who left and, pursuant to

 4     Croatian government decision, did not return within six months or did not

 5     send in a request to have their flat returned to them, were not able to

 6     do so.  And it's only now that these requests are being dealt with.

 7             So those who tabled their requests in 1998 or 1999, those cases

 8     are still pending.  But flats and houses were not an obstacle to people

 9     who wanted to come back to their origins and native area.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

11             I'm also looking at the clock.  I don't know whether this would

12     be ...

13             MR. MISETIC: [Microphone not activated]

14             JUDGE ORIE:  I don't hear you.

15             MR. MISETIC:  Sorry.  I was going to turn to a new topic, so it

16     might be a good time for a break then.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

18             We will have a break, and we will resume at a quarter to 1.00.

19                           --- Recess taken at 12.24 p.m.

20                           --- On resuming at 12.51 p.m.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, could you keep in mind that I would

22     like to reserve some seven or eight minutes at the end of this meeting

23     for procedural matters.

24             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I anticipate I will be done well

25     before the end so --

Page 22777

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then, Ms. Gustafson, would you please keep

 2     that in mind.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, first a correction to the record, I

 4     put to the witness Exhibit P2345 which is, I have been now told,

 5     MNA status, and what I should have called out is P2402, which is in

 6     evidence, but it is a redacted version of P2345, and so the record should

 7     be clear.  The pages, however, are the same in both documents.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  That's now clearly on the record, Mr. Misetic.

 9             Please proceed.

10             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

11        Q.   Mr. Pasic, I'd like to shift gears here for one minute and ask

12     you a few questions concerning the statement you made on the 2nd of

13     August.  This is discussed at paragraph 10 of your 2009 statement.

14             MR. MISETIC:  And if we can turn to that.  It's D1707.

15        Q.   And you're referring to -- back to your 2002 statement, which is

16     D1706, at paragraph 10, and you were asked by the Cermak Defence what did

17     you mean when you said you were -- by the term "trouble to come."  And

18     you explained that you believed that the plights of the civilian

19     population would be repeated like in the previous HV operations

20     Maslenica, Medacki Dzep, and Bljesak, particularly since Knin town was

21     the epicentre of and synonymous with the rebellion against the Republic

22     of Croatia constitutional order?

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

24             MR. MISETIC:

25        Q.   My question is if you could please clarify what you were

Page 22778

 1     referring to concerning the plight of the civilian population repeated,

 2     like in those operations.

 3        A.   As I have said before, I'm a citizen of the Republic of Croatia

 4     of Serb ethnicity.  Since 1991, I have been in the focus of events, and

 5     after each operation of the Croatian Army, and there have been several, I

 6     can mention Miljevci, then came Maslenica, then there was the Dubrovnik

 7     coast-line, Sinj and the surroundings, the Medak pocket, Flash.  In each

 8     of these operations the civilian population suffered most.  That is, the

 9     population that lived in these areas.  I expected something of that kind

10     to happen at Knin, because Knin was the epicentre of the rebellion

11     against the illegally-elected Croatian Government, and that's why the

12     plights there could even exceed those in the earlier operations.

13        Q.   Well, what is it that you expected would happen specifically when

14     you talk about the plight?

15        A.   I expected an exodus to occur; and it, indeed, happened.  The

16     civilian population left in organised convoys, which a so-called army of

17     the Republic of Serbian Krajina did to its own population.

18        Q.   And what was the basis of this expectation?  Why did you expect

19     that?

20        A.   I expected that because the previous operations resulted in the

21     civilian population suffering most badly, and they mostly left the areas

22     that were put under the control of the Croatian authorities or the

23     Croatian police, even -- even though it was possible to remain in those

24     areas, and yet many people left.

25        Q.   Well, did you expect that the -- when you said this on the 2nd of

Page 22779

 1     August, were you expecting that if Croatia took over control of Knin

 2     town, that Croatia or its organs would treat the civilian population

 3     badly?

 4        A.   No.

 5        Q.   Mr. Pasic, I'd like to show you the video-clip of the Croatian TV

 6     newscast on the 2nd of August which carried your call to the Krajina

 7     Serbs.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, this will be 65 ter 1D2980.

 9                           [Video-clip played]

10             "Sasa Kopljar:  ...the Croatian government commissioner for Knin,

11     Petar Pasic, sent an open letter to the citizens of Serb nationality in

12     Knin who, according to Pasic, in the last couple of days have been unable

13     to leave the town because of the barriers placed at every entrance to the

14     town in order to prevent them from escaping from an already apparent

15     disarray.  Your time is nearly up, but it may not be too late to turn

16     your backs on your steeped-in-crime leaders who are leading you to

17     suffering and hell, wrote Pasic, calling the citizens of Knin to accept

18     the peaceful hand of negotiations of Croatia in Geneva, and to renounce

19     their dissident authorities and acknowledge the Republic of Croatia as

20     their sole homeland.  At the same time, the self-proclaimed Serb

21     authorities are continuing with their intensive ethnic cleansing of the

22     area of north-western Bosnia.  Another 119 refugees of Croatian

23     nationality from the wider Banja Luka area, mostly from the village of

24     Simic, fled by boats from Srbac across the Sava River to Drvar on the

25     Croatian coast."

Page 22780

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 2        Q.   Mr. Pasic, is that in fact the -- how your letter was transmitted

 3     over Croatian state television to those in the so-called Krajina who

 4     could watch Croatian television?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Other than this report on Croatian television, were there other

 7     means through which your letter was broadcast or disseminated to the

 8     Krajina Serb population?

 9        A.   According to the information available to me, not such a letter,

10     but there was a comment on the TV channel of the so-called Republic of

11     Serbian Krajina in which that letter was called a threat to the Serb

12     population in the area of the so-called RSK, and in a very ugly manner,

13     they spoke both about the Croatian state and the commissioner of the

14     Croatian government, calling him an Ustasha commissioner or Tudjman's

15     brown-nose.  And in the so-called RSK, especially in the media, the term

16     member of the Croatian people was rarely used.  Instead, they used a

17     phrase part of the Ustasha people.

18             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I ask that 65 ter 1D2980 be marked

19     and I tender it into evidence.

20             MS. GUSTAFSON:  No objection, Your Honour.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

22             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1716.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  D1716 is admitted into evidence.

24             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

25        Q.   I just wanted to seek a clarification to page 6 of your

Page 22781

 1     2002 statement, which is, again, D1706.  In it, you state that

 2     General Gotovina's headquarters had moved from Split to Knin and was

 3     housed next door to Cermak's office.

 4             Are you aware that, in fact, General Gotovina's headquarters at

 5     all times in 1995, the headquarters itself, was in Split and remained in

 6     Split but that there was forward command post that had also been set up

 7     in Knin.

 8        A.   I know the term "command post" and "forward command post," but I

 9     don't know, really.  I suppose that the garrison of General Gotovina was

10     in Split and that the forward command post was in Knin.

11        Q.   Okay.  I take it from your answer you mean that -- you suppose

12     that the command of General Gotovina was in Split, but the forward

13     command post was in Knin?

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, if it just a supposition, do we need a

15     clarification of what is supposed?

16             Please proceed.

17             MR. MISETIC:

18        Q.   Finally, Mr. Pasic, if you had felt -- let -- this question

19     arises from the 2002 statement, much of which you have clarified now, but

20     I wanted to ask you this question anyway.

21             If you felt that you were a figurehead with no real authority,

22     and if you felt -- if had you felt that there was some sort of a policy

23     to allow crime to take place, would you have stayed in that position as

24     the commissioner of the Knin region?

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Gustafson.

Page 22782

 1             MS. GUSTAFSON:  Your Honour, I think the question is highly

 2     hypothetical and calls for speculation on the part of the witness.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but even if it is a hypothesis, then that

 5     doesn't mean that it's speculation because the witness is asked about

 6     what he would do, and that could be something that he has formed an

 7     opinion about already, and, under those circumstances, it would not be

 8     speculation, but, rather, thoughts about what to do under what

 9     circumstances.

10             Therefore, the witness may answer the question.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that the

12     Croatian Government trusted me in my work, because if it hadn't been the

13     case, I wouldn't have stayed in the position of commissioner from the

14     5th of August till the 9th of March, 1996.

15             MR. MISETIC:

16        Q.   Yes.  My question, though, is specifically asking you about your

17     perspective on things and my question is --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, perhaps, also in view of my ruling on

19     your last issue --

20             Did you give it ever any thought, Mr. Pasic, that you could have

21     been used as a figurehead with no real authority?  Did it ever come to

22     your mind as a possibility?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Did you ever think about that, if this would be the

25     case, how you would react, or have you not even thought about that?

Page 22783

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I partly thought about that.  If it

 2     had been the case, it would have been difficult for me to accept that.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And -- well, sometimes it may be difficult to

 4     accept, but what would you have done?  Would have you stayed, or would

 5     you have quit?  What -- in what would this difficult acceptance have

 6     resulted, in your thoughts?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In my thoughts, or, rather, I

 8     didn't think along the lines of making a living.  It was about the

 9     majority of expelled Croats and Serbs having confidence in me.  Some

10     didn't, but they were a minority, and they held opposed -- their position

11     was opposed to mine.

12             I must say that the situation in Knin, in spite of all the

13     efforts made by the garrison and the commissioner and the government of

14     the Republic of Croatia, didn't develop the way it should have.  I said

15     that on March the 9th I was replaced, and I became commissioner of the

16     Croatian Government for four other municipalities.  My deputy, that is

17     the man who replaced me --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  We are moving away from the question, Mr. Pasic.  I

19     asked you whether you had considered for this possibility.  You said you

20     partly thought about that and that, if that would be the case, that it

21     would have been difficult to accept that.  Would the difficulty of

22     accepting it, would that have had any consequences in what you would have

23     done, in your thoughts?  Would you have said, I would have --

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

25             JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... it wouldn't have

Page 22784

 1     changed your behaviour.  Is that how I am to understand?

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, I tried to avoid hypothesis and to get

 4     it in a clear context, as you may have been aware of.  To some extent, it

 5     is the phrasing of the question which is also of importance to whether we

 6     are not -- we are asking the witness to speculate or not.

 7             MR. MISETIC:  Okay.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 9             If have you any follow-up questions, I have got no problems with

10     that, let me be clear.

11             MR. MISETIC:  I do.  It's just -- again, it's a little bit of a

12     difficulty of the 2002 statement, so I'm assuming that my colleagues

13     across the well are going to state that those -- that statement has --

14     was accurate.  And if that is the case, then my question, and I will try

15     to be more specific on it, is --

16        Q.   Mr. Pasic, if you felt when you were in Knin, in August and

17     September of 1995, that burning and looting was something that had been

18     approved or planned from above, what would you have done?

19        A.   If it had been planned and implemented like that, I wouldn't have

20     agreed to be part of that system and part of those authorities.

21        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Pasic.

22             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I don't have any further questions.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Misetic.

24             Ms. Gustafson, are you ready to cross-examine Mr. Pasic?

25             MS. GUSTAFSON:  Yes, Your Honour, if I could just have one

Page 22785

 1     moment.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Pasic, you will now be cross-examined by

 3     Ms. Gustafson.  Ms. Gustafson is counsel for the Prosecution.

 4             MS. GUSTAFSON:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 5                           Cross-examination by Ms. Gustafson:

 6        Q.   Good afternoon, Mr. Pasic.

 7        A.   Good afternoon.

 8        Q.   I would like to begin by asking you some questions about your

 9     various statements and your subsequent corrections.

10             And you first gave a statement to the Prosecution - that was back

11     in 2001 and 2002 - and you don't need to look at it at the moment, if you

12     could just listen to my question.  Because it's not actually related to

13     the contents of that.

14             Now, at that time, the statement was prepared in English and the

15     interpreter sat down with you and read it back to you in Croatian.

16             Is that how it happened?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   And after the interpreter read it back to you, it was then that

19     you signed the statement and initialled each page of it, on the English

20     version; is that right?

21        A.   I can complete this.  I gave my statement on two occasions.  On

22     the first two days when I gave my statement, it wasn't read to me, either

23     in English or Croatian.  Only in March of the following year, 2002, that

24     statement was read in Croatian.

25        Q.   Right.  And it was read to you in March of 2002, and after it was

Page 22786

 1     read to you, that's when you signed it and initialled every page; is that

 2     right?

 3        A.   I think so, but ... I'm not sure whether I initialled every page

 4     or simply put my signature at the end of the document, the statement.

 5        Q.   Well, it's in evidence, Mr. Pasic, you can take it from me that

 6     your initials are on every page.

 7             And now you gave your second statement to the Defence, the Cermak

 8     Defence, than was -- that took place on 22nd of November 2007 and the

 9     18th of February, 2009.  And today in your testimony and as well written

10     in that statement, you confirmed that when you gave your statement to the

11     Defence, you read your Prosecution statement, and I'd like to ask you, at

12     that time were you actually given a hard copy of your Prosecution

13     statement in Croatian to read over?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   And did you read it over, both on the 22nd of November of 2007,

16     and, again, on the 18th of February, 2009; or was it just on one of those

17     occasions that you read over your Prosecution statement?

18        A.   Initially, I only read the statement very superficially.  I

19     didn't appreciate its full significance, because I thought that that

20     statement would never be used, although it says there the International

21     Criminal Tribunal, and I signed at a time when I may have been a bit too

22     confused.

23             So I didn't attach so much significance to it.  But I'm the only

24     one to blame for that.

25        Q.   Mr. Pasic, I'd like you to answer my question, which is:  Did you

Page 22787

 1     read your Prosecution statement both on the 22nd of November, 2007, when

 2     you met with the Cermak Defence and on the 18th of February, 2009, when

 3     you met with them again; or did you only read it over on one of those

 4     occasions?

 5        A.   I read it several times.

 6        Q.   Did you read it both on the 22nd of November and -- in 2007, and

 7     on the 18th of February 2009.  Is that -- do I correctly understand you?

 8     Thank you.

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   And were you given -- did the Cermak Defence, at that time, when

11     they took that second statement from you, did they actually give you a

12     copy of your Prosecution statement in Croatian to keep?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   And we've heard today that you recently met again with the

15     Cermak Defence on the 2nd of September, 2009, a few weeks ago.  And at

16     that meeting, the -- the note of that meeting says that:

17             "The purpose of the meeting was to confirm his statement for the

18     Rule 92 ter procedure."

19             So my question is: At that time in September 2009 when you met

20     with the Cermak Defence, I take it they asked to you read over both of

21     your previous statements again.  Is that right?

22        A.   What I said was that I wasn't cautious enough in -- towards the

23     statement that I gave.  But I read both the statements, yes.

24        Q.   Thank you.  And I take it, at that time, the meeting on the

25     2nd of September, you were aware, they either made you aware then, or you

Page 22788

 1     were already aware that you would be called as a witness for the

 2     Cermak Defence; is that right?

 3        A.   It was only last Friday that I was informed by the Tribunal that

 4     I would be an official witness.  Up until then, I still didn't know that

 5     for certain.

 6        Q.   When did the Cermak Defence first inform you that you would be a

 7     witness for the Cermak Defence?

 8        A.   I think that was before, when we met for the first time in Split.

 9     But official information, saying that I was a potential candidate for --

10     or, rather, I was a candidate as a witness for the Cermak Defence case,

11     but official information I received on the 2nd or 3rd of September.

12        Q.   So the Cermak Defence first informed you that may be a witness

13     for the Cermak Defence when you gave them your statement back in 2007 and

14     2009, and then they confirmed that you were definitely a witness when you

15     met with them on the 2nd of September, 2009.  Is that right?

16        A.   It didn't confirm that.  It wasn't the Cermak counsel who

17     confirmed that.  It was confirmed by the Registry of the Tribunal.

18        Q.   Well, Mr. Pasic, the note of the meeting that you had on the

19     2nd of September with the Cermak Defence says that the purpose was to

20     confirm your statement for the Rule 92 ter procedure.

21             So I take it then that they explained to you that they were

22     planning to call you as a witness and that your statements would be given

23     do the Trial Chamber as evidence.  Is that right?

24        A.   Well, most probably they intended to call me.  But let me repeat,

25     I was officially informed that I would be coming in as a witness from

Page 22789

 1     the --

 2             JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... there seems to

 3     be quite some confusion.  I do understand that last Friday, you got a

 4     message from the Registry that you would go to The Hague in order to

 5     testify.

 6             Is that correctly understood?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, early September of this year, five weeks ago,

 9     you were interviewed by the Cermak Defence.

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Did they tell you that they intended to examine you

12     as a witness before this Tribunal?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

15             Please proceed, Ms. Gustafson.

16             MS. GUSTAFSON:  Thank you, Your Honour.

17        Q.   And did they tell you that they intended to tender your witness

18     statements, to give them to the Trial Chamber as your evidence in this

19     case?  Did they tell you that on the 2nd of September?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Now, on that occasion, on the 2nd of September, you made a number

22     of corrections to your Prosecution statement.  At the end of those

23     corrections, you said:

24             "Pasic informed the Defence that he thinks he did not pay

25     sufficient attention when he read his statement."

Page 22790

 1             Now, I understand that statement to mean - and correct me if I'm

 2     wrong - that when you met with the Cermak Defence on the 2nd of

 3     September, you explained to them the reason why you had to make

 4     additional corrections to your Prosecution statement was the fact that,

 5     on previous occasions, you had not paid sufficient attention when you

 6     read your Prosecution statement.

 7             Is my understanding correct?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   So, then, in light of that, I would think that you would have

10     read your Prosecution and Defence statements over more carefully than you

11     had previously on the 2nd of September; is that right?

12        A.   All these additions to the statement, I proposed to the Cermak

13     Defence team.  None of them said -- none of them told me to write

14     something like that.

15        Q.   That's not my question, Mr. Pasic.  My question is: On the 2nd of

16     September, having realised that you had not paid sufficient attention on

17     previous occasions, you read your Prosecution statement over more

18     carefully; is that right?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Thank you.

21             Mr. Pasic, when did you arrive in The Hague?  What day?

22        A.   I arrived in The Hague on Tuesday.

23        Q.   And when did you first meet with the Cermak Defence, after you

24     arrived in The Hague?  Do you remember when you met with them first?

25        A.   The same day.

Page 22791

 1        Q.   And how was that meeting arranged?  Who contacted whom to arrange

 2     that meeting on Tuesday?

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8                           [Private session]

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23                           [Open session]

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

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

Page 22792

 1             MS. GUSTAFSON:  Thank you.

 2        Q.   And when did you first inform the Cermak Defence that you wanted

 3     to make additional changes to your witness statement?

 4        A.   When I saw that I had made some omissions in previous -- my

 5     previous reading of the statements.  I felt the need to make some

 6     additions to the statements and incorporate some elements that I had

 7     omitted earlier on.

 8        Q.   And when was that?  When did you inform the Cermak Defence of

 9     that?

10        A.   Well, I think that was ... on the 1st or 2nd.  Well, I don't know

11     what the date was, but I know that we were -- that I suggested that these

12     changes be made.

13        Q.   Sorry, Mr. Pasic, my question wasn't clear.

14             I meant after your -- the changes you made in September.  After

15     that, when did you first inform the Cermak Defence that you wanted to

16     make additional changes, the changes that we -- that you made just the

17     other day, just on Tuesday.  When did you tell the Cermak Defence you

18     wanted to make those changes?

19        A.   I -- when was that date?

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Pasic, I think that Mr. Kay asked you to seek

21     permission when you wanted to consult papers.

22             The question simply is: This same week, when did you tell the

23     Cermak Defence that there were additional changes you would like to make?

24     That was the question.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think it was the 2nd of

Page 22793

 1     September, that that was the slot -- or, rather, the 10th of October.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  That is -- well, the 10th of October is --

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, the 2nd of October.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  2nd of October.  And you said you arrived this

 5     Tuesday in The Hague?  That's the day before yesterday.

 6             Yes, did you give them a phone call on the 2nd of October or ...

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the 2nd of October, I met with

 8     Mr. Zeljko Basic from the Defence team for General Gotovina.  He was

 9     passing through, going from Split to Sibenik, and I asked to meet with

10     him.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

12             MR. MISETIC:  Just if -- I'm sorry for counsel, but if the

13     counsel could ask for clarification as to which team we're talking about.

14             MS. GUSTAFSON:

15        Q.   Mr. Pasic, the transcript reads that you with Mr. Zeljko Basic

16     from the Defence team for General Gotovina.  Did you mean -- did you mean

17     Cermak --

18        A.   Yes, I beg your pardon, I meant Mr. Cermak.

19        Q.   So you phoned him on the 2nd of October, and you said -- you said

20     what?

21        A.   I said that I had received information, telling me that I was

22     going to be a witness, and I was told when and at what time.  And then I

23     saw that I was in a bit of a predicament since some statements that I had

24     given to the Prosecutors in 2002 do not stand, since I changed a part

25     with respect to General Cermak.  I was supposed to change -- well, as far

Page 22794

 1     as I was concerned, as a commissioner of the Croatian government, these

 2     statements do not stand, as far as the events that happened after

 3     Operation Storm are concerned as well.

 4        Q.   You phoned Mr. Basic on the 2nd of October.  When did you receive

 5     the phone call from the Registry that you were officially going to be a

 6     witness in this trial?

 7        A.   On Friday, the previous day.  I was called up by a lady from the

 8     Registry of the Tribunal, Mrs. Or Ms. Lily.

 9        Q.   And between the time that Ms. Or Mrs. Lily called you on Friday

10     and the next day when you called Mr. Basic, between those two phone

11     calls, did you read your Prosecution statement?

12        A.   Several times.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Gustafson, I'm a bit confused about the 2nd of

14     October.  You said the day after that.

15             The witness said he received a phone call on Friday, which was

16     the 2nd of October, and that he called Mr. Basic on the 2nd.  So I have

17     difficulties in understanding the day after that.

18             MS. GUSTAFSON:  I apologise, Your Honour, I hadn't done the

19     counting.  He had said on Friday the previous day.

20             MR. KAY:  I wonder if it might help if he could see a calendar or

21     something like that, if that would meet with the Court's approval.  It

22     sometimes helps people to remember days of the week and dates.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Well, talking about time, Ms. Gustafson, I

24     asked to you keep in mind as well that I would need seven minutes.  We

25     are now at a point where there are just seven minutes remaining.

Page 22795

 1             So I would suggest that we leave it for the time being.

 2             Mr. Pasic, we'll continue tomorrow, but I want to instruct you

 3     that you should not speak with anyone about the testimony, the testimony

 4     you gave today - and, of course, tomorrow there will still be testimony

 5     to be given - I would -- so you shouldn't speak with anyone, not on the

 6     phone, not in any other way, just don't talk about your testimony with

 7     anyone.

 8             And then we'd like to see you back tomorrow morning at 9.00 in

 9     this same courtroom.

10             Madam Usher, could you please escort Mr. Pasic out of the

11     courtroom.

12                           [The witness stands down]

13                           [Trial Chamber confers]

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Three brief matters.

15             First, when looking, and we dealt with that earlier, about the

16     translation of the statement of the witness, I see that the B/C/S version

17     reads, and forgive me for my pronunciation [B/C/S spoken], which I

18     haven't checked it but looks very much as a kind of a working version of

19     the translation.  Usually we're informed what kind of translation we have

20     in our hands.  But apparently here we are dealing with a work document

21     rather than a final translation.  So could you please verify the status.

22             Mr. Kay is tendering it, but it has been prepared apparently by

23     -- I don't know by whom but at the request of the Prosecution.  It is of

24     some concern to me.

25             MS. GUSTAFSON:  I believe it's a CLSS translation, Your Honour.

Page 22796

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But nevertheless, it says that the B/C/S at

 2     the top, and it's not contradicted, so my understanding of the Croatian

 3     or B/C/S is growing.  That meets some concern and it should be verified

 4     what the exact status of that translation is.

 5             MR. KAY:  A schedule of the differences has been done by the

 6     Cermak Defence during the proceedings this morning, Your Honour.  That --

 7     I don't know whether --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  We will have to further pay attention to that.  We

 9     are not in a position at this moment.  If you could share that with

10     Prosecution and/or CLSS, that would certainly speed up resolution of this

11     -- of this apparent problem.

12             MR. KAY:  It's done, apparently.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

14             Then the Cermak Defence has filed, on the 2nd of October,

15     six motions under Rule 92 bis, which results in some 1500 pages,

16     approximately.  It could be 1300 or 1700, I'm not -- the Chamber would --

17     before the Prosecution responds to this motion, the Chamber would further

18     like to discuss with the parties how to proceed in relation to the

19     subject matter covered by these 92 bis statements.

20             Therefore, don't hurry, Mr. Waespi, to have your response already

21     filed today and perhaps wait until the Chamber has given it some further

22     thought on what would be the most efficient way of -- and receiving this

23     evidence, and to work in such a way that we do not lose time on exercises

24     which can -- without any prejudice for the Cermak Defence could be

25     avoided.

Page 22797

 1             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, we're very conscious of that, you know

 2     that the Rule 68 disclosure on this matter has been an ongoing issue.

 3     Those documents come from the first steps taken by us.  We have it very

 4     much in mind that this information should be scheduled and put in a

 5     digestible form.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And if you already could give that some

 7     thought, then -- because the Chamber will think about it a while as how

 8     to digest a large number of pages.  And you should be aware that if we

 9     receive 1500 pages, we'll read 1500 pages and analyse them in such detail

10     as is required.

11             So that, of course, triggers the further thinking of the Chamber

12     on this matter.

13             MR. KAY:  We've had discussions between the Prosecution and the

14     Defence on this matter.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And perhaps we might further encourage -- if

16     -- has this been --

17             MR. KAY:  It's -- it's a matter -- it's the disclosure just

18     dealing with it, we -- we have very much in mind the concerns the Court

19     has.  We were aware of it when we served it, but we had these materials

20     and it was the best way to proceed with the first materials we had.  But

21     we're very conscious of the fact that those materials would be put into a

22     schedule, Your Honour.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Or to be presented in another way.  As I said

24     before, how the chamber will receive this evidence.

25             MR. KAY:  Yes.

Page 22798

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  So I'm not denying any right of presenting evidence.

 2     But it's just the form in which it is presented and -- okay.  We'll deal

 3     with that later, but Mr. Waespi knows that he doesn't have to make

 4     over-hours this evening to file a response.

 5             Then, as far as next week, Thursday, is concerned, the 15th of

 6     October, there are still considerable problems in scheduling the

 7     video-conference link on that day.  I just want to inform the parties

 8     about that.

 9             In addition to that, I can already tell the parties that where I

10     said that we have to apply Rule 15 bis anyhow for part of the day, that

11     in addition to that, we would not have the full afternoon session

12     available.  Most likely not any further than until 6.00.  That is also to

13     be kept in mind.  If this, in terms of time needed to elicit evidence

14     from these two witnesses would trigger any further thoughts as to whether

15     that would be enough, the Chamber would like to know.  Otherwise, the

16     Chamber will consider whether it's feasible at all to have this videolink

17     next week, Thursday.  We are still working on it, but it is just already

18     a flag for the parties.

19             MR. KAY:  Can I -- sorry, Your Honour, I don't mean to interrupt.

20     It's just on this distinct issue.  It seems me this witness is going to

21     go into tomorrow.  The witness scheduled for tomorrow will go into

22     Monday, and we have a witness already listed for Monday who will then

23     continue, and then another witness.  It may be to all intents and

24     purposes better to draw a line under that now so that decisions are able

25     to be made on the scheduling of the witnesses, se we have a clear plan.

Page 22799

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  And to have then have these witnesses scheduled for

 2     either the end of October or the first days of November through

 3     videolink.

 4             MR. KAY:  We're very much thinking along those lines and looking

 5     at the dates for the last batch of witnesses that are to be held after

 6     the break.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  We'll include that in our considerations,

 8     Mr. Kay.

 9             Then one second, please.

10                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  In order not to collide with the Chamber who

12     is using this courtroom this afternoon, I refrain from -- what I had in

13     mind is to read practical guidance on bar table submissions.  We'll leave

14     that for tomorrow.

15             We adjourn.  We will resume tomorrow, Friday, the 9th of October,

16     9.00 in the morning, Courtroom III.

17                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.48 p.m.,

18                           to be reconvened on Friday, the 9th day of October,

19                           2009, at 9.00 a.m.