1 Monday, 4 March 2013
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused not present]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.
5 JUDGE DELVOIE: Good morning to everyone in and around the
7 Mr. Registrar, could you call the case, please.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case number
9 IT-04-75-T, the Prosecutor versus Goran Hadzic. Thank you, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
11 Could we have the appearances, please, starting with the
13 MS. BIERSAY: Good morning, Your Honours. My name is
14 Lisa Biersay on behalf of the Prosecution, and with me functioning as our
15 Case Manager this morning is Ms. Indah Susanti, also with our intern who
16 is Kay Hong Leung. And I apologise for this column, it's very difficult
17 to see.
18 JUDGE DELVOIE: It is.
19 MS. BIERSAY: Yes. It comes at a price for having such a big
20 courtroom. So good morning.
21 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Zivanovic, for the Defence.
22 MR. ZIVANOVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. For the Defence of
23 Goran Hadzic, Zoran Zivanovic and Christopher Gosnell with
24 Ms. Manal Tellawi.
25 JUDGE DELVOIE: I was told there was an issue, Mr. Gosnell.
1 MR. GOSNELL: Yes. Good morning, Mr. President.
2 On Saturday, that is the day before yesterday, we received an
3 e-mail with a proofing note which is customary. What is less customary
4 is that attached to the proofing note was a rather lengthy series of
5 corrections and additions to the witness's statement made apparently by
6 the witness in an e-mail sent to the Prosecution on the 24th of January,
7 2013, so that was more than a month ago. In particular, there is a new
8 meeting involving the witness and some members of the -- what he believes
9 is the SBWS on around the 20th of April, 1992.
10 This meeting is referenced in a document of which we do have
11 disclosure and which was on the Prosecution list. That's certainly the
12 case. But what we did not have prior to Saturday was any indication that
13 this witness was going to talk about it, much less that he was going to
14 add one particular rather negative observation about that meeting. So we
15 say this is rather new. The e-mail was clearly disclosable to the
16 Defence pursuant to Rule 66(A)(ii). We didn't get it. So I would
17 suggest there's clearly been a violation of disclosure.
18 Now, as to whether -- as to what kind of remedy there might be,
19 it places us in a very difficult position. I'm not sure that this would
20 be an appropriate situation to talk about removing or prevent -- not
21 allowing the admission of this material, but I haven't had any
22 opportunity to discuss it with my client. Now, he may not know anything
23 about it, but I haven't had the opportunity to raise that.
24 So I suppose the remedy that I would ask is that if I don't use
25 the entirety of today for my cross-examination, although I do believe
1 that's likely, that we hold the witness over until tomorrow morning,
2 after I've had an opportunity to consult with Mr. Hadzic, and then I can
3 ask any additional questions that may be necessary about this matter.
4 Thank you, Your Honours.
5 MS. BIERSAY: I agree with the summary given by Mr. Gosnell.
6 What -- I would differ in the assessment of this meeting which is
7 described in a admitted exhibit. The e-mail essentially -- we sent some
8 materials to the witness beforehand because there were lots of potential
9 exhibits for him, and after he looked at those exhibits he forwarded that
10 e-mail as additions for discussion. And it should have been disclosed; I
11 agree with that. So while I agree with that, the information in the
12 e-mail is consistent with the previously disclosed document that
13 identified the witness himself as being present for that meeting. So I
14 have no objections to the witness being held over if Mr. Gosnell deems it
15 appropriate in that regard.
16 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you. So be it.
17 Anything else? Then we can bring the witness in.
18 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
19 [The witness entered court].
20 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Zivanovic, Mr. Hadzic is not here today. We
21 will get --
22 MR. ZIVANOVIC: Yes, he will be absent and we filed a motion.
23 JUDGE DELVOIE: It has been filed. Thank you very much.
24 Good morning, Mr. Witness.
25 THE WITNESS: Good morning, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you for coming to The Hague to assist the
2 Tribunal. Could you state your first and last name, your date of birth,
3 and nationality, please.
4 THE WITNESS: Yes, my name is James Lubin, L-u-b-i-n. My date of
5 birth is 26 March 1936. I am British by nationality.
6 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you very much. Mr. Lubin, you're about to
7 make the solemn declaration by which witnesses commit themselves to tell
8 the truth. I must point out to you that you're exposing yourself to the
9 penalties of perjury should you give false or untruthful information to
10 the Tribunal. May I ask you to give the solemn declaration now. The
11 usher will hand you the text.
12 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
13 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
14 WITNESS: JAMES LUBIN
15 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you very much. You may be seated.
16 Ms. Biersay, your witness.
17 MS. BIERSAY: Thank you, Your Honour.
18 Examination by Ms. Biersay:
19 Q. Good morning, Mr. Lubin.
20 A. Good morning.
21 Q. I take it from your response to me that you are able to hear me
23 A. I can hear you very well.
24 Q. Okay. And can you also hear me well from this microphone?
25 A. I can indeed.
1 Q. Are you comfortably seated?
2 A. Very comfortably. Thank you.
3 Q. Mr. Lubin, could you describe for the Trial Chamber what position
4 you held from approximately March to June of 1992.
5 A. Yes. During that period I was assigned to the United Nations
6 Protection Force in Yugoslavia with the acronym UNPROFOR. I was assigned
7 to an area called Eastern Slavonia. It was one of four sectors of the
8 United Nations protected areas in the former Yugoslavia -- actually, on
9 Croatian territory.
10 Q. In that regard, did you provide a written statement in July of
11 2012 regarding your tender as civilian affairs co-ordinator?
12 A. I did.
13 Q. And before I address the statement specifically, could you
14 describe to the members of the Trial Chamber what occupied most of your
15 time in that position you describe.
16 A. Yes. What occupied me overwhelmingly were the forced population
17 movements of local population. When I say "forced local population
18 movements," I mean they were not planned by the population; they were
19 made to move.
20 Q. And those movements that occurred with -- from within your
22 A. From within the sector into Croatia proper.
23 Q. Now, directing your attention to the July 20, 2012, statement,
24 did you sign that statement?
25 A. I did.
1 MS. BIERSAY: Your Honours, at this time I have a binder which I
2 have shown Defence counsel and he has agreed that I can show it to the
3 witness. So at this time if we could please give this binder that
4 contains some of the documents that we will be using during the witness's
5 examination. Thank you. And in order I will be discussing tab 1 then
6 tab 4 for the Registrar's reference.
7 Q. Now, Mr. Lubin, if you could -- now turning to tab 1 which is a
8 statement that is before you, may I ask the Registrar to display on the
9 screen for the assistance of the Chamber the English original of
10 65 ter number 5964.1.
11 And you can either look at the hard copy of the document you have
12 or on the screen, whichever's easier for you. Directing your attention
13 to this first page, do you recognise that document?
14 A. Yes, it's the witness information testimony I signed.
15 Q. And do you recognise your signature on that page?
16 A. I do.
17 Q. And turning to the next page, if we could, do you recognise any
18 initials at the bottom of that page?
19 A. Yes, I recognise my initials.
20 Q. And did you initial each of the pages of this statement at the
21 time that you signed it?
22 A. I did.
23 Q. If we could turn to the second-to-last page. After paragraph 91,
24 do you recognise the initials on that page?
25 A. I do, they're mine.
1 Q. When you prepared and signed your statement in July of 2012,
2 certain documents were attached to that statement at that time; is that
4 A. That's correct.
5 Q. You have been advised that only the first 19 pages of your
6 statement, the ones that actually contain your words, that only that will
7 be admitted and it will exclude the attachments. Do you understand that?
8 A. I do understand that, yes.
9 Q. Instead, you were asked to provide a supplement to your July 2012
10 statement which correlated the attachment numbers mentioned in your
11 statement to the internal numbering system of the Prosecution. Do you
12 recall that?
13 A. I do recall that.
14 Q. And did you, in fact, prepare and sign such a supplement?
15 A. I did.
16 Q. And when approximately did you sign that supplement, if you
18 A. I signed it, yes.
19 Q. Do you recall whether it was this year or last year?
20 A. It was this year.
21 Q. Now, in preparation for your appearance today, have you had an
22 opportunity to read and review both the 2012 statement and the 2013
24 A. I have.
25 Q. When you reviewed your July 2012 statement, did you find anything
1 that you thought was incorrect?
2 A. Apart from minor typographical errors, there was nothing
3 substantive which would alter the statement in any way.
4 Q. Now, if I could direct your attention to page 6 which is
5 paragraph 27.
6 A. Yes, just one moment, please. Okay.
7 Q. In the first line it says:
8 "While in the Sector, I conducted and participated in regular
9 meetings with the RSK and local Serb authorities ..."
10 Directing your attention to the word "regular," do you have any
11 modification to make to that word?
12 A. Yes, I think it would be better if the word "regular" were
13 deleted because "regular" gives the impression that they were held at
14 certain times on certain days. They were sometimes called at a moment's
15 notice when emergencies occurred. So it would be better to remove the
16 word "regular."
17 Q. Now directing your attention to page 9, paragraph 43, right above
18 that paragraph 43 there is a heading that's:
19 "Witnessed expulsions from Dalj and Aljmas."
20 Is there any modification that you would like to make to that
22 A. Yes, I think the word "witnessed" should be taken out and the
23 village of Erdut also added.
24 Q. Now directing your attention to paragraph 70, which can be found
25 on page 14, in that paragraph it details a letter you sent to the
1 vice-president of the government of the Serbian region of Slavonia,
2 Baranja, and Western Srem, protecting the, one, changing of names of some
3 villages in Sector East which contravened paragraph 17(b) of the UN plan
4 for UNPROFOR's mission ..."
5 Do you have any modification you'd like to make to paragraph --
6 to the words "paragraph 17(b)"?
7 A. Yes, I think it would be better if it were just made "paragraph
8 17," that would clarify my point in that paragraph.
9 MS. BIERSAY: Now turning to tab 4, may I please ask the Registry
10 for 65 ter number 6390.
11 Q. And this one will be on the screen, Mr. Lubin.
12 A. Okay.
13 Q. Do you recognise this document?
14 A. Yes, I do.
15 Q. And what do you recognise it to be?
16 A. I recognise it to be an addendum to my original statement.
17 Q. And do you recognise your signature on that page?
18 A. I do.
19 Q. And on the next page do you recognise your signature on that
20 page, if we could zoom out a bit?
21 A. I do.
22 Q. And where do you recognise it?
23 A. I do.
24 Q. And following -- underneath paragraph 2 is a table correlating
25 the attachments in your statement to identification numbers on the
1 document as well as identification numbers given to you by the Office of
2 the Prosecutor; is that correct?
3 A. That's correct.
4 Q. And if we could go to the next page, please. Do you also
5 recognise any signatures on that page?
6 A. That's my signature.
7 Q. And you previously said that you have been able to review the
8 documents to satisfy yourself that the correlations are correct; is that
10 A. Yes, they are correct.
11 Q. Now, if you were asked questions about the material contained in
12 your 2012 statement and your 2013 supplement, would you provide in
13 substance the same information?
14 A. I would indeed, yes.
15 Q. With the previous corrections made, are these two statements
16 truthful and accurate?
17 A. Absolutely.
18 MS. BIERSAY: Your Honours, at this time the Prosecution tenders
19 65 ter number 5964.1 under seal. There is a public redacted version that
20 is listed as 5964.3. And we'd also tender the supplement which is
21 65 ter number 6390. So three exhibits, two are -- the first two are the
22 same, one under seal version, one public redacted version, and the
23 supplement to those two.
24 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
25 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mrs. Biersay, the public redacted version, is
1 that .3?
2 MS. BIERSAY: .2, forgive me, Your Honours.
3 JUDGE DELVOIE: .2. Okay. And why are they under seal?
4 MS. BIERSAY: They're under -- there's some redactions that were
5 required because of some Rule 70 conditions --
6 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
7 MS. BIERSAY: -- and these documents are referenced.
8 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you very much. Admitted and marked, three
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 65 ter 5964.1 shall be assigned
11 Exhibit P1351 admitted under seal, and its public redacted version 65 ter
12 document 5964.2 shall be assigned Exhibit P1351.1, while the 65 ter 6390
13 will be assigned Exhibit P1352, admitted under seal. Thank you.
14 JUDGE DELVOIE: That last one admitted under seal, Ms. Biersay?
15 MS. BIERSAY: No, it need not be admitted under seal because
16 there's no reference to any specific Rule 70 issues.
17 JUDGE DELVOIE: So the last one not under seal. Thank you,
18 Mr. Registrar.
19 MS. BIERSAY: Turning now to tab 48, may I please ask the
20 Registry for previously admitted Exhibit L2.
21 Q. And that will appear in colour on your screen, Mr. Lubin.
22 MS. BIERSAY: Excuse me, before we go to that tab, could we go to
23 what I believe is previously admitted Exhibit 233.140.
24 MR. GOSNELL: Sorry, could I have a tab number. I can't --
25 MS. BIERSAY: Tab 40.
1 MR. GOSNELL: Thank you.
2 MS. BIERSAY: And is it possible if we could zoom in on the right
3 portion of the map a little bit for the witness. Okay. That should do
5 Q. Mr. Lubin, are you -- this is a map. Do -- are you familiar with
6 the area depicted in this map?
7 A. I am.
8 Q. And what area is depicted in this map?
9 A. This depicts part of the lower half of Sector East.
10 Q. And in this portion of Sector East, are you familiar with the
11 names of the villages depicted?
12 A. Yes, I'm very familiar.
13 Q. And could you describe what, if any, travels you did throughout
14 the sector during your tenure?
15 A. Could you repeat the question.
16 Q. Could you describe to the Trial Chamber whether or not you would
17 travel throughout the sector?
18 A. Yes, I would travel -- every day I would travel throughout the
19 sector, various parts of the sector, depending what kind of emergency had
20 emerged there overnight, and sometimes I would travel just to have a
21 regular meeting with local officials in towns such as Ilok, for instance,
22 and a couple of the other towns.
23 Q. And where were you --
24 A. Villages I should say, excuse me.
25 Q. And where were you headquartered?
1 A. We were headquartered in Erdut in -- towards the top of the map
2 which is cut off.
3 MS. BIERSAY: If we could ...
4 THE WITNESS: Yes. Erdut is situated on the bulge there that
5 goes out into the Danube.
6 MS. BIERSAY:
7 Q. Are you able to take that pen, electronic pen, and just put a
8 spot next to the -- Erdut that you identified?
9 A. Yes. This is Erdut.
10 Q. And make it bigger as well.
11 A. We have two Erduts by [indiscernible] but --
12 Q. Okay.
13 A. It was that area.
14 Q. Now in paragraph 8 of your statement you refer to the UNPROFOR's
15 mission and now I'd like to turn to tab 48, which I hope will be
16 previously admitted Exhibit L2.
17 MS. BIERSAY: The map that we previously saw is already admitted
18 as P233.140 and there's no need to capture the markings by the witness.
19 Q. Now, Mr. Lubin, this document - as you can see - is dated 11
20 December 1991, and you will note that it reads that it is the report of
21 the Secretary-General pursuant to Security Council Resolution 721 (1991).
22 Do you see that?
23 A. I do.
24 Q. If I could now go to page 10 of this -- e-court page of this
25 document, please. And, Mr. Lubin, are you generally familiar with this
2 A. Yes, I am.
3 Q. And now directing your attention to page 10.
4 A. We appear to be on page 15.
5 Q. The document itself is marked page 15 and in our electronic
6 system it appears --
7 A. Excuse me.
8 Q. -- as page 10.
9 A. Excuse me.
10 Q. No, it's very good to put that on the record. Now, what you're
11 looking at is annex 3, and it is the concept for a United Nations
12 peacekeeping operation in Yugoslavia.
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Now, I'd like to direct your attention specifically to page 11,
15 which is the next page which on the document itself reads "page 16."
16 Now, that is right above paragraph 8. It reads:
17 "The United Nations Protected Areas."
18 Directing your attention to paragraph 9, which I believe is the
19 B/C/S 3 if that will assist.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And at paragraph 9 reads that:
22 "There would be three UNPAs: Eastern Slavonia , Western Slavonia
23 and Krajina ..." and that is written in November/December of 1991.
24 Was that the reality that you had when you were deployed to
25 Sector East?
1 A. Yes, Eastern Slavonia was the area in which I performed my
2 duties, but eventually one of the other protected areas, the Krajina, was
3 subsequently divided into north and south, making a total of four UNPAs.
4 Q. The description given there for the borders of the Eastern
5 Slavonia UNPA, could you read that and is that -- and let us know whether
6 that's consistent with the area when you arrived or if -- tell us if it's
8 A. That is consistent with the situation when I arrived, yes.
9 Q. So it included Beli Manastir; is that correct?
10 A. That's correct.
11 Q. And those parts of Osijek which lie east of Osijek city; is that
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Vukovar?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And villages in the eastern --
17 A. Part of --
18 Q. -- part of Vinkovci?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Now, directing your attention to page 13, paragraph 15, and if
21 you wanted to look at a hard copy you can go to -- in your binder it
22 would be tab 48 that would help you to navigate a bit more.
23 A. Thank you.
24 Q. So on the hard copy it will say page "18" on the top portion.
25 Now, if we could focus on the bottom of that page to the heading
1 "Demilitarisation of the UNPAs," it describes that there would be a
2 timetable and the UNPAs would be demilitarised. Now, I'd like to point
3 you to paragraph 15(a) which reads:
4 "All units and personnel to the Yugoslav National Army (JNA) and
5 the Croatian National Guard, as well as any Territorial Defence units or
6 personnel not based in the UNPAs, would be withdrawn from them."
7 My question to you: What was the status of withdrawal of the JNA
8 and Territorial Defence units when you arrived in the sector in March of
10 A. They were present. They had not withdrawn.
11 Q. Was there any withdrawal that happened while you were in the
13 A. Yes, towards the end of my tenure, I believe in late May, the
14 units of the Yugoslav national army started to withdraw.
15 Q. And when you say "started" --
16 A. And they did complete that withdrawal.
17 Q. Directing your attention to 15(b):
18 "All Territorial Defence units and personnel based in the UNPAs
19 would be disbanded and demobilised ..."
20 Was that the case when you arrived to -- into the sector?
21 A. No, it was very far from the case.
22 Q. And why do you say that?
23 A. Because these so-called Territorial Defence unit and, indeed,
24 paramilitaries seemed more armed day by day.
25 Q. If I could direct your attention to page 19 of the document
1 before you, and for us it will be page 14. And directing your attention
2 to subsection (d). So on your page, Mr. Lubin, it says page 19 at the
3 top of the page.
4 A. Okay.
5 Q. And can you see the subsection (d)?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And I'll read it.
8 "All paramilitary, irregular or volunteer units or personnel
9 would either be withdrawn from the UNPAs or, if resident in them, be
10 disbanded and demobilised."
11 A. No, that's not true. They were never demobilised during my time
12 and they were never withdrawn. Indeed, there was a large increase in the
13 number of these irregular forces.
14 Q. And right below that, if I could direct your attention to
15 paragraph 16, that reads:
16 "It would be the responsibility of each unit, before it withdrew
17 or was disbanded, to remove any mines which it had laid while deployed in
18 the UNPAs."
19 Was that -- how does that compare to the reality you faced when
20 you were in Sector East?
21 A. We did begin to oversee the removal of mines, but I think it was
22 a very slow process which certainly hadn't been completed before my
23 tenure was up, which was the 1st of June.
24 Q. On the same page, directing you to paragraph 19, it's just under
25 the heading that reads "local police forces." And the first sentence in
1 paragraph 19 reads:
2 "The maintenance of public order in the UNPAs would be the
3 responsibility of local police forces who would only carry side-arms ..."
4 Now directing my question to you: Does that accurately reflect
5 the situation that you had in Sector East?
6 A. No. My interpretation of "side-arms" would be something like a
7 pistol or small weapon of that sort. It was quite common for all the
8 so-called police - I wasn't sure that they were really policemen - to
9 carry such weapons as Kalashnikovs, that type of heavy-duty weapon which
10 would contravene this agreement.
11 Q. Now, why do you say "I wasn't sure that they were really
13 A. Through our civilian police, our United Nations civilian police,
14 my contacts with them were full time, they would always comment to me
15 that so and so was not a policeman because they knew nothing about basic
16 police procedures. They gave me the impression that they'd either been
17 former military men or some kind of guard who had been hurriedly
18 converted into so-called policemen.
19 Q. Were there any of these policemen whom you knew well on a
20 professional basis whom you were able to confirm that they were police
22 A. Could you repeat that question?
23 Q. So some people you weren't quite sure whether or not they were
24 police officers. Did you have contacts with people whom you knew were,
25 in fact, police officers in their capacity in dealing with you?
1 A. Yes, yes. There were few. It became obvious to me certain
2 police chiefs were very professional in their approach, but others
4 MS. BIERSAY: At this time, Your Honour, if we could please go
5 into private session to address several Rule 70 documents that we have on
6 the list.
7 JUDGE DELVOIE: Private session, please.
8 [Private session]
11 Pages 3195-3200 redacted. Private session.
23 [Open session]
24 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours. Thank you.
25 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
1 MS. BIERSAY:
2 Q. Now, in your statement you describe events relating to the
3 village of Miklusevci. The document that appears that you have in your
4 binder is tab 100, 65 ter number 5945. Is that document familiar to you?
5 A. It is.
6 Q. And what do you recognise it to be?
7 A. I recognise it information I sent to my superior,
8 Cedric Thornberry.
9 Q. And it reads:
10 "Please be advised that the mayor of Vinkovci has telephoned to
11 inform me that approximately 180 Rutheians from Miklusevci have been
13 Now, is that word meant to be "Ruthenians"?
14 A. Yes, it is.
15 Q. And could you explain to the Trial Chamber how frequent it was to
16 receive such calls from the mayor of Vinkovci?
17 A. It wasn't very frequent. This was a rare call. I was usually
18 informed by -- let me retrace that. I would learn of an expulsion in a
19 number of ways from our military observers, our police, and sometimes the
20 local authority would arrive at my door-step and tell me that there was
21 an evacuation or something like that going on in a certain area and I
22 could witness it if I wished.
23 Q. And the last sentence:
24 "Need guidance on how to handle return of expellees to homes
25 already occupied."
1 To what does that refer?
2 A. I'm sorry, could you repeat the question.
3 Q. The very last sentence --
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. -- "Need guidance on how to handle return of expellees to homes
6 already occupied."
7 A. Yes, we simply didn't know how to handle that because in the
8 rare, rare instances where a couple of people wished to stay, their
9 houses were already occupied. So the normal result of this was that they
10 too would be expelled because there was nowhere for them to live.
11 Q. And these homes were occupied by whom, if you know?
12 A. These were occupied by Serb refugees who had been driven out of
13 Croatia, so we were told.
14 MS. BIERSAY: At this time we tender 65 ter number 5945.
15 JUDGE DELVOIE: Admitted and marked.
16 THE REGISTRAR: It shall be assigned Exhibit P1355. Thank you.
17 MS. BIERSAY: And if we could now turn to tab 53 which is
18 65 ter number 5170.
19 Q. Now, in your statement you describe expulsions related to
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And I direct you to this document that reads: "Attempted
23 Expulsion, Tovarnik." Do you recognise this document?
24 A. I recognise it, yes.
25 Q. And what is it?
1 A. This is a situation report. These reports would be sent at least
2 once daily, maybe up to six times daily, depending on the number of
3 incidents that occurred in the sector. Situation reports going to my
4 supervisor Cedric Thornberry in Belgrade.
5 Q. Directing your attention to the second page of that exhibit it
7 "Please be advised that some 22 Croats travelling in a minibus
8 from Tovarnik have been intercepted ..."
9 Is that the expulsion that is referenced in paragraph 86 of your
10 statement about Tovarnik?
11 A. It is.
12 MS. BIERSAY: At this time we'd move for the admission of
13 65 ter number 5170.
14 JUDGE DELVOIE: Admitted and marked.
15 MS. BIERSAY: Now turning --
16 THE REGISTRAR: Shall be assigned Exhibit P1356. Thank you.
17 MS. BIERSAY: Sometimes I wait too long and sometimes not long
18 enough. Forgive me.
19 If we could turn to tab 101. Yes, tab 101 which is
20 65 ter number 5946.
21 Q. Mr. Lubin, do you recognise that document?
22 A. I do.
23 Q. And what do you recognise it to be?
24 A. I recognise it to a short situation report from me again to my
25 supervisor, Thornberry.
1 Q. Now, the subject is "Expulsion Tovarnik." And it reads:
2 "We have now confirmed that some 40 persons were expelled from
3 Tovarnik ... yesterday, 24 May, in the morning.
4 "The expelled were driven out on tractors, 2 or 3 at a time
5 through fields, this avoiding RussBat roadblocks."
6 First of all, what is RussBat?
7 A. RussBat is our Russian Battalion who were assigned to protect and
8 patrol the southern half of the sector. BelBat was the Belgian battalion
9 which was assigned to guard and patrol the northern part of our sector.
10 Q. Now, in your statement there is reference made to 22 expellees
11 from Tovarnik being on bus -- being bussed out of the sector. This
12 document describes 40 persons being expelled through tractors. Could you
13 shed some light on whether we're talking about the same expulsion or two
14 different expulsions?
15 A. We're talking about the same village but with two different
16 expulsions. And I draw your attention to the fact that these expellees
17 were driven on tractors through the fields, actually, thereby avoiding
18 any roadblocks that we'd set up to prevent that. The 22 expellees
19 referenced in paragraph 87 were on a minibus when we intercepted them.
20 MS. BIERSAY: At this time we'd move for the admission of
21 65 ter number 5946.
22 JUDGE DELVOIE: Admitted and marked.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Shall be assigned Exhibit P1357. Thank you.
24 MS. BIERSAY: And, Your Honours, at this time if we could please
25 return to private session to address some more Rule 70 documents.
1 JUDGE DELVOIE: Private session, please.
2 [Private session]
11 Pages 3207-3209 redacted. Private session.
22 [Open session]
23 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honours. Thank
25 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
1 MS. BIERSAY: Thank you.
2 Q. Mr. Lubin, directing your attention to page 8, paragraph 36 of
3 your statement, you describe that the expulsion process was very well
4 organised. What was the basis for that conclusion on your part?
5 A. Yeah, they were very well organised because initially they used
6 buses, local transport buses. Many people were present, some with
7 clipboards with lists of people that were to be expelled. And it was
8 obviously not a spontaneous event.
9 Q. In that regard in describing these expulsions, are you able to
10 describe for the Trial Chamber the atmosphere surrounding these
11 expulsions in Sector East?
12 A. Yeah, the -- the atmosphere was one of absolute terror on the
13 part of those being expelled. On a couple of occasions I actually
14 boarded vehicles and tried to speak with some of the expellees, asking
15 them were they voluntarily leaving. They all said yes and they were all
16 obviously not telling the truth. Most other women were old women, they
17 were crying. There were a few children who were also distressed. There
18 were signs of brutal treatment, bruises on people, bandages. We were
19 always called to these meetings, if we were called at all or informed
20 about them, when it was too late for us to do anything about it. We
21 would ask the people did they want to return to their homes. We would
22 try to protect them. I can't recall one person who wished to return to
23 their home. They were in absolute terror. It was extremely frustrating
24 for us.
25 Q. Thank you, Mr. Lubin.
1 MS. BIERSAY: Your Honour, I am looking at the clock and it
2 appears that it may be time for a break.
3 JUDGE DELVOIE: Yes, Ms. Biersay. Thank you.
4 Mr. Lubin, we'll take our first break. We'll come back at 11.00.
5 You will be escorted out of the courtroom by the court usher. Thank you
6 very much.
7 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Mr. President.
8 [The witness stands down]
9 JUDGE DELVOIE: Court adjourned.
10 --- Recess taken at 10.29 a.m.
11 --- On resuming at 10.59 a.m.
12 [The witness takes the stand]
13 JUDGE DELVOIE: Yes, Ms. Biersay, please proceed.
14 MS. BIERSAY: I rise to inform the Trial Chamber that the
15 Prosecution has no further questions for this witness and at this time we
16 would tender his associated exhibits that are attached to the motion for
17 his -- the admission of his statements pursuant to Rule 92 ter.
18 JUDGE DELVOIE: A memo will be circulated by the Registrar. Yes,
19 they're admitted of course.
20 Mr. Gosnell.
21 MR. GOSNELL: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Good morning,
22 Your Honours.
23 Cross-examination by Mr. Gosnell:
24 Q. Good morning, Mr. Lubin.
25 A. Good morning.
1 Q. My name is Christopher Gosnell, I represent Mr. Hadzic here, and
2 I first off want to thank you for your long and distinguished service to
3 the United Nations, obviously in some very difficult places. Now, I want
4 to return to something you said this morning and that was in referring to
5 policemen that:
6 "I wasn't sure that they really were policemen."
7 Did you find in your time in Sector East that there were
8 individuals who were appropriating for themselves certain positions or
9 titles when, in fact, they had no such authority? They had no authority
10 to do so?
11 A. Yes, this was not only my opinion but it was the opinion of
12 professional police officers assigned to UNPROFOR, namely, our
13 Swedish Battalion of police.
14 Q. And did you find in particular that there were individuals who
15 may previously have been involved in combat either as what would be
16 described as volunteers or paramilitaries who then sought to describe
17 themselves as police?
18 A. I personally was not aware of that, but -- could you rephrase the
20 Q. Well, perhaps I could put it shortly like this: As you travelled
21 to some of the municipalities away from Erdut, for example, did you find
22 that people were acting like police even though no one had appointed them
23 to that position?
24 A. Well, there were active police. I really can't say whether
25 anyone had appointed them or not, no, I couldn't say that.
1 Q. Well, let's take a look at a document and contextualise this.
2 A. Yes.
3 MR. GOSNELL: If we could have Prosecution tab 67 which is P1353
4 which should not be broadcast but perhaps we don't need to go into
5 private session. We'll just look at the substance of this document and
6 this particular portion of the document.
7 MS. BIERSAY: I'm sorry, I normally would agree to that, but the
8 provision is that the document be discussed in closed session, that's the
9 Rule 70 condition that we've been given.
10 MR. GOSNELL: Well, if that's the condition, that's what we'll
11 have to do.
12 JUDGE DELVOIE: Private session, please.
13 [Private session]
11 Pages 3215-3221 redacted. Private session.
13 [Open session]
14 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honours. Thank
16 MR. GOSNELL: And this is Prosecution tab 21 if I can get to it
17 in my own binder.
18 THE REGISTRAR: That would be 65 ter 5163. Thank you.
19 MR. GOSNELL: Yes, thank you. Could we have page 7, please.
20 Q. Now, this appears to be a document from Mr. Johansen to
21 Mr. Thornberry dated the 22nd of February, 1992, and I believe this is in
22 relation to the same incident we're discussing now, the Tovarnik alleged
23 expulsion. And the paragraph I am interested in is the third or fourth
24 paragraph from the bottom:
25 "Regarding the expulsion on 18th May, 1992 - when the bus reached
1 the check-point - the situation had reached what I would call the point
2 of no return."
3 A. Excuse me, sir, that is not the same expulsion. This is on the
4 18th of May. The Tovarnik expulsion you referred to before was on the
5 24th of May.
6 Q. Apologies, that's correct. In any event, this is another
7 event --
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. -- and do you see that characterisation, the point has -- "the
10 situation has reached what I would call the point of no return"?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Is that a fair characterisation of the state of affairs at the
14 A. I think that's a very fair characterisation, yes.
15 Q. And the next paragraph says:
16 "To at least try to prevent further expulsion of people, it is
17 necessary to show a massive presence based on information by CIVPOL in
18 the area - the resources in Sector East - RussBat area are now released
19 for this purpose."
20 Do you recall that, in fact, really a -- notwithstanding what you
21 said earlier about the UN relying on moral suasion and moral motivations
22 that nonetheless really a major armed presence would be required in order
23 to suppress the kind of violence that was encouraging people to leave?
24 A. Yes, that would be my personal opinion, but referring to this
25 paragraph the massive presence he refers to is just massive visibility.
1 Unfortunately, we have -- we did have a problem with patrols in the
2 southern part of the sector. To my mind, the Russian Battalion were not
3 patrolling the area properly. Referring to this document that you've put
4 on the screen, this is a visit the United Nations chief of police and
5 myself made to the Russian Battalion to urge them to ensure that there
6 were more patrols. We were not satisfied that they were doing enough or
7 their presence certainly wasn't visible enough to prevent these kinds of
9 Q. And isn't that because the people who were creating the
10 conditions of instability were well armed?
11 A. I don't follow your question, I'm sorry.
12 Q. Well, isn't it because the individuals who were threatening these
13 civilians, inducing them to leave, the reason a very significant presence
14 would be required is not because these were individuals throwing rocks or
15 pebbles or hitting people with sticks and stones; we're talking about
16 people with armed -- people with rifles. Correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And that kind of opposition isn't going to be lightly overcome,
19 is it?
20 A. Yes, but our job is always negotiation not confrontation.
21 MR. GOSNELL: May I tender this document, please?
22 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
23 THE WITNESS: May I add something to that?
24 JUDGE DELVOIE: Just one moment, Mr. Lubin.
25 The Registrar tells me that this document is already admitted
1 under 92 ter list, Mr. Gosnell.
2 MR. GOSNELL: Thank you kindly. I had not realised that.
3 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
4 JUDGE DELVOIE: Yes, Mr. Lubin.
5 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honour.
6 I want to clarify that this was a United Nations peacekeeping
7 mission. It was not a United Nations peacemaking mission. During the --
8 my some 25 years of service with the United Nations, there was rarely a
9 peacemaking mission. I can only recall one and that was in Somalia.
10 Normally the conditions have to exist in an area where there is peace to
11 keep. Unfortunately, events showed that in this area there was no peace
12 to keep.
13 MR. GOSNELL: Could we --
14 Q. Thank you for that, sir.
15 MR. GOSNELL: Could we have Prosecution tab 27 , please, which is
17 Q. And coming up on screen in front of you, sir, is a sitrep from
18 you to Mr. Thornberry and this concerns an event in Beli Manastir on
19 17 April, which you do describe in your statement. I won't ask you to go
20 through all the details of that. In this statement at point 3 you say:
21 "Two Hungarian families who had complained to
22 CIVPOL - Beli Manastir of threats and violent acts against them from
23 local were escorted and assisted in crossing the Batina bridge since they
24 had declared their desire to return to Hungary. ICRC also assisted in
25 this process."
1 Would this again be one of those circumstances where you would
2 say you'd made the determination that these individuals genuinely needed
3 or wanted to leave?
4 A. Yes, the determination was actually made by another civil affairs
5 officer, Adnan Abd-Elrazek, who had arrived in the area and became
6 responsible for the northern part of our sector. He relayed information
7 to me about this family and I accompanied him together with the ICRC in
8 this process. We were very moved by this family. They had young
9 children. It was a typical expulsion. The car was heavily laden with
10 personally belongings and I didn't actually go to the border of Hungary.
11 I just escorted them out of the sector across the Batina bridge where the
12 ICRC took over, and the children in the car before they left gave us a
13 bunch of daffodils picked from their garden. I remember it very well.
14 Q. And these families were forced to leave without the vast majority
15 of their belongings; is that true?
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. And, in fact, weren't they leaving with the clothes on their
18 backs and small bundles or parcels of belongings?
19 A. That's correct. In a car, actually, in a car, their own car.
20 Q. The fact that they didn't have all of their belongings didn't
21 mean that you shouldn't assist them. In fact, the fact that they had
22 fled just with the clothes on their backs was an indication that the
23 situation was urgent; is that correct?
24 A. Yes. This was not a rapid departure. They had told
25 Mr. Abd-Elrazek a couple of days before that they wanted to leave. So
1 they had a few more belongings than would normally take place when the
2 expellees had not been given any notice that they were going to have to
4 Q. It says here in this report that their departure was not without
5 incident but the two families and three heavily laden small cars were
6 then assisted to the Hungarian border by ICRC. Did someone attempt to
7 block them from leaving?
8 A. They did.
9 Q. Who?
10 A. Paramilitaries. And even the Yugoslav army. I think there were
11 two instances, separate instances, where I had to talk them a way through
13 Q. Were they blocking the departure of these individuals because
14 they were afraid of being accused of engaging in expulsion of civilians?
15 A. You'd have to ask them.
16 Q. Did they tell you?
17 A. I didn't discuss it with them.
18 Q. Did Mr. Abd-Elrazek discuss it with them and tell you?
19 A. We didn't discuss it with them. We just told them what we wanted
20 to do and asked for free passage.
21 Q. And no indication as to why they would try and stop you?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Did you ever hear from any of the individuals that you assisted
24 that they were waiting precisely for UNPROFOR's arrival so that they
25 could leave the area because they previously had been prevented from
1 leaving, whether by the JNA or anyone else?
2 A. No, I wasn't aware of that.
3 Q. Was a list made of the individuals in these three cars, either by
4 you or by Mr. Abd-Elrazek?
5 A. That would have been -- civilian police would do that. There was
6 co-ordination always with civilian police.
7 Q. Do you remember whether anyone as part of this convoy to Batina
8 bridge was armed or was it just unarmed UNCIVPOL individuals as far as
9 you know?
10 A. In this particular instance it was Mr. Abd-Elrazek and myself and
11 that was all. No other -- I beg your pardon. I think we had a civilian
12 police officer with us. I can't remember his name.
13 MR. GOSNELL: I'm done with that document. I'm not sure whether
14 this is an associated exhibit or not, if not I would tender it. It is an
15 associated exhibit. Thank you. I'm done with the document.
16 MS. BIERSAY: Just, excuse me, if I can be of assistance, all the
17 tabs essentially from 1 through 39 are part of the associated exhibits,
18 if that assists.
19 MR. GOSNELL: Tremendously. Thank you.
20 Q. You say in your statement that there were 33.000 Serb refugees in
21 Sector East who had themselves been expelled or at the very least fled
22 from other parts of Croatia; is that correct?
23 A. Yes. I can't be absolutely sure about the number, but there is
24 certainly an approximation.
25 Q. And based on your observation, were these individuals angry about
1 what had happened to them?
2 A. It was very, very difficult for me to know who was Serb refugee
3 and who was a local Serb. During several public briefings, Serbs would
4 tell me their side of the story. They would relate their situation where
5 they true had been expelled from Croatia. In fact, some of the stories
6 were quite moving. So I was aware that there was anger in some cases.
7 Q. Would you say that the presence of what I would characterise as
8 such a large number of refugees or internally displaced persons, to be
9 technically correct, created a situation of volatility in the area?
10 A. Yes, I would say so.
11 Q. Now, earlier today you said "certain police chiefs were very
12 professional in their approach but others weren't."
13 Can you recall which police chiefs would you recall were very
14 professional in their behaviour?
15 A. Yes, it was a small minority. I can recall one in particular.
16 He was the chief police of Ilok. He was very open, and in my opinion he
17 was honest. But he was unique. I believe he was a Croat married to a
19 Q. Well, let's go to Prosecution tab 82, which is 05903. I suggest
20 to you, sir, that perhaps there were some other police chiefs who
21 certainly at the time you thought were making their best efforts to tamp
22 down a difficult situation. And if we go to page 3 --
23 MR. GOSNELL: This should be in closed session.
24 JUDGE DELVOIE: Private session, please.
25 [Private session]
11 Page 3230 redacted. Private session.
19 [Open session]
20 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honours. Thank
22 MR. GOSNELL: If we can go to page 3, please.
23 Q. This is your report to Mr. Thornberry regarding your trip to
24 Beli Manastir on the 22nd of April, and here you also confirm, as you've
25 just said:
1 "Beli Manastir officials made it clear they want a permanent
2 civilian presence in Baranja and hope to hold similar meetings to discuss
3 civil affairs issues. Local police admitted that extremists were
4 responsible in civilian affairs working group meeting."
5 Do you recall that working group meeting specifically?
6 A. Yeah, I recall the meeting, but I can't say accurately what was
7 discussed there.
8 Q. "Civilian authorities said expulsion order was a forgery,
9 co-operation again promised, usual problem: Orders not followed at lower
10 level ..."
11 A. I'm sorry, where is this?
12 Q. Down at the very bottom of page 3, if we could just scroll down.
13 A. Could you repeat that, please.
14 Q. Yes.
15 "Local police admitted that extremists were responsible in
16 civilian affairs working group meeting. Civilian authorities said
17 expulsion order was a forgery ..."
18 Perhaps I should just stop here and situate this. You say in
19 your statement that there was an alleged expulsion order for individuals
20 and the -- the civilian authority here, am I correct, is denying that
21 that was issued by them; correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Okay. And then they say:
24 "Co-operation again promised. Usual problem: Orders not
25 followed at lower level."
1 What are you referring to there?
2 A. Again, I can't find it.
3 Q. I'm sorry, sir, it's the very last line of the page --
4 A. Ah, okay.
5 Q. -- which I think is now there.
6 A. Yes. Yeah, I think I'm referring to the police giving orders and
7 they weren't followed at the lower level.
8 Q. And what do you mean by in the first instance the police and in
9 the second instance the lower level?
10 A. The police.
11 Q. Well, who are you referring to precisely in this context, which
13 A. I think I'm referring to the local police.
14 Q. And who are you saying here is not following those orders?
15 A. The local police.
16 Q. So to summarise, does that mean you're saying the local police
17 chief is trying to give orders and that individual policemen are not
18 following them; is that the gist of this or is it something else?
19 A. That appears to be the gist of it, yes.
20 Q. Now, given that you have here a police chief who wants to have a
21 civilian UN presence in his jurisdiction, he's admitting frankly that
22 there is this violence occurring, he's admitting that extremists are
23 committing it, and he does - according to you - in the last line he does
24 appear to be giving orders to -- at least to the best of his ability to
25 tamp down these problems?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Why do you say he's being duplicitous?
3 A. At what date was this meeting?
4 Q. Well, you've written this report on the 22nd of April and --
5 A. This report -- the sitrep?
6 Q. And it may be the same day. In any event, sometime around the
7 22nd of April because I know how prompt you are about reporting events in
8 your documents?
9 A. Yes, absolutely. Yeah, I probably say that he's being
10 duplicitous now because these are things that I learned as the mission
11 went on, that whatever police officials told me I had to take with a
12 grain of salt.
13 Q. Doesn't it occur to you that in this context - and you surely
14 were aware that there was instability in this region - and why do you
15 discount the possibility that he was not being honest in asking for
16 CIVPOL to be there, in asking for assistance, and in telling you quite
17 frankly that this violence was going on and he wasn't able to stop it?
18 A. In this area nothing was ever what it seemed. There were always
19 lies and counter lies. He may well have been telling the truth, but by
20 this stage in the mission I was very skeptical about everyone. Frankly,
21 I can't recall this conversation accurately or the meeting accurately.
22 This is 21 years ago.
23 Q. I'd like now to turn to the Vance Plan and that's L2, Prosecution
24 tab 48. Because I'd like, if possible, to try and look at who is
25 responsible for what in Sector East during these important -- this
1 important time-period. And if we could go to paragraph 7 of the annex
2 which is -- it says page 16 on the page. I believe this is page 11 in
3 e-court. And here we have the basic concept set out. And it says:
4 "United Nations troops and police monitors would be deployed in
5 certain areas in Croatia, designated as 'United Nations Protected Areas.'
6 These areas would be demilitarised; all armed forces in them would be
7 either withdrawn or disbanded. The role of the United Nations troops
8 would be to ensure that the areas remained demilitarised and that all
9 persons residing in them were protected from fear of armed attack ..."
10 Now, let's just stop there. I think you'd agree with me that
11 what we have is a clear obligation on the part of UNPROFOR to prevent
12 remilitarisation of the area once it has been demobilised; is that
14 A. It doesn't say that, does it?
15 Q. "The role of the United Nations troops would be to ensure that
16 the areas remained demilitarised ..."
17 A. Okay.
18 Q. So that's correct?
19 A. That's correct.
20 Q. Now, you'd agree that this paragraph doesn't say who is
21 responsible for actually compelling demilitarisation; is that correct?
22 A. There again, this is a peacekeeping operation, not a peacemaking
23 operation, so there was no compelling.
24 Q. Except UNPROFOR is responsible here to ensure "that the areas
25 remained demilitarised."
1 A. Yes, but UNPROFOR was not authorised to use force in that
3 Q. So they have an obligation that you're saying they may not be
4 able to fulfil? I withdraw that question.
5 If we could go down to page 15 in e-court and it's paragraph 15
6 of the annex. Now, down at the bottom we have the section starting
7 "demilitarisation of the UNPAs." And here's what that says:
8 "On the basis of the agreed timetables, demilitarisation of the
9 UNPAs would be implemented as rapidly as possible, in the following
10 way ..."
11 In the first instance it says:
12 "All units and personnel of the Yugoslav National Army ... the
13 Croatian National Guard, as well as Territorial Defence units or
14 personnel not based in the UNPAs, would be withdrawn from them.
15 "All Territorial Defence units and personnel based in the UNPAs
16 would be disbanded and demobilised. Disbandment would involve the
17 temporary dissolution of the unit's command structures."
18 (C), and this is, I would suggest, a crucial one:
19 "The weapons of the Territorial Defence units and personnel based
20 in the UNPAs would be handed over to units of JNA or the Croatian
21 National Guard, as the case may be, before those units withdrew from the
22 UNPAs ..."
23 Does it appear to you looking at that that implies an obligation
24 on the part of the JNA to enforce, if necessary, demobilisation of, and
25 it's described I think very clearly here, Territorial Defence units and
2 A. Yes. I would just add a rider to this that most of the military
3 matters were dealt with by my United Nations military colleagues.
4 Q. Except that you met with General Biorcevic, the commander of the
5 12th Corps quite frequently; isn't that correct?
6 A. I did.
7 Q. Why did you meet with him so frequently?
8 A. Because he wanted me to meet with him in the first instance and
9 he was the only legal authority as far as I knew. The so-called local
10 administration was not recognised as official by the United Nations, but
11 of course we had to deal with them because they were de facto.
12 Q. De facto what? I'm sorry, I thought you were going to say
13 something else?
14 A. They were de facto authorities.
15 Q. When you say "de facto authorities," are you saying that the JNA
16 were the ones with the practical capacity and the only ones with
17 practical capacity to enforce security in this area, in Sector East? And
18 I'm talking about before the arrival of UNPROFOR.
19 A. Yes, I would say that.
20 Q. And during the transition time while RussBat was coming up to
21 strength, really it was still also only the JNA; correct?
22 A. That's correct.
23 Q. In fact, you refer in your statement to unoccupied Croatia, and I
24 believe you may use the term "occupied Croatia," but you certainly do use
25 the term unoccupied Croatia. Was it your view that Sector East, at least
1 the areas in which the JNA was present, was occupied by the JNA?
2 A. Yes.
3 MR. GOSNELL: Could we go to Prosecution tab 29 which is 05929.
4 Q. Sir, can you give a general -- before looking at this document,
5 can you give me a general idea of how frequently you did meet either with
6 General Biorcevic or with any JNA officers?
7 A. A general idea. Certainly on arrival I met with him quite
8 frequently because I was shuttling backwards and forwards from the sector
9 to the Croatian side, and whatever comments the Croatian side made to me
10 I would relate to General Biorcevic and vice versa. I was communicating
11 their different opinions on various matters. So I met with him
12 frequently earlier in the mission. As the mission went on, I met less
13 and less frequently with him. I met after that mainly with the Krajina
15 Q. Now, at -- by the way, did you ever meet the head of the military
16 police of the 12th Corps?
17 A. Do you remember his name?
18 [Defence counsel confer]
19 MR. GOSNELL:
20 Q. I'm not sure of the rank but it was a Kosutic?
21 A. He's -- probably attended by initial reconnaissance meetings. I
22 had two initial reconnaissance missions at the beginning of March, early
23 in March, when there were a large number of military men present on
24 General Biorcevic's vessel which was tethered in the Danube. He may well
25 have been amongst those officers, but I don't recall meeting with him
1 certainly on -- not on a regular basis after those initial meetings.
2 Q. If we could look at page 3 of the document there on the screen in
3 front of you, sir.
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. It says - and this is the 19th of April - and this is in
6 reference to as you say here in paragraph 1 "last night's expulsions from
8 Then you go down to paragraph 3 and that's what I'm --
9 A. I'm on page 2 here so could you go back.
10 THE REGISTRAR: There are only two pages of this document.
11 MR. GOSNELL: Sorry page 1, paragraph 3.
12 Q. Now, it's paragraph 3 that I'm interested in. It says:
13 "As we were unable to meet with top JNA officials, JNA liaison
14 officers were informed. They were also informed of the looting of 20
15 Croat houses in," it could be Torjanci, I'm not sure, "by JNA soldiers
16 (see CIVPOL report). UNPROFOR's position on lack of JNA control over
17 above was made clear."
18 Now then if we can go over to page 2, paragraph 6.
19 "From the above you will again see that JNA is losing control
20 both of its own soldiers and other paramilitary units. Evidence given in
21 the Dalj incident shows that such paramilitary were involved."
22 Now, I'm interested in that formulation in paragraph 6 that you
24 "From the above you will again see that JNA is losing control
25 both of its own soldiers and other paramilitary units ..."
1 Now, was it your view that the paramilitary units at this time,
2 as of the date of that report, 19th of April, were under the de facto
3 control of the JNA?
4 A. I wouldn't characterise it as that, but they certainly had
5 influence over them.
6 Q. Was it your view that they should have control over those
7 paramilitary units?
8 A. No, I don't think I should have an opinion on that. I can tell
9 you that people I believe were part of the paramilitary operation were
10 present at some of those earlier meetings that I mentioned to you before,
11 early in March. There were vast numbers of soldiers in irregular
12 uniforms there. Some of them even had hand-grenades hanging from their
13 shoulder straps, which I don't think is a regular military uniform
15 Q. Was that at the meeting on the ship in the Danube?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Those paramilitaries were present there?
18 A. Yes, I believe so. I believe so because their uniforms were not
20 Q. Sir, the reason I'm asking you these questions, you say it's not
21 for you to say, we're discussing the Vance Plan --
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. -- and I'm trying to get an understanding of who was responsible
24 for what as envisaged by the Vance Plan.
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And what we have in 16 -- excuse me, in paragraph 15(c) is a
2 statement that "weapons of the Territorial Defence units and personnel
3 based in the UNPAs," and I suggest to you that the reference to personnel
4 based in the UNPAs is a bit of euphemism in diplo-speak for
5 paramilitaries --
6 MS. BIERSAY: Objection, Your Honour. That -- that
7 interpretation may be unique to Mr. Gosnell, but the witness is not
8 required to adopt it. So if Mr. Gosnell would like to ask the witness if
9 he agrees with that, that would be another thing. But I object to him
10 incorporating it in his question in that manner.
11 MR. GOSNELL:
12 Q. Well, let's go back to L2. Keeping in mind, sir, what you've
13 just seen in paragraph 6 of your report, let's go back to L2 and have a
14 look at the Vance Plan. And that's page 19 of the annex.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. I'll read it but it's coming up in front of you.
17 "The weapons of the Territorial Defence units and personnel based
18 in the UNPAs would be handed over to units of JNA ..."
19 What do you understand the reference to "personnel based in the
20 UNPAs" to be?
21 A. Could you repeat the question, please.
22 Q. Sure. It says there at the beginning of the sentence, this is
23 about who -- to whom may weapons be given that are demobilised. And at
24 the beginning of 15(c) it clearly says that the weapons of the
25 Territorial Defence can be given to the JNA, and then there's a second
1 group identified. And it says:
2 " ... and personnel based in the UNPAs ..."
3 A. Well, I'd think that was -- be paramilitaries. I would -- I
5 Q. Thank you. And -- and you say in paragraph 6, if we can now go
6 back to 05929, please, page 2. And I apologise for flipping back and
7 forth between these documents, sir.
8 "From the above you will again see that the JNA is losing control
9 both of its own soldiers and other paramilitary units ..."
10 So here we have an apparent role for the JNA in demobilising
11 these paramilitary units. We have the paramilitary units, according to
12 you, being present on the JNA ship in the Danube. Are you saying in this
13 paragraph that at this time you viewed the JNA either as de facto in
14 control or that if they weren't in control they must be in control? Is
15 that the view of the -- of UNPROFOR?
16 A. Let me read that question again. Officially the JNA were in
18 Q. Officially and in substance true?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And as far as the Vance Plan is concerned, that's who has to be
21 in control of demobilising these groups; correct?
22 A. Yes, but you know there was a -- further memorandums, additions
23 to the Vance Plan, spelling out in more detail the demilitarisation of
24 these units. And I believe in that further document it doesn't say
25 anything about weapons being handed over to the JNA. I think you'll find
1 that those weapons were supposed to be put under the control of both our
2 military and local authorities with a lock -- with keys belonging to
3 ourselves, when I say ourselves, I mean our military and the local
4 authorities. So this previous document was superseded.
5 Q. We're going to come to that change.
6 A. Mm-hmm.
7 Q. But before we -- I'm not planning on coming to this other
8 document right now --
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. -- but as we -- but while we're on the subject, when you say that
11 there was a double-lock system and that one of the keys was to be held by
12 the local authorities --
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. -- do you recall that, in fact, it wasn't the RSK or the SBWS
15 that was supposed to control one of those keys, it was, in fact, the
16 local opstina. Do you recall that?
17 A. You may well be right, but these -- this is a military aspect of
18 the mission. I did not deal with any of the military aspects of the
19 mission. I relied purely on the military commanders we had there.
20 Q. Let's go back to L2, please. And let's move away a little bit
21 from the military, but, sir --
22 A. May I just add --
23 Q. Sir, if I can just situate the reason why I'm asking these
24 questions. I want to situate the police questions within the broader
25 context of the military questions, and I think you'd agree that it's not
1 possible to discuss one without the other; is that right?
2 A. Yes.
3 MR. GOSNELL: Could we have page 12 of this document.
4 THE WITNESS: But may I make a further explanation on this
5 Security Council document that you've referred to?
6 MR. GOSNELL:
7 Q. Please do.
8 A. I did not operate under the instructions in that document because
9 it was amended by further documents which clarified the duties of both
10 civilian personnel, military personnel, and our civilian police. There
11 spelled out in much more exact terms in that further document which we do
12 have because I've seen it. I don't know the number, but I'm sure you can
13 find out which one it was. So really, this document that you've been
14 pointing me to is a bit of a red herring.
15 Q. Well, with respect, I don't think it's a red herring, but in any
16 event we will discuss the subsequent amendments to the plan. If we could
17 look at paragraph 10 and now we're going to move over to the police, it
19 "The function of protecting the inhabitants of the UNPAs would be
20 shared between the United Nations Forces infantry units and its civilian
21 police monitors. The infantry would ensure that the UNPAs remained
22 demilitarised ..."
23 We were discussing that earlier. And then it says:
24 "The police monitors would ensure that the local police carried
25 out their duties without discrimination against any nationality and with
1 full respect for the human rights of all residents ..."
2 And then at paragraph 12 it says the civilian police monitors
3 would be unarmed. And then if we go to page 14, paragraph 19:
4 "The maintenance," and this is the critical portion:
5 "The maintenance of public order in the UNPAs would be the
6 responsibility of local police forces who would carry only side-arms ..."
7 Is that correct that they were legally not permitted to carry
8 more than side-arms?
9 A. That's correct.
10 Q. And that wouldn't be enough, would it, to keep control of
11 paramilitaries who were intent on destabilising the situation, would it?
12 A. I don't think I'm qualified to comment on that.
13 Q. Well, you were there?
14 A. I was there.
15 Q. You saw the types of people who were committing these acts,
16 groups of paramilitaries with rifles. Would you say that police carrying
17 side-arms would have been in a position to stop them?
18 A. Well, some of their own policemen were involved in these
19 expulsions, so they would be their own men.
20 Q. Some people who you said earlier were claiming to be police but
21 who may not have been; correct?
22 A. Correct.
23 Q. Now --
24 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Gosnell, I see the time.
25 MR. GOSNELL: Thank you very much, Mr. President.
1 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Lubin, we'll take a second break. We come
2 back at 12.45. You will be escorted out of the courtroom by the court
3 usher. Thank you very much.
4 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
5 [The witness stands down]
6 JUDGE DELVOIE: Court adjourned.
7 --- Recess taken at 12.16 p.m.
8 --- On resuming at 12.45 p.m.
9 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Gosnell, at page 66 of the transcript it is
10 about the demobilisation the weapons of the Territorial Defence units and
11 personnel based in the UNPAs would be handed over to the units of the
12 JNA. And you asked the witness what do you understand the reference to
13 personnel based in the UNPA to be. And then you say -- it says that --
14 it says there at the beginning of the sentence: "This is about to whom
15 weapons may be given that are demobilised and at the beginning of 15(c)
16 it clearly says that the weapons of the Territorial Defence can be given
17 to the JNA and then there is a second group identified." And it says,
18 "and personnel." And then you get the answer I suppose you wanted to
19 get, but could we go to L2, the document, and this was on page -- let's
20 see -- where is it. You could perhaps help me where it is.
21 MR. GOSNELL: Sorry, Mr. President, it's -- on the page it says
22 page 19 of the annex.
23 JUDGE DELVOIE: On the page it says 19. Yes, there it is. Now
24 could we go to page 18 where under (a) and (b) it is said all units and
25 personnel of the Yugoslav National Army and in (b) all
1 Territorial Defence units and personnel based in the UNPA; right?
2 MR. GOSNELL: Yes, Mr. President.
3 JUDGE DELVOIE: Would you -- is it your understanding that each
4 time where it is said "personnel" here it is referred to paramilitaries?
5 MR. GOSNELL: I believe so, but I do think it's a matter of
6 evidence. My reading is that that is, indeed, the case.
7 JUDGE DELVOIE: My problem is, Mr. Gosnell, that you suggest to
8 the witness that it is a separate category. Shouldn't you first have
9 asked him whether he considers it a separate category and eventually
10 allowed him to read the rest of the text, because I think a plain reading
11 means that it is the TO, all units and its personnel?
12 MR. GOSNELL: I now understand where you're -- that reading,
13 Mr. President. I had not read it that when I put it to him.
14 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay.
15 MR. GOSNELL: But I'm more than happy to be fair to the witness
16 to then go back and let him say otherwise, because I did not intend to
17 force him into that answer.
18 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay. I'm very happy to hear that, Mr. Gosnell,
19 because I was under the impression that this could be something that
20 could be considered as cross-examination skill in common law but would be
21 much less be appreciated by a civil law judge. So I'm happy with your
23 MR. GOSNELL: I had no intention to do that. I genuinely had
24 read it as two different categories.
25 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay.
1 MR. GOSNELL: But I entirely see what you're reading too.
2 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
3 The witness may be brought in.
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 MR. GOSNELL: Perhaps it would be possible to save time to bring
6 L2 -- oh, it's already on the screen. Thank you.
7 Q. Mr. Lubin, if I may, I'd like to go back to a subject that we
8 have already discussed and I want to give you an opportunity, a full
9 opportunity, to think about whether or not there's an answer that I may
10 have pushed upon you a bit too strongly, and it concerns -- if we go over
11 to the next page on this document in front of you, again coming back to
12 this formulation "the weapons of the Territorial Defence units and
13 personnel based in the UNPAs ..." I hate to belabour this but I do want
14 to be fair to you, sir.
15 A. Okay.
16 Q. It is possible that what is being said here is it's the units and
17 personnel of the TO who -- whose weapons are being handed over to the
18 JNA. That's a fair and possible reading, isn't it?
19 A. You're asking me that question?
20 Q. I'm sorry to have to ask it, but I made a mistake in pushing it
21 on you too strongly, so now I'm giving you the opportunity to say
23 A. The wording in this document was superseded by a further document
24 clarifying the role of everyone in the mission. It was much simplified,
25 so that paragraph is irrelevant. I'll be pleased to answer questions on
1 the updated version of the plan, the one that we used as our Bible in the
3 Q. Let me just ask you to -- for your patience for one additional
4 question on this document before we move on, because after all this is
5 the precursor at the very least to the document that you're referring to.
6 And down at (d) it does say "all paramilitary, irregular, or volunteer
7 units or personnel would either be withdrawn from the UNPAs or if
8 resident in them be disbanded and demobilised."
9 A. Yes, again, I don't know what the version is in the other
10 document because I don't have it in front of me.
11 Q. Let's move now to Prosecution tab 26, please. This is 05919. If
12 we could look at subparagraph (b), page 5. Now, this appears to be the
13 press briefing that was given by Mr. Eckard around the 14th of April.
14 Would you say that this accurately reflects what -- the Vance Plan as it
15 was implemented? And, sir, I'm not asking you for a
16 provision-by-provision analysis; that's a general question.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. So it does reflect the Vance Plan as --
19 A. It does.
20 Q. Now, if we just look at paragraphs (a) and (b), it again refers
21 to the withdrawal of JNA and Territorial Defence units or personnel.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Then it says:
24 "All Territorial Defence units and personnel based in the UNPAs
25 are to be disbanded and demobilised ... demobilisation means that the
1 personnel involved would cease to wear any uniform or carry any weapons,
2 though they could continue to be paid by the local authorities."
3 I assume you wouldn't accept, sir, that there is any group of
4 paramilitaries or armed individuals that would escape these provisions,
5 that are not intended to be covered by these provisions; is that correct?
6 A. No, the provisions would cover everyone.
7 Q. And if we can turn the page over to page 6, I want to ask you
8 about police -- or perhaps before we do that, sorry, we could just stay
9 on page 5 for one last -- one last issue, because before the break you
10 properly suggested that there had been a change as to whom the weapons
11 could be given. And it says there in paragraph (c):
12 "The weapons ... are to be placed in secure storage under a
13 two-lock system, with one lock being controlled by UNPROFOR and the other
14 by the president of the council of the opstina (district) concerned."
15 Now, first of all, would you agree, just to be clear, that
16 "opstina" is better translated as "municipality"?
17 A. I believe that's the translation, yes.
18 Q. And do you have any understanding as to why it was decided that
19 the key should be held by the president of the council of the opstina
20 instead of, for example, anyone from the regional SBWS government?
21 A. No. This is a military matter. I wouldn't have any intimate
22 knowledge of why that was done.
23 Q. Well, let's look at a police matter if we turn the page. And
24 again we see here the same provision. This actually, sir, is in all
25 material elements identical to the provision from the Vance Plan which is
1 paragraph 19 of the Vance Plan. But since we have this document in front
2 of us and you prefer this one, let's use this one.
3 A. No, it's not a question of whether I prefer it. It's a question
4 of which instructions we were operating under. I had no choice in the
6 Q. In the first full paragraph it says:
7 "The local police forces are responsible to the existing opstina
8 councils in the UNPAs. Any existing regional police structures can
9 remain in place, provided they are consistent with the principle
10 described above concerning the national composition of the local police
12 Do you have any understanding or knowledge as to why local police
13 forces were to report to the opstina councils instead of, for example, to
14 the regional structures?
15 A. No, I don't have any idea.
16 Q. Can you recall the existence of any regional police structures?
17 A. No, I cannot. Police matters were dealt with by civilian police.
18 I had my hands full with civilian matters.
19 Q. Did you need a JNA pass to move around Sector East?
20 A. No. I was promised freedom of movement.
21 Q. Were other UN officials required to have a JNA pass --
22 A. No.
23 Q. -- to move around?
24 A. No.
25 MR. GOSNELL: Could we have Prosecution tab 21 which is 05163,
2 Q. Just to follow-up on my last question: Did you pass through JNA
3 check-points when you travelled around Sector East?
4 A. I did.
5 Q. And can you describe how frequently you came across JNA
6 check-points? At what intervals were they placed along the roads if they
7 were on the roads?
8 A. That's truly very difficult to remember, Mr. Gosnell. I'm sorry.
9 Q. Well, let's put it this way. At the outskirts, for example, of
10 Erdut where you were residing at the time, did you pass through JNA
11 check-points in all directions or only one direction or can you recall
13 A. There again I can't be sure because since we were never stopped,
14 since we were assured freedom of movement, it was something that I
15 wouldn't observe. It's a general principle in all UN peacekeeping
16 operations that an essential part of our job is to have complete freedom
17 of movement.
18 Q. If we can go to page 3 of this document down at the bottom and
19 this is your -- this particular part of the document is your report -- at
20 least you're the drafter of this report. It appears to be the 22nd of
21 May, 1992. Down at the bottom of point 4 there it says -- and it's in
22 reference to the Miklusevci expulsions that were carried out on the 18th
23 of May, and just to situate us you say this was committed by persons from
24 the Territorial Defence, local police in civilian clothes, and other
25 armed persons after a night of terrorising the houses by gun-fire and
1 grenades. Do you recall that?
2 A. I don't -- as I've told you before, there was so many expulsions,
3 I can't recall this particular event. But I may be able to cast some
4 light on this to help you. I indeed was the drafter, but the releasing
5 officer was the commanding officer of the sector, Colonel Khromchenkov,
6 the Russian. These were probably his feelings or his information put in
7 my words because his English was not very good. So I don't recall this
8 particularly. If you give me a second, I'll try and help you.
9 Q. Sir, I'm not so much interested in attempting to parse out the
10 distinction between these armed groups, but what I am interested in is
11 down there at point 4 --
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. -- and what you say there or perhaps on the instructions of
14 Khromchenkov, you say:
15 "Until total disarmament of Territorial Defence and all - repeat
16 all - other armed persons takes place, it would be impossible to protect
17 individual returnees without a massive UN presence."
18 So can I take it from this that at this time, certainly, there
19 has not been disarmament as foreseen in the Vance Plan?
20 A. Can you give me the date of this?
21 Q. The 22nd of May, 1992.
22 A. There was not complete disarmament. That didn't take place fully
23 until my tenure ended on June 1st.
24 Q. And if, indeed, what we're dealing with is terrorisation by armed
25 persons, it's not very likely, is it, that the local police carrying
1 side-arms are going to be able to suppress that violence, is it?
2 A. I suppose I could agree with that, yes.
3 MR. GOSNELL: Could we have Prosecution tab 23 which is 05172.
4 THE WITNESS: May I make a further comment there, a further
6 MR. GOSNELL:
7 Q. Please.
8 A. The massive problem we had was that the police were playing a
9 Jekyll and Hyde role. At one time they would be so-called local police
10 and then the next minute they would be paramilitaries or at least people
11 in different uniforms or in different clothes carrying weapons, but they
12 were identified many, many times as policemen who were supposed to be
13 protecting the very people they were expelling.
14 Q. And since the opstina authorities are accorded authority over
15 local police, it might be difficult to prevent, for example, local TOs
16 from becoming suddenly local police?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Could we have Prosecution tab 23 which is 05172, please. Page 3.
19 And this is an outgoing code cable from Nambiar to Goulding. The date is
20 the 25th of May, roughly the same time-period. And in the middle of the
21 page it says:
22 "Demobilisation of the territorials and irregulars is the next
23 urgent task ..."
24 Again, fairly clear indication, is it not, that there had not
25 been demobilisation of forces as foreseen in the Vance Plan; correct?
1 A. That's correct.
2 Q. There's a comment over on page 4 -- or, excuse me, on page 2,
3 paragraph 4, which you refer to in your statement. And in your statement
4 it's paragraph 89.
5 "Our own reports show a basic climate of hostility and
6 intimidation by the wilder Serbian elements towards the various national
7 minorities in, now, especially Sector East ... we have the clear
8 impression that actions in Sector East are not entirely home-grown ..."
9 Do you have any understanding of what Nambiar meant when he says
10 that the actions in Sector East are not entirely home grown?
11 A. No, I don't know what he's trying to say there.
12 Q. You've told us a little bit about your contacts with the JNA.
13 Can you tell us how frequent were your contacts with opstina authorities?
14 A. The opstina authorities were sometimes very, very difficult to
15 pin down. We had no regular meetings. I could set up group meetings
16 from time to time. How often do I have meet with them? Once every two
17 weeks, ten days, something like that.
18 Q. Well, you describe a lot of -- in many of your reports, for
19 example, going to Beli Manastir or travelling to other locations, and
20 those frequent -- those reports are frequent. Would it be correct to say
21 that the first person you would seek out when you go to one of these
22 locations would, indeed, be the local opstina authorities?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And who would that be typically? Would it be a mayor? Would it
25 be a chief of police?
1 A. Both. Sometimes -- generally speaking, it would be the mayor,
2 but sometimes the chief of police would be present.
3 Q. And is it fair to say that whenever you moved around or -- well,
4 let's not say always, but if you went into an area your purpose was, in
5 fact, to meet with those local authorities; correct?
6 A. That would be -- my purpose would be to meet with someone, yes,
7 or to witness an expulsion or the results of an expulsion.
8 Q. And did you see evidence that these opstinas were under strong
9 central control or would you say that they were often acting as
10 authorities unto themselves?
11 MS. BIERSAY: Objection, Your Honour, could we break that down
12 into two separate questions. I think the compound nature of it may be a
13 bit confusing. It is to me at least.
14 MR. GOSNELL: I think it's clear.
15 JUDGE DELVOIE: Yeah, to me too.
16 Could you answer the question, Mr. Lubin.
17 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.
18 I did see evidence that these opstinas were under strong central
19 control because time and again when I made a suggestion to a local mayor
20 or other local official, they said we would have to talk to Knin before
21 we can give you an answer on that. And I think that's documented in
22 either one of the documents attached to my report or in my statement
24 MR. GOSNELL:
25 Q. Well, sir, that's an extremely surprising answer because I've
1 looked at many of your reports, I've looked at your statement, and I've
2 looked at many documents that are not in your report.
3 A. What's surprising?
4 Q. Can you pin-point? Can you recall any circumstance in which
5 someone said: I'll get in touch with Knin and then I'll decide what to
7 A. Yes. I can remember almost those exact words, they were used
8 several times.
9 Q. And if that was the case then why not just ask Knin to issue or
10 put pressure on Knin to issue blanket instructions to these various
11 opstina that you were visiting in order to --
12 A. That would be the task of my supervisor. I had no control over
13 the other sectors.
14 Q. And what was your purpose in meeting - again, if that's the case,
15 that individuals were saying, We'll get in touch with Knin - why did you
16 meet with Mr. Hadzic, Mr. Mladen Hadzic?
17 A. Well, my job was civilian co-ordinator. I had to co-ordinate
18 with local authorities. Whether they listened to me was up to them.
19 Q. Well, do you consider Mr. -- Dr. Mladen Hadzic to be a local
20 authority or do you consider him to be a regional authority?
21 A. I considered him to be a local authority.
22 Q. And what was his position?
23 A. I'm not sure of his title. I believe -- he wasn't the mayor, it
24 was position above that, president of whatever the opstina was. I think
25 we have his title here in the document.
1 Q. Do you have any notion of the geographical limits of the opstina
2 that you say he was the head of?
3 A. Yes, I mean I can't point it out to you, but I think it's
4 delineated on one of the maps we have, the opstinas. He would have been
5 in the Erdut-Dalj region, that would be his opstina, excuse my
7 Q. Sir, I'd like to take you now to some of these individual
8 incidents of expulsion that you describe in your statement. The first
9 one - and we can now remove the document from the screen - the first one
10 is described -- well, not necessarily the first one, but let's say one is
11 described at paragraph 47 of your statement. You describe buses
12 arriving. They were painted blue-grey. Armed men dressed in some kind
13 of camouflage uniform but lacking any distinctive identifying features
14 moved people on board."
15 Now, how would you characterise the identity of those individuals
16 or can you in any way characterise their affiliation beyond what you've
17 said in the statement?
18 A. This was the first expulsion I witnessed in person. If you go
19 back to the previous couple of paragraphs, you will see that I just
20 arrived in the sector. I think it was late in the day and I received a
21 message from UN -- ICRC, yes, I remember. And they called me and asked
22 me to go immediately to the scene. The scene was as I described. What
23 was your question again, sir?
24 Q. Let me put this specific question to you --
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. -- did you see that the men with guns were using those guns to
2 threaten people to get on the buses --
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. -- or were they not doing that?
5 A. The people were already on the buses.
6 Q. So you didn't?
7 A. I didn't see the beginning of the expulsion. I saw the buses as
8 they were about to leave, and I got on board and I talked to people.
9 Q. So you can't say whether the armed men were at that location at
10 that time forcing people to get on the buses rather than that individuals
11 may have been intimidated, coerced, threatened at some earlier time which
12 then induced them to get on the bus?
13 A. At that particular occasion I didn't see who was forcing them to
14 get on the buses.
15 Q. But you see, sir, the distinction I'm trying to get at and it
16 goes back --
17 A. I understand --
18 Q. -- it goes back to the dilemma that we were discussing earlier.
19 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters kindly ask the speakers not to
20 overlap. Thank you.
21 MR. GOSNELL:
22 Q. I'm trying to understand whether they were physically forced,
23 induced onto the bus, or whether they went there because of some prior
24 acts of threats or coercion.
25 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Gosnell and Mr. Lubin, did you hear the
1 intervention of the interpreters?
2 THE WITNESS: I did but I didn't hear the question.
3 JUDGE DELVOIE: The interpreters asked not to overlap, please.
4 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry.
5 MR. GOSNELL: I'm not sure. I apologise to the interpreters.
6 Q. So the question is whether on this occasion, we're speaking of
7 this occasion, it was the case that they had been threatened at some
8 earlier time which induced them to get on the buses, in a sense,
9 voluntarily; or whether they had been forced on to those buses by the
10 individuals with guns who were there?
11 A. Well, I can categorically state that they were never in any sense
12 put on the buses in a voluntary matter. The second part of that question
13 is whether they had been forced on those buses by those individuals I
14 don't know because I arrived later on the scene. This was the first
15 population movement that I witnessed personally. After this, I
16 immediately contacted Hadzic's office, this is the local Hadzic, to set
17 up a procedure where this kind of thing would never happen again.
18 If there was a so-called voluntary movement of population, his
19 office was to give us at least 24 hours' notice, allow us freely to speak
20 to the expellees, to see if their movement was voluntary, and to perhaps
21 understand why they were signing over every possession they owned to the
22 local government, including expensive farm equipment and all their
23 personal belongings.
24 Q. Well, I'm required under the Rules to tell you that of course we
25 contest that claim, but I'm not going to do it chapter and verse with you
1 here. But what I do want to go through with you is the content of your
2 statement in order to try and understand it. And you say here that:
3 "The expellees were terrified, they were mostly old people,
4 women, and children. The children were crying. I asked if they were
5 going willingly, but all were too afraid to answer. It was clear to all
6 present that they were not going willingly. They had only small bundles
7 or clothes or hand baggage and were leaving behind everything that they
8 possessed, homes, furniture, livestock, and farm equipment, in summary,
9 their every possession."
10 Now, does that description correspond to what you observed in
11 respect of the Hungarian refugees from Baranja as well?
12 A. No, as I mentioned before, the Hungarian refugees was an
13 exception to the rule. They had been informed a couple of days
14 beforehand and were prepared to leave, they wished to leave because they
15 were being threatened. You know, their -- I must interject something
16 here, Mr. Gosnell. There are so many forms of violence. There's mental
17 torture, there are subliminal threats, there is sleep deprivation because
18 of these threats, the whole atmosphere in the region I can only describe
19 as toxic. You could feel the hatred in the air. It was an awful time to
20 be present there, and referring back to this particular expulsion which
21 you have asked me about, that was my first encounter with such savagery.
22 And, quite frankly, I was in shock. I didn't think civilised people
23 behaved in that way anymore. I thought we were rid of that when we got
24 rid of the Nazi regime in the Second World War, but apparently we didn't.
25 Thank you.
1 Q. Well, sir, I don't want to argue with you, but we're here talking
2 about individual responsibility. That's what this case and this trial is
3 about. And what I'm trying to pin-point here, it's a fairly small point
4 but it's important in this context -- and I take on board entirely what
5 you've said. But in this context what I want to ask you is whether you
6 view the characteristics surrounding these individuals to be different
7 from the characteristics that you saw in respect of the individuals whom
8 you assisted to leave Baranja?
9 A. Explain the word "characteristics."
10 Q. The notion that the expellees were terrified, that they were
11 crying, that they were -- that they were afraid, that they were not going
12 willingly in some general sense even if at that moment in time they
13 wished to depart for security reasons, and that they had only small
14 bundles or clothes or hand baggage, and that they were leaving behind
15 everything they possessed. Just those are the attributes that I'm asking
16 you about, whether those attributes were shared in respect of the
17 individuals in Baranja.
18 A. In general terms, yes, except for the bundles of clothes. The
19 Hungarian refugees had a few more belongings, suitcases, et cetera, they
20 had more time to pack. But the atmosphere surrounding both expulsions,
21 their feelings were the same. They were in distress. You have to
22 understand that these people'd lived there all their lives, this is where
23 they're home. They were so-called Hungarians, but they were being
24 banished to Hungary, a country they didn't know.
25 MR. GOSNELL: Can we have 1D230, which is Defence tab 1.
1 Q. Now, this is a statement from an individual who left Dalj at
2 around this time. And if we can go to page 2, please.
3 A. I'm sorry, what is the date of this?
4 Q. It's a statement that was given several -- many years after the
5 events --
6 A. Okay.
7 Q. -- several years after the events --
8 A. Which event are we talking -- excuse me, sir --
9 MS. BIERSAY: I -- could I just get some guidance from
10 Mr. Gosnell regarding this document.
11 MR. GOSNELL: It's from Prosecution disclosure as I -- well,
12 apparently it's -- I can't say for sure whether it's from Prosecution
13 disclosure, but I can say that it was obtained from either the
14 Prosecution or the Croatian authorities directly.
15 MS. BIERSAY: Well, to the extent this is a witness statement
16 gathered for the purposes of prosecution -- local prosecution or
17 prosecution by this institution, we object to the showing of it to the
18 witness. I believe that we've had a standing protocol where we're
19 quoting from the document and not showing it to the witness. I'm happy
20 to be corrected on that score.
21 JUDGE DELVOIE: Is it a witness statement --
22 MR. GOSNELL: It --
23 JUDGE DELVOIE: -- for this jurisdiction?
24 MR. GOSNELL: No, Mr. President.
25 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
1 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Gosnell, are we right when we think that you
2 are going to show a particular passage from this document to the witness
3 and then ask a question?
4 MR. GOSNELL: That is correct.
5 JUDGE DELVOIE: Please proceed.
6 MR. GOSNELL:
7 Q. This person says:
8 "I was still in Dalj a year" --
9 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Gosnell, that is exactly -- you show it to
10 the witness, the passage, you don't read it into the record, and you ask
11 a question.
12 MR. GOSNELL: That's fair enough, Mr. President.
13 Q. Sir, you've heard the instruction from the President. I'm
14 interested in that first paragraph, and this person seems to be
15 indicating that he had been previously prohibited from leaving by someone
16 on the Serb side and he was waiting for UNPROFOR to arrive precisely so
17 he could leave. Now, would you agree that -- and I'm not sure that we
18 disagree at all, Mr. Lubin. But would you agree that there would be
19 circumstances in which a climate could arise that individuals from Dalj,
20 Erdut, Aljmas, would genuinely wish to get out of there?
21 A. Let me go back to your first point, Mr. Gosnell. You say that
22 the person was waiting for us before they left. That's -- it doesn't say
23 that -- your interpretation's wrong I think.
24 Q. That's a fair point to make. I can't say that he says that they
25 were waiting --
1 A. For someone.
2 Q. It says that they coincided, does it not?
3 A. No, it's just giving a date in time in my opinion, "I only left
4 when UNPROFOR arrived," they're giving you a specific time-frame. That's
5 the only reading I can make of that. Maybe you have a different
6 interpretation, but I don't see it.
7 MS. BIERSAY: Forgive me, perhaps I am being too impatient, but
8 did Defence counsel plan on reading the or directing the witness to the
9 third sentence as well? Because I think without that there is a
10 misperception on the record about what information is contained in this
12 JUDGE DELVOIE: I suppose the witness reads or should read the
13 entire paragraph, not only the first or the second or the third sentence,
14 but the entire paragraph.
15 MR. GOSNELL: I would be very content with that, Mr. President,
16 and then I would propose to ask a question, but my question is based on
17 the content of what's in that paragraph --
18 JUDGE DELVOIE: No problem with that, Mr. Gosnell.
19 MR. GOSNELL: And I do believe I'm allowed to characterise to
20 some degree without misstating it.
21 Q. And the question, sir, is whether you see here that this
22 individual appears to be saying - without getting into too much of a
23 discussion of rhetoric or language - he appears to be saying that he
24 wasn't able to leave before the arrival of UNPROFOR, that he wished to,
25 but that then when UNPROFOR arrived he was able to. Correct?
1 A. There again, Mr. Gosnell, with the greatest respect, it was a
2 woman who is saying this. She's talking about "my husband." But you've
3 probably said the words correctly, I think.
4 Q. And in respect of a person like this, there would be no question
5 of needing to force them on to a bus at gunpoint to leave; correct?
6 A. Judging by what's happened before, and particularly to her
7 husband, I can well understand why she volunteered to leave.
8 MR. GOSNELL: I would tender this document.
9 MS. BIERSAY: And the Prosecution would oppose the admission of
10 this document. It is a statement. We have certain procedures that we
11 follow in order to admit statements, and I don't believe any of them have
12 been satisfied. The Defence has shown the witness one paragraph, asked
13 the witness to comment on counsel's interpretation of essentially the
14 first sentence, and we think it would be inappropriate to admit this
16 MR. GOSNELL: If I may just briefly, Mr. President. Given the
17 nature of the exhibits that have been tendered with this witness,
18 including a large quantity of statements that were not only not given to
19 a judicial authority but to goodness knows whom -- that's going too far,
20 they do indicate who it was given to. The point being that there are
21 innumerable statements attached to this witness's testimony. I think
22 it's not inappropriate for the purposes of impeachment do the same.
23 JUDGE DELVOIE: I think that in order to avoid painting ourselves
24 into a corner we will come back to that tomorrow or eventually even in a
25 written decision.
1 MR. GOSNELL: Thank you, Mr. President.
2 JUDGE DELVOIE: So the document is marked for identification.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Shall be assigned Exhibit D33, marked for
4 identification. Thank you.
5 MR. GOSNELL: Could we have 05928, please, which is Prosecution
6 tab 28.
7 THE WITNESS: Mr. President, may I make a comment on
8 Mr. Gosnell's last statement, please? A point of clarification.
9 JUDGE DELVOIE: Please do.
10 THE WITNESS: Mr. Gosnell, you just said given the nature of the
11 exhibits that have been tendered with this witness, including a large
12 majority of the statements that were not only given to -- that were not
13 only not given to a judicial authority. Let me point out that all those
14 statements, police statements which are attached to my testimony, would
15 have been given to local police authorities for their action. And in
16 that regard, at one point in June 1992 I received a personal letter from
17 the chief of police in UNPROFOR that some 650 cases had been forward to
18 local police authorities and at that time not one was being investigated.
19 Thank you.
20 MR. GOSNELL: Well, unless that's in the statement I suggest we
21 strike the answer.
22 THE WITNESS: It is in my statement.
23 MR. GOSNELL:
24 Q. Fair enough. Then let's move on to the document before us, and
25 this is dated the 19th of April, 1992. And it concerns an alleged
1 expulsion through Nemetin -- to Nemetin via Sarvas. And it appears that
2 this expulsion occurred during the night I believe of the previous night.
3 And here you say:
4 "Under existing circumstances situation cannot be controlled by
5 UNPROFOR as expulsions are during darkness ..."
6 Can you enlighten us as to what the security situation was at
7 night relative to during the day in this area?
8 A. No, I can't because the JNA imposed a curfew and we were not
9 allowed to patrol after nightfall. May I just ask you one other question
10 on your statement there, Mr. Gosnell? Can I ask you why you say "alleged
11 expulsion"? Because these expulsions absolutely took place. They're not
12 a figment of our imaginations.
13 Q. When did the JNA curfew come into effect, as best you can recall?
14 A. The JNA curfew was in effect all -- most of the time I was there.
15 I believe it was removed later on in the mission and I think that's also
16 noted in my statement.
17 Q. And was it your observation that they were controlling movement
18 during the curfew?
19 A. I can't make an observation on that because I was not allowed out
20 at night.
21 Q. It says here:
22 "JNA is not controlling situation and local police do not make
23 night patrols."
24 Did you ever inquire as to whether or not the police were
25 permitted to make night patrols in accordance with the JNA curfew?
1 A. No, I didn't.
2 Q. Did you ever hear?
3 A. Where -- when you say "police," which police are you talking
5 Q. Whichever police you're referring to down at the bottom of the
6 page in your report.
7 A. Could you direct me to that, Mr. Gosnell?
8 Q. Yes, sir. It's the very last line here if we can scroll -- well,
9 it's there.
10 "JNA is not controlling situation and local police do not make
11 night patrols."
12 A. If I said that, then it must be correct.
13 Q. I understand that it's correct or I accept that it's correct, I
14 don't disagree. What I'm asking you is whether you ever heard that the
15 police were not permitted to make patrols in accordance with this curfew?
16 A. No, I didn't hear that. It wouldn't make any sense, they were
17 one and the same body. They were both Yugoslav authorities.
18 Q. So you don't see that there might be any distinction between the
19 JNA and local police in terms of control, in terms of capacity, in terms
20 of decision-making, in terms of ability to suppress violence?
21 A. No, I didn't say that, did I?
22 Q. Well, do you -- the question was - and let's just go back to the
23 question and maybe you can just answer the question and then we'll move
24 on to the next question - did you ever hear whether the police were
25 permitted, according to the terms of the curfew, to conduct patrols at
2 MS. BIERSAY: And I would submit that the question has been asked
3 and answered in line 16 on page 93:
4 "No, I didn't hear that."
5 MR. GOSNELL: All right. Thank you.
6 Q. The -- could we have 05929, Prosecution tab 29, please. Now,
7 this -- we've looked at this document before and now we're looking at it
8 again. This again is in respect of the Dalj expulsion or alleged
9 expulsion on the 18th and 19th of April. Now, here it seems from your
10 report that your first -- the first person on the Serb side who you seek
11 out in order to address the situation is the JNA; is that correct?
12 A. The JNA were ever present in our camp. There was always an
13 officer, a liaison officer, in an office nearby. So that would be the
14 person I would contact.
15 Q. Could we go to P191, please, Prosecution tab 78. This should not
16 be broadcast and I believe we need to move into closed session -- private
18 JUDGE DELVOIE: Private session, please.
19 [Private session]
11 Pages 3271-3274 redacted. Private session.
14 [Open session]
15 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honour. Thank
17 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you very much.
18 So, Mr. Lubin, we finish for the day. We will be back in court
19 with you tomorrow at 9.00, same courtroom. I remind you that you are
20 still under oath, which means that you cannot discuss your testimony with
21 anybody and that you cannot talk to any of the parties. The court usher
22 will escort you out of the courtroom. Thank you very much.
23 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Mr. President.
24 [The witness stands down]
25 JUDGE DELVOIE: If there's nothing else we can deal with in the
1 next two minutes, court adjourned.
2 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.58 p.m.,
3 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 5th day of
4 March, 2013, at 9.00 a.m.