Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 27957

 1                           Friday, 26 March 2010

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning to everyone.

 6             Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  This is case number

 8     IT-06-90-T, the Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

10             For the continuation of the cross-examination, Mr. Kay, I think

11     we have to remain in private session.

12             MR. KAY:  That's correct, Your Honour.

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

14     courtroom.  And, meanwhile, we move into private session.

15                           [Private session]

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 27958











11 Pages 27958-27979 redacted. Private session.















Page 27980

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14                           [Open session]

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

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

17                           [The witness takes the stand]

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Sacic, we're now in open session again.  You'll

19     be cross-examined on matters, I take it, that were addressed in the

20     examination by the Chamber in open session as well.

21             You'll be cross-examined by Mr. Mikulicic.  Mr. Mikulicic is

22     counsel for Mr. Markac.

23             You may proceed, Mr. Mikulicic.

24             MR. MIKULICIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

25                           Cross-examination by Mr. Mikulicic:

Page 27981

 1        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Sacic.

 2        A.   Good morning to you too.

 3        Q.   Since we're going to speak the same language, I would kindly like

 4     to ask you to pause between my question and your answer to allow the

 5     interpreters to do their job and I'll do my best to do the same.

 6        A.   Thank you.

 7        Q.   I'm going to ask you something else and we're going to contribute

 8     to the efficiency of the examination, and that is to listen to my

 9     question until I finished and then to try and answer it by concentrating

10     on what I actually asked you.  Now if I want an additional explanation,

11     I'll ask for it.  So just try to stick to the question.

12        A.   I will do my best.

13        Q.   Mr. Sacic, how long have you known General Markac?

14        A.   I've known him since the beginning of 1990, or, rather, 1991,

15     yes, the beginning of 1991.  We saw each other more intensively.  And

16     before that, for four or five years on and off, we would happen to meet.

17        Q.   Before Operation Storm, how long did you work with

18     General Markac?  And in what capacity?  What position did he occupy, what

19     position did you occupy?

20        A.   Well, from 1991, in actual fact, from June 1991, I think -- well,

21     I don't think.  I'm certain.  He saw me as his deputy, and I saw him as a

22     highly respected commander.

23        Q.   We know that Operation Storm, the events of which are the subject

24     of these proceedings and the indictment began in August 1995.  So that

25     means that it's true that from June 1991, right up until Operation Storm

Page 27982

 1     and through Operation Storm itself, you were under the command of

 2     General Markac under one or another circumstances; is that right?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Can you tell us, please, whether you got to know General Markac

 5     during that time, and can you make -- can you tell us how far you got to

 6     know him?

 7        A.   Well, I think I knew him a little less than his wife did, but I

 8     knew him very well.

 9        Q.   Tell us, please, Mr. Sacic, what kind of boss, if I can use the

10     word, was Mr. Markac or commander?  Did he respect law and order, the

11     rules governing his job and so on and so forth?  How did you experience

12     him?

13        A.   Well, you told me to be short in my answers, otherwise I could

14     give you a very lengthy description and use superlatives, but let me be

15     specific.

16             I was always impressed by his humaneness, otherwise I couldn't

17     co-operate with him because I'm a deeply humane person too.  Then his

18     altruism impressed me, his will to carry out his job, and his tasks to

19     the benefit of the homeland, Croatia, his bravery, his co-operation.  He

20     had a lot of patience.  It wasn't always easy to work with me because I

21     am a temperamental man, but he knew that, and he knew how to approach me,

22     and so on.

23        Q.   Thank you.  But I asked with you respect to his respect of law

24     and order, disciplinary measures and so on and so forth.

25        A.   Oh, absolutely.  There was no doubt on that score whatsoever.

Page 27983

 1     Every meeting, all his intentions from the word go, when that terrible

 2     aggression came upon us in Croatia and destroyed generations and lives,

 3     from those very first days, he insisted that the units which we had

 4     rallied together should immediately be trained according to the law, and

 5     he put me in charge of organising seminars with experts in criminal law

 6     and in other aspects of the law, and that's something that I did.

 7        Q.   Do you remember, Mr. Sacic, an example, a case when you heard

 8     that General Markac -- did you ever hear General Markac issue anyone to

 9     do anything unlawful?

10        A.   No, never.  Never heard, never saw.

11        Q.   Do you remember any cases or happen to hear of any cases whereby

12     General Markac would post festum allow something to pass that was not

13     lawful?

14        A.   Well, he didn't have the authority to do that.  There were units,

15     there were members of the Special Police with secondary school education

16     and so on, and had he -- we been different or had he been different, if

17     he didn't have the moral quality he did and if he was prone to allow

18     unlawful things to happen, our units simply wouldn't have followed us.

19        Q.   Mr. Sacic, you personally or somebody whom you know or remember

20     who engaged in something illegal within the sector of the Special Police,

21     did you ever inform General Markac about that, if anything like that had

22     come to your attention?

23        A.   Well, I remember that I reported myself to him on one occasion,

24     because I had a traffic incident and he punished me for that which was

25     absolutely in order because anybody engaged in a traffic incident of that

Page 27984

 1     kind would be dealt with in the same way.

 2             But that he was strict, that's right.  He was always consistent,

 3     and we respected that.

 4        Q.   You have sort of anticipated my next question, which is this:

 5     When General Markac was informed of some unlawful act, how did he react?

 6     That's what I was going ask you next.

 7        A.   Well, this -- I just happened to crash into another car so that

 8     just a minor traffic offence and disciplinary infraction.

 9             But he undertook what he was supposed to do under the law and the

10     regulations.

11        Q.   Now, Mr. Sacic, if one of your superiors, and that includes

12     General Markac, of course, and the assistant ministers or the minister

13     himself.  But anyway, if one of your superiors were to order you to act

14     in an unlawful manner, how would you react as an official policeman,

15     military policeman [as interpreted]?

16        A.   I wouldn't carry out the order.

17        Q.   And what would you do specifically, apart from not carrying out

18     the order?  Would you do anything else?

19        A.   Well, probably I would inform my boss that somebody was asking me

20     to commit a criminal act or an unlawful act or an infraction.  Not

21     probably.  I'm sure I would do that.

22        Q.   You've already said something about this in the previous

23     examination, but let me ask you:  Does the Special Police have authority

24     under the law for conducting criminal investigations into the

25     perpetrators of criminal acts?

Page 27985

 1        A.   No, we didn't have that authority under the law governing the

 2     internal affairs sector.  There were offer services within the Ministry

 3     of Interior who were in charge of things like that.

 4        Q.   Now the members of the Special Police, and I mean you personally

 5     there, as well, did they have in the hierarchical sense or in the factual

 6     sense authorisation to issue orders to other members of the police force

 7     who did have the authority to conduct investigations and prosecute

 8     persons?

 9        A.   No.  And even if somebody were to allow -- to go ahead and do

10     something like that, it would be irrelevant because nobody would have to

11     listen to you and you would have to report it in your turn because it

12     would be an abuse of authority, overstepping your authorisation and that

13     would be treated as a disciplinary offence in itself, a serious one or

14     less serious, and possibly as a crime too.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne.

16             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I wonder if this examination is

17     going beyond the scope of the subject, that is the subjects indicated by

18     the Chamber as those which we have to confine ourselves to.

19             MR. MIKULICIC:  I just finish that subject, Your Honour, if it

20     helps.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  That certainly helps.

22             Please proceed.

23             MR. MIKULICIC:  Thank you.

24             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Your Honour?

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kuzmanovic.

Page 27986

 1             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  I think there might have a translation issue on

 2     page 28, line 6, toward the end of that line.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  One second, please.

 4             MR. MIKULICIC:  Last two words.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, no, the problem was that I was engaged in a

 6     search and, therefore, have not the scrollable transcript on my screen.

 7             MR. MIKULICIC:  Since this was my question, Your Honour, I could

 8     easily tell what I asked.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

10             MR. MIKULICIC:  I'm sure I didn't ask witness whether he was in

11     capacity of military policeman.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Please then repeat it so that ...

13             MR. MIKULICIC:

14        Q.   [Interpretation], Mr. Sacic, there was a mistake in the

15     transcript.  If you remember, I asked you the following question:  I said

16     if one of your superiors, including General Markac, of course, issue --

17     if they would issue an unlawful order to you, how would you, as an

18     official, as a policeman, act?  Did you have anything to do with the

19     military police?

20        A.   No, not with the military police, no.

21        Q.   Thank you.  [Interpretation] Mr. Sacic, before we break, just a

22     few more questions.

23             Tell me, please, in your introduction you said that you sent

24     reports to the Main Staff of the Croatian Army about searching the

25     terrain and that during operations as the Special Police, you would

Page 27987

 1     receive orders from the Main Staff and so on.

 2             Now what was, in fact, the role of the Chief of the Main Staff

 3     and the Main Staff itself in Operation Storm with respect to the Special

 4     Police, and later on with respect to searching the terrain?  Just in a

 5     few words briefly, please, because the Trial Chamber has already heard

 6     testimony about that.

 7        A.   Well, I -- I don't know about that fully because my commanding

 8     officer, General Markac, had more direct communication with them.  But

 9     what I know from him and from his conduct towards me as Chief of Staff,

10     and we can conclude that the Main Staff of the Croatian Army, and I'm

11     sure about that, the Chief of the Main Staff would send us his orders,

12     his decisions, and we then, as members of the Special Police, would --

13     were supposed to implement them within the frameworks of the defined

14     areas of responsibility of the period and that General Markac, at the

15     time, was in that military hierarchy, and that we were all subordinated

16     to him, to General Markac.  And all of us at the time, also based and

17     conducted ourselves, conditionally speaking, as a military unit.  And

18     everything we did was referred back to the Main Staff of the

19     Croatian Army.

20        Q.   Just one more question staying with that topic.

21             Do you remember ever, either the command of the Military District

22     of Split or Gospic, did you ever receive an order directly for the

23     Special Police to go into action?  You, as the head.

24        A.   No, never.

25             MR. MIKULICIC:  Your Honour, this would be a suitable time for

Page 27988

 1     break.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, it is.

 3             But before we take a break, the witness in one of his previous

 4     answers to Mr. Kay's question, said that the further details of an

 5     on-site investigation to be conducted in the absence of --

 6             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Do we need to be in private session for this,

 7     Your Honour?

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I think we have to be.

 9             Yes, we -- well, first, we can excuse the witness.  I'm just

10     seeking some additional information.

11             Madam Usher, could you escort the witness already out of the

12     courtroom.

13                           [The witness stands down]

14             JUDGE ORIE:  And we move into private session.

15                           [Private session]

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 27989











11 Pages 27989-27991 redacted. Private session.















Page 27992

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8                           [Open session]

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

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

11             Could I hear from the parties whether they think that we could

12     conclude the testimony of this witness today?

13             Earlier we were quite confident that we might not even need the

14     Friday.  Now the question is whether we'll be -- whether we'll be able to

15     conclude at all at 1.45 p.m.

16             Mr. Mikulicic, Ms. Mahindaratne.

17             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes, I'm the last one in the row as it concerns

18     the Defence teams.

19             What I can say, Your Honour, that I will surely try to squeeze my

20     cross-examination in that way that I will leave, let's say, 15 minutes in

21     the last session for eventual re-cross or re-direct whatever it --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  As matters stand now, position of the Gotovina

23     Defence is still the same.

24             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Mr. President.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  If we would not be able to conclude at quarter to

Page 27993

 1     2.00, of course, we still could consider whether we can get another hour

 2     this afternoon, which certainly would have to be 15 bis because one of

 3     the Judge would say not be available.

 4             Mr. Kay.

 5             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, I have personal difficulties and so do my

 6     team, in fact, for -- well, my team and are both leaving this afternoon.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And at a time which would leave no room

 8     for ...

 9             MR. KAY:  No.  I'm going directly from here.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  That would mean that if we could not conclude the

11     evidence today, and, of course, Mr. Sacic is an important witness for

12     this case, that we'd have to continue next week.

13             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, so far I have only one question

14     in the re-examination, so I have no --

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  You don't think that would take 15 minutes.

16             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, the Chamber has put a lot of questions as

18     well, so we might have additional questions.

19             So, therefore, it is not an option to continue ...

20                           [Trial Chamber confers]

21             JUDGE ORIE:  The Chamber will not further explore the possibility

22     of continuing this afternoon.  There are too many -- and, therefore,

23     whether we will conclude today or not or whether we have to continue on

24     Monday depends on how the cross-examination and re-examination develops.

25             Could the witness be brought into the courtroom.

Page 27994

 1             MR. MIKULICIC:  Your Honour.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Mikulicic.

 3             MR. MIKULICIC:  It just occurred something to me.  In order to

 4     speed up my questioning, during my questioning I intend to relate on

 5     certain documents.  In order to speed up the procedure, and I know that

 6     the bringing up documents on our screens takes a lot of time.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  If you have list --

 8             MR. MIKULICIC:  I will refer to the document and the number, and

 9     I wouldn't -- most -- mostly I wouldn't ask to show them on the screen.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That's, in itself, acceptable.  The Chamber

11     has various relevant documents already printed out for themselves.

12             But please proceed.

13                           [The witness takes the stand]

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Sacic, we'll continue.  We'll still in open

15     session.

16             MR. MIKULICIC:

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 27995











11 Page 27995 redacted.















Page 27996

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18        Q.   I'll pass on to another question, Mr. Sacic.

19             When you were answering the questions of the President of the

20     Trial Chamber, you were shown a map, and you remember that you marked the

21     route that the Special Police units took from Gracac to Donji Lapac.

22     That's Exhibit C4.

23             From today's advantage point which is 15 years and seven months

24     after the events, can you say that the route that you marked on the map,

25     indeed, faithfully reflects the route taken by the units?

Page 27997

 1        A.   Well, I am ashamed to admit that even now, three or four days

 2     after having marked that route, I'm not at all sure whether it was

 3     faithful, and, of course, I cannot say that a battalion of the Special

 4     Police took that very route in the direction of Lapac.

 5        Q.   To the question of the President of the Trial Chamber about the

 6     uniform worn by members of the Special Police during the Storm operation,

 7     you said, and the Chamber has heard much evidence about that, that

 8     Special Police members wore green uniforms but exceptionally sometimes

 9     would wear parts of a uniform with a camouflage pattern, but you said

10     that was very rare.

11             Do comment briefly.  How rare was that?  Could you be a bit more

12     specific?  And which part of the uniform was it that could be different

13     in colour?

14        A.   But it would certainly be rare.  Our reserve forces were not that

15     fully equipped with uniforms as the active duty officers.  So, from --

16     they still had uniforms from 1991, 1992 when we all wore camouflage

17     uniforms.  And depending on their ability to prepare to go out in

18     terrain, they would sometimes have to change into dry clothes.  In their

19     bags, they would sometimes have a jacket mostly, or a -- or a rain

20     jacket, pieces of canvas with a camouflage pattern.

21             MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation]  Could we please --

22             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the counsel please repeat the document

23     reference.

24             MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   The Prosecutor asked you whether you know that a member of the

Page 27998

 1     Special Police was punished for setting fire to houses, and you said that

 2     you remember that in the wider area of Zadar, somebody was punished; is

 3     that correct?

 4        A.   Yes, that's correct.  That's what I said.

 5        Q.   We have in front of us a report dated the 4th of August [as

 6     interpreted], 1995, submitted by the commander of the special unit of the

 7     Zadar-Knin police administration, Mr. Svemir Vrsaljko, to the attention

 8     of the sector Special Police, Mladen Markac, where he says that on the

 9     17th of September, arson was committed and that a certain individual did

10     it.  Is that the case you referred to?

11        A.   Yes, most certainly.  I'm glad you called this up and I'm glad to

12     see that I was right.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Mikulicic, 4th of August reporting, 17th of

14     September.

15             MR. MIKULICIC:  4th of October, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, 4th of October.  Then I have no problems in

17     following the evidence.

18             MR. MIKULICIC:  And this is D531.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  My main concern was that it is maybe difficult

20     to report something in August which happened in September.

21             MR. MIKULICIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

22        Q.   Then, Mr. Sacic, the Prosecutor showed you a witness statement,

23     namely, Exhibit P321.  That was Witness Vanderostyne, who, in

24     paragraph 29 of his statement, stated that, on the road from Gospic to

25     Gracac everything was burnt.

Page 27999

 1             Here's my question:  Do you know that on the road from Gospic to

 2     Gracac there are the settlements of Sveti Rok, Ricica, Lovinac?

 3        A.   Absolutely.

 4        Q.   Do you know that all these are Croatian villages which were set

 5     on fire as early as 1991, when the rebel Serbs engaged in a rebellion

 6     against the Republic of Croatia?

 7        A.   Yes, I'm absolutely familiar with that, immediately familiar,

 8     because I took part in the defence of those areas.

 9        Q.   Then the Prosecutor presented the statement of that same witness

10     and spoke about the route from Gracac to Donji Lapac.  However, your --

11     you replied to that and I will no longer question you about that.

12             In that witness statement, though, the witness says that he

13     travelled from Zagreb to Gracac and travelled through Karlovac, Otocac

14     and Gospic than he saw large-scale destruction.  I'm referring to

15     paragraphs of P531, paragraphs 18, 19, 21, and 23.

16             Can you tell the Trial Chamber, Mr. Sacic, whether it's true that

17     these towns of Karlovac, Otocac, and Gospic, throughout the homeland war,

18     were held by the Croatian side and that they were bombarded daily by the

19     Serb forces?

20        A.   Yes.  I can confirm that, and I feel very sorry for the

21     population of those towns.  Yes, that is absolutely correct.

22        Q.   The Prosecutor went on to ask you, and here's my transcript

23     reference, page 27825, line 4.  Is it true that the inner control of the

24     Special Police, apart from their other tasks, also had the task the

25     collecting information about the members of the Special Police.  Do you

Page 28000

 1     remember that?

 2        A.   Yes, I remember the question.

 3        Q.   Mr. Sacic, you gave an interview to the investigators of the

 4     ICTY.  For the sake of reference, that's tape 2 of video V000-5730, page

 5     13.  Where were you were also asked and you answered that that service

 6     engaged in intelligence activities like the military intelligence

 7     administration in the military, and that its name was inner control just

 8     for -- for formal reasons.

 9             You said that they assisted you and General Markac in the

10     preparation and the planning of the action, that they made maps, and that

11     they had communication with the military intelligence administration

12     about the disposition of enemy forces and their strength.  In other

13     words, that they were in engaged in an intelligence activity both in war

14     and in peace.

15             Can you confirm today that what you said to the to the ICTY

16     investigators at the time is your definition of the role of the inner

17     control?

18        A.   Yes, and I'm very proud that I was able to phrase it that well.

19        Q.   Was the inner control in charge of disciplinary matters?  That

20     was a question of the investigators.  You replied:  They only had to be

21     informed of breaches of discipline.

22             Now, my question to you is:  Did the inner control section of the

23     Special Police, and my reference is D527, the regulation on the structure

24     of the internal affairs, was it the task that section to conduct

25     disciplinary action and take measures against members of the Special

Page 28001

 1     Police who behaved illegally?

 2        A.   No.  They could only submit certain information about morale in

 3     the unit, conditionally speaking.  That's what I understood to be their

 4     task.  To inform me as Chief of Staff, whether the morale in a certain

 5     unit was satisfactory, whether they were motivated to carry out a certain

 6     task to a sufficient degree with regard to the perils that they would

 7     face.  If there was defeatism, that was a very importantly information

 8     for me to know so as to be able to decide where to deploy that unit.

 9             MR. MIKULICIC:  For the sake of reference, that interview,

10     65 ter 7556.

11        Q.   My last question about that, Mr. Sacic is:  Did you, as chief of

12     sector of the Special Police, have the possibility of using the inner

13     control as a tool to find out about breaches of discipline and a tool to

14     sanction those who breached discipline.  Could you use it or could

15     General Markac use it?

16        A.   The -- what you have -- what you quoted a short while ago was my

17     most important tool, that I get information about the enemy and combat

18     readiness and possible problems, if there would be a defeatism or

19     something like that.  But, fortunately, that never happened.

20             MR. MIKULICIC:  Your Honour, I move to private session, if you

21     would.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Perhaps -- yes, we move into private session.

23                           [Private session]

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 28002











11 Pages 28002-28038 redacted. Private session.















Page 28039

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25                           [Open session]

Page 28040

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May we have a break, please.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  One second, Mr. Sacic.

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

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

 5             Mr. Sacic, your testimony has been concluded, which means that

 6     you're excused.  But I'd first like to thank you for coming the long way

 7     to The Hague and for having answered the many questions that were put to

 8     you by the Bench and by the parties.  I wish you a safe return home

 9     again.  You may follow the usher.

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.  Thank you

11     very much.  It's been a honour, and I'd like to say good-bye to you,

12     thank you sincerely and best wishes.

13                           [The witness withdrew]

14                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Now we move back into private session,

16     Mr. Mikulicic, so that we can deal with two matters.

17                           [Private session]

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 28041











11 Pages 28041-28043 redacted. Private session.















Page 28044

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22                           [Open session]

23             THE REGISTRAR:  We're back in open session.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

25             The Chamber first would like to deliver a statement on the

Page 28045

 1     priority of involving individuals in witness interviews who may have an

 2     association to events relevant to the indictment.

 3             Hereinafter, I will refer to these persons associated persons.

 4             The Chamber considered that these person's association to the

 5     events relevant to the indictment can be manifold, such as, for example,

 6     due to their presence on the ground, their participation in meetings or

 7     functions in certain hierarchies.  An associated person can be anyone

 8     with a certain interest in how events relevant to the indictment are

 9     presented in this case.

10             On the 9th of December, 2009, the Chamber requested the parties

11     to submit their positions on the priority of involving associated persons

12     in witness interviews.  This can be found on pages 25.954 to 25.955.

13             On the 15th of December, 2009, the Markac Defence argued that the

14     Prosecution's attempts to impugn investigatory techniques of the

15     Markac Defence were unsubstantiated.

16             On the 17th of December, 2009, the Gotovina Defence submitted its

17     views arguing that as long as there is full transparency about the

18     investigators's presence at the interviews, there is nothing improper in

19     utilising associated persons.  The Gotovina Defence further submitted

20     that Mr. Robertsson, an investigator of the Prosecution manipulated

21     witness Forand's evidence.

22             On the 18th of December, 2009, the Prosecution submitted its

23     views, arguing that such involvement may be inappropriate where the

24     investigator was closely involved in the events that are the subject of

25     the statement.  The Prosecution pointed to the possibility that the

Page 28046

 1     involvement of such individuals may also unintentionally manifest itself

 2     in the statement; for example, by influencing the witness indirectly.

 3     The Prosecution also points to the fact that such investigators may be

 4     important fact witnesses themselves whose recollections may become

 5     tainted by their involvement in other witnesses' interviews.

 6             On the 23rd of December, 2009, the Prosecution rejected the

 7     Gotovina Defence's contempt allegations vis-a-vis Mr. Robertsson.  And on

 8     the 31st of December, 2009, the Gotovina Defence submitted further

 9     support for its allegations, and on the 27th of January, 2010, final oral

10     submissions were heard by the parties, and this can be found at

11     transcript pages 27.061 up to and including 27.079.

12             The Chamber considered all written and verbal submissions of the

13     parties on this matter and finds that the reliability of a witness's

14     statement may be affected even associated person is involved in the

15     taking of the witness statement.  The Chamber considers that there is an

16     inherent risk in such a practice and that the parties should refrain from

17     using associated persons in the taking of certain witness statements.

18     The Chamber adds that this does not mean that associated persons can no

19     longer participate in Defence or Prosecution teams, but, rather, that

20     they cannot be involved in taking witness statements which are related to

21     the person's association.

22             In a situation where witness statements have already been taken

23     with an involvement of associated persons, the Chamber finds that maximum

24     transparency only partially remedies the involvement.  Such transparency

25     would at least better enable the Chamber and the parties to test whether

Page 28047

 1     the inherent risk of such a situation had any influence on the witness's

 2     answers, thereby creating a better position for the Chamber and the

 3     parties to assess, on a case-by-case basis, whether the reliability of a

 4     statement is tainted.

 5             In this case, the Chamber did not find any specific instances in

 6     the facts presently before it where the involvement of an associated

 7     person in the taking of a witness statement made the Chamber believe that

 8     it had been corrupted.

 9             Accordingly the Chamber will not pursue the suggestion of

10     possible contempt against Mr. Robertsson.

11             And this concludes the Chamber's statement.

12             The next item would be a brief statement on scheduling and final

13     briefs.  The Chamber would like to provide the parties with some

14     information on further scheduling in this case.

15             We have four Chamber witnesses left to hear.  Their testimonies

16     will most likely be heard in mid-April.  We then also have a pending

17     application to re-open the Prosecution's case, which may result in the

18     hearing of further evidence.  The Chamber would then, one week after the

19     hearing of the last witness, like to be informed about any rebuttal

20     evidence to be presented by the parties.  The parties should then be

21     ready to submit their final briefs by the 31st of May of this year.

22     Should further developments make this time-line unlikely, the Chamber

23     will consider entertaining requests for extension of time.

24             With regard to the final briefs, although by no means meant as

25     exhaustive, the Chamber would already now like to provide the parties

Page 28048

 1     with a few suggestions.

 2             The Chamber would like -- would find it helpful if the parties,

 3     in particular, the Prosecution, were to include in their final briefs,

 4     specific and well-sourced information about the following:

 5             Firstly, evidence with regard to each alleged incident of murder,

 6     inhumane act and cruel treatment, plunder, wanton destruction, and

 7     deportation and forcible transfer, which identifies the perpetrator,

 8     including the affiliation, if any, with certain police, military or

 9     paramilitary forces.  This may include evidence about which forces or

10     units were present in the given locations or areas at the time.  The

11     parties may, in this regard, use maps, showing the daily or hourly

12     advancement of forces on the ground.  These should be maps already in

13     evidence, or, if a party wishes to produce maps, the party should clearly

14     indicate that these maps exclusively reflect its interpretation of

15     certain identified evidence.

16             And perhaps I should say "well identified evidence."

17             Secondly, for every mentioned incident, the Chamber would find it

18     helpful if the parties were to point out evidence indicating the

19     ethnicity of the victim or victims.

20             And this concludes the Chamber's statement.

21             Now, there's one matter which I already raise, and which will

22     give an opportunity to the parties to perhaps make brief written

23     submissions, unless a yes or a no would be sufficient immediately.

24             The 1991 population census has previously been discussed and

25     segments of it have admitted into evidence.  The Chamber is still

Page 28049

 1     considering whether the entire census or at least all parts relating to

 2     the geographical scope of the indictment in this case should be admitted

 3     into evidence.  And the Chamber would like to receive the parties'

 4     submissions on that.

 5             If this takes more than one or two line, the Chamber would invite

 6     the parties to make written submissions and then the dead-line would be

 7     by next Wednesday.  If, however, the parties could, in a one-liner,

 8     present their positions, then they have an opportunity to do so.  Usually

 9     the Chamber is not seeking one-liners from the parties.

10             No one-liners, I hear, then we will receive your -- yes,

11     Mr. Kuzmanovic.

12             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  I have got a one-liner, I guess.  It is our

13     position that the entire census can be admitted, Your Honour.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  That saves you writing out further

15     argument.

16             MR. KAY:  I will also agree with that, having read the transcript

17     just now, Your Honour.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

19             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I have actually two points,

20     including one on the previous point.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Two one-liners, that's --

22             MR. MISETIC:  Well, the first one-liner is I think it would be

23     more beneficial to all parties if we knew the purpose for which the

24     census is intended.  And then that would help us in whether we need the

25     whole census in or just what is relevant to the indictment period.

Page 28050

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  I have no one-liner answer to that question yet.

 2             The other matter.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  The other matter is we have an issue concerning the

 4     Prosecution being asked to put in this chart, specifying which units are

 5     in the area, et cetera, in their final brief, in the sense that, assuming

 6     we're filing final briefs simultaneously, we don't believe the accused

 7     should be served for the first time without an opportunity to respond in

 8     writing to whatever the specific allegation will be.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  It is not anything more than visualising what is in

10     evidence, so instead of describing that on this -- the beginning of this

11     valley that it was that.  It's just about visualising, nothing more

12     nothing less.

13             MR. MISETIC:  We have a problem with that because the Court may

14     recall from 98 bis that there is an issue there.  An incident took place

15     on -- let's say the 5th of August, and there's evidence that there were

16     units in that area on the 15th of September.  You may recall that from

17     the 98 bis argument.

18             We would like the opportunity to be able to actually verify what

19     is being alleged, what the parameters are for, quote, troops in the area.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  I think, as a matter of fact, I was talking about

21     daily or hourly movement of units.  Of course, if there is no good

22     time-frame it wouldn't make any sense at all to produce any such maps.

23     It is just visualising of what is there as oral evidence, documentary

24     evidence.  But we could discuss this perhaps in a bit further detail, if

25     need be.  But, Mr. Misetic, I fully agree with you, that it makes no

Page 28051

 1     sense to say where troops were on the 5th of August, if that -- because

 2     that would have no relevance, apart from historical relevance from what

 3     happened on the 15th or the 20th.

 4             So, therefore, it is it illustration rather than anything else,

 5     but sometimes describing an area or a territory is sometimes not easy,

 6     and if you want to tell us exactly what happened on the 6th of August, at

 7     8.00 in the morning, on the Plavno valley or what happened during that

 8     morning, then sometimes visualising assists in understanding it.

 9             That's what was on our mind.

10             MR. KEHOE:  Mr. President, just briefly to -- to --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm already stealing --

12             MR. KEHOE:  I will just be 30 seconds.

13             I would, likewise, like to address at some point with the Chamber

14     this listing of murder victims and victims who were the subject of

15     inhumane acts.  Because of all the difficulties we have had, not only

16     with the murder counts but the clarification schedule, we have got no

17     position of the Prosecution after two years of trial on that score.  So

18     we would essentially be getting that discussion of their view on the

19     evidence at the same time that we're filing our brief, which would be

20     problematic, because we're supposed to be answering something that has

21     not been clarified to date.

22             We can discuss it at a later point, Mr. President, I just want to

23     reserve or bring that to the Court's attention.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  And I would encourage you to be in -- to communicate

25     with the Prosecution how they understood this invitation from the

Page 28052

 1     Chamber.  It wasn't an order but it was something the Chamber would like

 2     to see to happen and then to see whether you can agree on what, more or

 3     less, how Ms. Mahindaratne understands it, how you understand it, so that

 4     are you not taken by surprise.

 5             Ms. Mahindaratne --

 6             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President --

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  -- a one-liner for the 91 census?

 8             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President, we agree that the entire

 9     census could be admitted into evidence.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

11             Mr. Mikulicic.

12             MR. MIKULICIC:  Very short question, Your Honour, did Chamber

13     have in mind scheduling the closing arguments?

14             JUDGE ORIE:  We have no expressed ourselves on it.  I can't say

15     that we have not thought about it.  But our thoughts have not developed

16     in such a way that we could, at this moment, give you further information

17     on that.

18             Then we -- with my apologies these were approximately seven

19     minutes is approximately 100 one-liners.  We'll count the number of

20     lines.  I apologise -- my apologies for that to transcribers,

21     interpreters, security, technical staff.

22             We stand adjourned - and now I have to - not until Monday but ...

23                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

24             JUDGE ORIE:  We stand adjourned sine die, which I hasten to add

25     is Latin for "without a day."

Page 28053

 1             Yes.

 2                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.53 p.m.,

 3                           sine die.