1 Wednesday, 5 May 2004
2 [Open session]
3 --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.
4 [The accused entered court]
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The hearing is being resumed.
6 Let me ask Mr. Registrar to call the case, please.
7 THE REGISTRAR: [Interpretation] Your Honour, indictment
8 IT-01-47-T, the Prosecutor versus Enver Hadzihasanovic and Amir Kubura.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
10 Can we have the appearances for the Prosecution, please.
11 MR. MUNDIS: Good morning, Mr. President, Your Honours, Counsel,
12 and everyone in and around the courtroom. For the Prosecution, Ms. Tecla
13 Henry-Benjamin, Mr. Kyle Wood, Ms. Ruth Karper, our case manager, and
14 Daryl Mundis.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Microphone not activated]
16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. President.
17 Good morning, Your Honours. On behalf of General Enver Hadzihasanovic,
18 Edina Residovic, counsel; Stephane Bourgon, co-counsel; and Muriel Cauvin,
19 legal assistant.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. And for Mr. Kubura.
21 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. On
22 behalf of Mr. Kubura, Rodney Dixon, Fahrudin Ibrisimovic, and Nermin
23 Mulalic, legal assistant.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
25 The Chamber wishes to greet all those present, the
1 representatives of the Prosecution, and especially Madam Benjamin, who is
2 present today, Mr. Mundis, and the counsel for the Defence, the accused.
3 I also wish to greet our new registrar, who has just taken over his
4 position and who will be assisting us during future hearings.
5 I also wish to greet the usher, who has a very important role, as
6 we all know, as well as all the staff of this courtroom, the interpreters,
7 and the court reporter, without omitting to mention the security officers.
8 Today we shall continue the cross-examination. Unless there are
9 any points to be raised, let me ask the usher to be kind enough to bring
10 in General Reinhardt.
11 [The witness entered court]
12 THE WITNESS: Good morning, Your Honours.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] General, let me check first
14 that you are hearing well the interpretation of what I am saying in your
16 THE WITNESS: I do.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. We have no
18 technical problems, then.
19 I turn now to Mr. Bourgon to give him the floor.
20 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Good morning, Madam Judge. Good
21 morning, Your Honour. Good morning, Mr. President.
22 Before beginning the next part of my cross-examination,
23 Mr. President, the Defence would like to offer its apologies because of
24 the delay yesterday. We overstepped our time limit. Sometimes it's
25 difficult to stop in the middle of a topic, but we will do our best not to
1 allow that to happen again.
2 The second point I wish to raise, Mr. President, that yesterday
3 the Defence took efforts to provide the references of certain documents
4 which were tendered, and I have them now and I should like the usher to
5 assist us in distributing the sources of documents that were lacking
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Chamber notes that for
8 documents DH140, 139, 147 we are given the references and the numbers. Is
9 this satisfactory for the Prosecution, Mr. Mundis?
10 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President. It is indeed
11 satisfactory. I'm just wondering perhaps if this should somehow be marked
12 and/or somehow attached to the record so that this document becomes part
13 of the case file.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes.
15 Mr. Registrar, let us give this document a number so that it can
16 be added to the documents that have already been tendered. In this way,
17 we can refer to this document when we are talking about Exhibits 139, 140,
18 150, and 145.
19 THE REGISTRAR: [Interpretation] DH151, that will be the exhibit
20 number of this document.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So the document has been filed
22 as Exhibit 151.
23 Mr. Bourgon, you have the floor.
24 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
25 As announced by the Defence yesterday, Mr. President, we are now
1 going to move on to the implementation of the technical matters that we
2 covered with the witness yesterday. The first part has to do with the
3 responsibilities and duties of the commander, and we will focus on the
4 role of a commander at the level of the corps, which will be followed by a
5 legal issue section regarding the applicable law during 1993 in Bosnia,
6 and then we will have some questions regarding the points he made in his
7 report. We will then go on to the evaluation of the situation as seen by
8 the witness during his studies of the large number of documents he was
9 provided with.
10 Finally, Mr. President, we will study with the witness the
11 measures that may have -- that could have been taken by the commander,
12 General Enver Hadzihasanovic, during his mission as commander of the
13 3rd Corps in Central Bosnia.
14 Without further delay, Mr. President, I turn now to the witness
15 to continue with my cross-examination.
16 WITNESS: KLAUS REINHARDT [Resumed]
17 Cross-examined by Mr. Bourgon: [Continued]
18 Q. Good morning, General.
19 A. Good morning, Mr. Bourgon.
20 Q. Yesterday, General, we -- we ended the day by referring to the
21 reasonable commander, and my first question for you this morning, General,
22 would be as follows: Would you agree with me that in determining the
23 individual criminal responsibility of a commanding general of a corps, for
24 the type of liability or the type of charges he is facing in this trial,
25 namely, that he did not take the necessary and reasonable measures to
1 either prevent or to suppress the actions of his subordinate, would you
2 agree with me, General, that it is necessary in doing so to look at the
3 situation and the context in which General Hadzihasanovic exercised his
5 A. Yes, sir.
6 Q. Would you agree with me, General, that it is important actually
7 to try and understand the position he was in and the many difficulties he
8 faced which might have a bearing on either his ability to take some
9 actions or the timing with which he took these actions?
10 A. Yes, sir.
11 Q. If I mention to you, General, that the evaluation of these
12 factors would include such things as the nature of the assignment or the
13 mission that was given to General Hadzihasanovic, would that be a fair
15 A. Only to some extent, sir, because the provisions of the law are
16 independent from the situation. It might be that it might be delayed, but
17 the provisions of the law as such remain, notwithstanding the situation, I
18 would say.
19 Q. Thank you. As we discussed yesterday, General, we mentioned that
20 the law basically remained in force at all times.
21 A. Okay.
22 Q. That the law was the left and right boundaries, but that within
23 those boundaries the commander had to focus on the mission.
24 A. Yes, sir. No question about that.
25 Q. In terms of the nature of the mission General Hadzihasanovic was
1 entrusted with, would you agree with me that if I try to qualify this
2 mission, it was a mission which included the waging of war operations in a
3 defensive mode in his own national territory facing two different enemies?
4 A. Yes, sir.
5 Q. In terms of the nature of the mission - moving on, once we have
6 qualified it as being waging war on a national territory - the nature of
7 the mission, in terms of the urgency of the military actions required in
8 this context and the importance of taking some actions to succeed in the
9 mission is a factor that might have affected either his ability at a given
10 moment to take some actions.
11 A. Yeah.
12 Q. Would you agree with me, General, that the resources that were
13 available to the general would also be a very important criteria, and I'd
14 like to qualify the resources in terms of, first, human resources.
15 Maybe my question is not precise enough. Let me rephrase this,
16 General. In terms of factors that would affect the exercise of command or
17 have an impact on the exercise of command, would the resources available
18 to the commanding general be a relevant factor?
19 A. It's a key factor.
20 Q. And when we say that resources is a key factor, if I speak about
21 human resources, such as the number of soldiers he had at his disposal,
22 the professionalism of the soldiers at his disposal, the training of the
23 soldiers at his disposal, the preparation of the soldiers at his disposal,
24 and the specialist qualifications of his soldiers, including both from a
25 technical point of view and from a leadership point of view, would all of
1 the above be important factors dealing with human resources that would
2 have an impact on the exercise of command by General Hadzihasanovic?
3 A. Yes, sir.
4 Q. Moving on, General, to materiel resources. And again, I'll try
5 to give you a list, and I'll go slowly. Such things as money or the
6 financial situation of the state, weapons, available ammunitions,
7 transportation resources, communication equipment, infrastructures,
8 including electricity, shelters, and accommodations, and what you may
9 refer to as combat supplies; namely, food, water, fuel, or petroleum
10 products, and medical supplies. Would the limited resources available
11 falling in these categories be a definite factor which would impact on the
12 exercise of command by General Hadzihasanovic?
13 A. Yes, sir.
14 Q. General, I would like to know if you are familiar with a World
15 War II war crimes trial, that of the German General Rendulic.
16 A. Rendulic. I know about him, but I don't know about the trial.
17 Q. I'm sorry about the pronunciation, Rendulic.
18 I'd like to give you a very quick overview of the situation he
19 was in and follow on with a question as to what happened to him during
20 this trial. General Rendulic was -- had to retreat over a very long
21 territory of many hundreds of kilometres, and as part of this retreat he
22 was under the impression that the Russian forces at his pursuit were
23 closing in on him. Having done his assessment of the situation, he
24 considered that it was necessary to prevent the enemy or the pursuing
25 force, to get the resources from the land that he was retreating from in
1 order to catch him. Would I be -- would it be fair to say that this can
2 be referred to as the scorched earth policy?
3 A. Yeah.
4 Q. And General Rendulic actually applied this policy of scorched
5 earth and was actually accused for doing so following World War II. This
6 was one of the charges he faced. There were other charges.
7 In this specific case, General, the conclusion of the military
8 court was as follows: They basically came to the conclusion that when the
9 trial took place, the assessment that the court could do in the courtroom
10 was that there was probably and most likely no need to do a scorched earth
11 policy in the circumstances, but the Court concluded that when assessing
12 the exercise of command by a general, it was necessary to look at what he
13 saw when he was there and to fully consider all of the circumstances he
14 was in in order to determine whether his decision-making was appropriate
15 at the time. And for this reason, the Court found him not guilty of this
16 charge. Would you comment on this case of General Rendulic.
17 A. My first question, sir, is: What court was it? Was it a German
18 military court or was it the court of the victory, of the winning forces?
19 Because that makes a big difference.
20 Q. It was, General, the international -- it was an international
21 military tribunal as Nuremberg, but it wasn't the Nuremberg trial.
22 A. Okay, okay.
23 Q. And it was the High Command case.
24 A. Yeah. I think the -- the policy of torched ground was a very
25 common policy in the Russian campaign on either side, and I don't know the
1 exact conditions under which General Rendulic fought by that time, but I'm
2 with you; one has to consider the overall situation as he has seen them --
3 has seen them and as he evaluated it at the time when he was retreating
4 over that stretch of country.
5 Q. And would you agree with me, General, that all of the
6 circumstances at the time that would affect or that may have had an impact
7 on his decision-making would also be relevant in order to assess the
8 exercise of his command?
9 A. Yes, sir.
10 Q. If I mention to you a number of issues, would you -- I would
11 appreciate it if you could confirm whether these issues could have an
12 impact on the exercise of command by a commanding general of a corps:
13 Issues such as enemy forces.
14 A. Yeah.
15 Q. And I would include, in terms of enemy forces, the strength of
16 the enemy forces, the armament of the enemy forces, the doctrine, the
17 war-fighting doctrine of the enemy forces, as well as any crimes committed
18 by enemy forces.
19 A. I would go with you until the last part, because I think the
20 crimes have to be considered. But they are not a real effect on your own
22 Q. And, General, if I mention to you that in the context of a war
23 crimes committed by the enemy forces will indeed have a very serious
24 impact on the morale of your own soldiers and on the measures that you may
25 need to even better control these soldiers and ensure that they abide by
1 the law --
2 A. Yeah.
3 Q. -- because the enemy is violating the law.
4 A. Absolutely. This is a key problem, then, for the commander, that
5 his own soldiers don't do the same things as the enemy has done to their
6 own forces, and I think this is a key question for the discipline and
7 morale of your own forces.
8 Q. We've mentioned already, General, issues such as organisation of
9 the army and professionalism of the army. Would you qualify the impact of
10 those on the exercise of command.
11 A. Very much so.
12 Q. Could you elaborate as to how it could impact on the exercise of
14 A. Well, if you have forces not qualified adequately for the mission
15 given to them, they will fail. If you have enemy forces better qualified,
16 better prepared for the mission, they will succeed. And the key thing of
17 operations is to win the operations and not to lose the operations, so the
18 better your soldiers are qualified, trained, and by being better trained
19 and qualified, their morale booster is higher up than the ones of poor
20 soldiers. The bigger are the chances that you will prevail in this
22 Q. Moving on to a different type of factor, that of the civilian
23 population and the treatment of the civilian population by enemy forces.
24 Would that also be a very important factor that could affect the morale
25 and the fighting ability of your own troops, given that the civilian
1 population is of the same ethnic and national background?
2 A. It's always very difficult to fight while the civilian population
3 is still in place, but what you just said will have a detrimental effect
4 on your own soldier. And I come back to what we discussed just before.
5 Even so -- just because of that, your countermeasures on stabilising the
6 morale are even more important.
7 Q. And if I mention to you the presence of thousands of refugees in
8 the area of responsibility of the commander, would that be a critical
9 factor? And if so, why?
10 A. It will be a critical factor, because it hampers your freedom of
11 movement; it hampers your possibility to use your weapon systems the way
12 you would like to use them, because you don't want to kill your own
13 population. So you're much more restricted than operating in an area
14 where no civil population is; therefore, normally in a case like this you
15 try to clear up the area before you go in war.
16 Q. General, another issue I would like to raise with you is should
17 in the case of waging war on your own national territory the law
18 enforcement agencies still be operating - namely, I'm talking about the
19 civil law enforcement agencies - the effectiveness of these agencies in
20 dealing with common crimes, would that be a factor that could affect the
21 exercise of command?
22 A. Very much so, because if they don't do it, you have to do it with
23 your own scarce resources. And I would always appreciate to still have
24 those civil authorities taking care of people who are committing crimes.
25 Q. And another issue, General, is that of the presence in the area
1 of international observers, non-governmental organisations, international
2 organisations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, as
3 well as the presence of medias, would that have an impact on the exercise
4 of command?
5 A. It would, because you have to consider that what everything
6 you're doing is like doing it in the glasshouse. You're being watched and
7 observed from every side in a very critical way, and you have to make sure
8 that the things you're doing will not have a detrimental effect in this
9 International Community as long as people are there to help you, and the
10 NGOs and IOs and other organisations you were talking about, including all
11 these international organisations were there for the benefit of -- of the
12 people living in that area.
13 Q. And talking about the presence of such organisations and having a
14 specific question which applies to this case, if we are talking about the
15 presence of the United Nations Protection Force, UNPROFOR, would that be a
16 fair statement that it would be normal and even more than normal, but it
17 would be the way to go for a commanding general to fully cooperate with
18 UNPROFOR while at the same time ensuring that they do not get access to
19 your plans so that they do not become an impeding factor on any operations
20 you want to lead?
21 A. I agree with you. UNPROFOR was there not to wage war but to
22 provide internal security. And we all remember how difficult it was and
23 that the outcome was a very detrimental one. But as a commander, you
24 would never jeopardise your plans by talking about those plans with
25 UNPROFOR, which are not working with you militarily. They were working
1 only in supporting on a very different level.
2 Q. But nevertheless, given the mandate of UNPROFOR, it would be a
3 good thing for the commander to cooperate with UNPROFOR within the scope
4 of their mandate.
5 A. Absolutely.
6 Q. If I mention to you the geography of the terrain, is that an
7 important factor for the commander?
8 A. Very much so.
9 Q. If I may ask you, General, to quickly just stand up and take a
10 look at the model in front of you. I'm not sure that you are able to see
11 the model.
12 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Mr. President, at this stage I
13 should like to ask the witness, without having him to answer any question,
14 to walk around and look and see whether he can recognise the model as
15 representing the area that he visited with the German troops; that is,
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, General, could you please
18 walk around the model and take your time to look at the places. And we
19 must point out that this model was prepared -- this model was prepared by
20 the BH army.
21 MR. BOURGON:
22 Q. Thank you, General. My first question to you, having taken a
23 look at the model, is: On the basis of your previous presence in this
24 area, do you recognise any of the area?
25 A. Yes, sir. And this is not only that I have been there as a
1 soldier. I've been there during the Olympic Games in Sarajevo, and I
2 skied the Bijelasnjica and some other areas, so I think I'm rather
3 familiar with the area.
4 Q. Thank you, General. How would you qualify the model you have
5 just taken a look at and the conditions of the -- sorry, the geography of
6 the terrain, in terms of waging a war in this type of context?
7 A. It's a very difficult terrain because it's what we call in our
8 military jargon a broken terrain, hilly, wooded terrain, a lot of villages
9 where -- a lot of separated areas, valleys and high ground, not an area
10 very favourable for mechanised forces. It's very favourable more or less
11 for dismounted infantry supported. It would be ideal to fight here with
12 helicopter and -- and very light mobile forces. I think it's -- it's a
13 very difficult terrain to continue the cohesion of the operations within
15 Q. Thank you, General. If I mention to you another factor that
16 would impede on the ability of the commander to exercise his duties as
17 being the proximity of the FEBA. Now, FEBA, I may be late with the terms
18 I use but FEBA being the forward edge of the battle area. Would that be
19 an important factor for the commander?
20 A. Yes. But to just caution it a little bit, I think it's difficult
21 to talk about one FEBA like a consolidated line throughout the area.
22 There were also pockets of operations, not so much connected with each
23 other. So it's not the normal way that you would fight with the
24 mechanised or a modern corps operations because -- because of the terrain
25 and also because of the difference, having to fight two enemies at the
1 same time.
2 Q. And if I change my term "FEBA" for the proximity of the war
3 fighting real action to the headquarters of the commander, would that be
4 an important factor?
5 A. It's an important factor because it also somehow alleviates the
6 problem of communication, because the closer you are to the front, the
7 easier it gets to -- to close this distance by other means than -- than
8 normal means you might have. You don't need satellites to do that.
9 Q. And if the headquarters of the commanding general in this case
10 was located in Zenica -- you are able to confirm this from the documents?
11 A. Yeah.
12 Q. And that Zenica was being shelled on a regular basis, would that
13 have an impact on the work going on in the 3rd Corps command headquarters?
14 A. Sure. Once you're shelled, your efficiency goes down
15 immediately, because you have to take cover and -- and try to survive,
16 rather than to continue to operate.
17 Q. And one last question, because you mentioned the issue of
18 communications. Would you agree with me, General, that terrain such as is
19 depicted by this model in Central Bosnia with, as you mentioned, woods,
20 mountains, hilly, would that be more or less difficult to communicate?
21 A. It's much more difficult to communicate, because you don't have
22 the -- the sight of line from one radio to the next one, which you
23 normally need to have in radio communications, so you have to work with a
24 lot of different ways, and I think this is one of the reasons, as far as I
25 saw it myself, that most of the forces tried to -- to work with Motorola.
1 Q. And one last objective question, if I may describe my questions
2 as such, in terms of factors which may impede the work of the commander:
3 How about the size of his area, the area of operations of the 3rd Corps?
4 A. It's been a large area for the corps. I think it was appropriate
5 also for a corps. The whole Bosnian area for Bosnia-Herzegovina was split
6 up in five different zones, with five different corps. And I think the
7 area for the 3rd Corps was somehow appropriate to the forces the commander
8 had at his availability.
9 Q. I have a few specific questions dealing with the facts or the
10 documents that you have already seen, in respect of factors which could
11 impede the ability of the commander to exercise his command. And the
12 first one I'd like to mention to you: Did you or were you able to
13 conclude from the documents which were shown to you that there was a very
14 strong use of propaganda by the HVO forces?
15 A. I think there was a strong use of propaganda of all forces
16 involved in these operations, but I could not -- I could not say I would
17 see a stronger involvement of propaganda -- at least, it didn't show up
18 for me through looking through the documents.
19 Q. And if you would have concluded differently -- now, this is a
20 hypothetical question, given your answer to the previous question. If the
21 propaganda actions of the HVO would have been very significant and even
22 that if the HVO had wanted to alarm its own population and create panic in
23 its own population, would that have an impact on the exercise of command
24 of General Hadzihasanovic?
25 A. It might have, but I think as soon as you have population in an
1 area of combat, the population is terrorised. No matter whether you have
2 additional propaganda assets, the population would use in the way you just
3 described it, to react in the way you just described it, because for them
4 sometimes it's almost impossible to realise who were shooting against
5 them, from what side.
6 Q. The next issue I'd like to cover, General, is that of roads. How
7 important are roads for the commanding general of a corps?
8 A. The more mechanised you are, the more important are the status of
9 roads. The less mechanised you are, the less important they get. But one
10 thing is absolutely clear: Behind every kind of forces you need supply
11 logistic forces, and logistic forces need roads because they negotiate
12 heavy equipment and heavy bulky loads, and if they don't have roads, they
13 cannot deliver what they are supposed to deliver for the sake of the
15 Q. And would it be a fair statement, General, to say that as soon as
16 the ability to use a road that is required is reduced or even completely
17 blocked, that the commanding general will focus his attention in finding a
18 road or building a road or ensuring that what this road was used for, find
19 a way to do that?
20 A. Yes, sir.
21 Q. And that this is indeed a very important endeavour for the
22 commanding general of a corps.
23 A. Yeah.
24 Q. If I mention to you, General, the political nature or the
25 political moves of the enemy forces generally - and I'll move then into
1 more specifics - would that have an impact on the ability of a commander
2 to exercise his command?
3 A. Well, every move of the enemy will have an impact on his
4 capabilities. I think that's what the enemy is all about. It's -- it's
5 not only the military; it's also the political and the psychological, and
6 as we just said before, the propaganda effects which will have impact on
7 your own forces and on your own capabilities.
8 Q. And, General, if I give you a specific case whereas General
9 Hadzihasanovic assumed his command in November of 1992, are you able to
10 confirm that?
11 A. Yeah.
12 Q. And if I mention to you that prior to General Hadzihasanovic
13 exercising or assuming his command there was a case in which a town was
14 given an ultimatum to lay down their weapons and surrender to the HVO, and
15 indeed did so, would this factor have an impact on the assessment of the
16 situation and the way General Hadzihasanovic would conduct his operations
17 after assuming command?
18 A. In that particular case, yes, sir.
19 Q. When a commanding general loses a village in his area to the
20 enemy, what are the consequences for the general?
21 A. I don't know. Because I think one might over-exaggerate now the
22 loss of a village. There was many, many villages, also villages which
23 have been taken back and forth. I think it really depends what kind of
24 village, whether it was in a strategic area or not. Just the loss of one
25 village is one case which happens in the operations which you have to
1 reckon, and therefore I'm not -- I'm not able to give you a qualified
2 answer on your question.
3 Q. Thank you, General. You mentioned yesterday that in Germany the
4 focus was placed on using all resources of the state should a situation
5 like that in Bosnia would arise [sic].
6 A. Yeah.
7 Q. Would I be right in saying that the commanding general losing a
8 village - and of course, it all depends on where the village is and the
9 size of the village - but would I be right in saying that by losing a
10 village he also loses the resources that he could get from this village as
11 well as any assistance he might get from the civil or lawful civil
12 authorities that were working in this village?
13 A. This is obvious.
14 Q. We've mentioned, General, the issue of refugees, and your answer
15 dealt with population movements. Whoever causes population movements in
16 the area, would it be fair to say that population movements will impede
17 the decision-making of the commanding general because he may have to alter
18 his plans of operations he was intending to lead?
19 A. Very much so.
20 Q. What I would like to do at this time, General, is simply to ask
21 you whether you were in a position from the documents that you had and
22 that you had a look at to assess the forces or the organisation of the
23 3rd Corps and the troops that were available to General Hadzihasanovic.
24 A. Well, there is a document in which the forces available to him
25 are laid down in -- in the organisation order of the 3rd Corps. But as I
1 also already mentioned yesterday or the day before yesterday, the -- the
2 terms for an organisation very often don't match our terms. So a brigade
3 doesn't say that every brigade -- the term "brigade" doesn't say that
4 every brigade has the same size, because very often they were different in
5 size. Also, battalions were not always in the same size. So yes, the
6 overall organisation, I think, has been laid down, and I also read a
7 number which General Hadzihasanovic has mentioned at the beginning when he
8 took over his corps, and that this then increased over the time, but the
9 number I read was in a document which I'm not allowed to quote; therefore,
10 I don't know the number.
11 Q. General, I would like to show you a document which I prepared
12 myself from the documents that were at your disposal, and I would like you
13 to take a look at this document and to tell me whether the information
14 included in this document, one, could be derived from the information that
15 was given to you; and, two, whether it would be a fair assessment at the
16 troops that were at the disposal of General Hadzihasanovic [sic].
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, yes.
18 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President. I'm just wondering -- I
19 see what might be one reference to an ERN number on this document. I'm
20 wondering if that -- if my learned colleague can inform us whether that
21 ERN number reflects the totality of the source of the information on this
22 document which he has prepared or if there are other documents from which
23 he also compiled this information, and if we could have the ERN numbers or
24 any other identifying numbers with respect to all the documents used in
25 preparing this current document.
1 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. The references
2 that my learned friend is referring to only refer to the percentage
3 indicated, the percentage of soldiers present within the 3rd Corps. This
4 figure should be compared with the theoretical effective authorised by the
5 government for the corps. Therefore, the reference L0098218 is a
6 reference to a document dated -- I don't know, either the 23rd of July or
7 the 1st of August, 1993. And in this document, mention is made of all the
8 troops of each unit and the percentage of existing soldiers in each of
9 those units compared to the total effective, as well as total percentage
10 of soldiers within the 3rd Corps as compared to the number according to
12 The rest of the information comes from a host of documents, and
13 that is why I'm asking the witness, that is, General Reinhardt, whether
14 the document that I myself prepared could be an illustration of the troops
15 available to General Hadzihasanovic. I have no intention of spending a
16 lot of time on this matter.
17 THE WITNESS: If I see that, I think this is a -- a very good
18 compilation. I basically based my information on the Supreme Command
19 Staff of the Armed Forces, Sarajevo, 9 November, the initial order on the
20 composition of the corps, knowing as I said that the corps has changed
21 over time, which you can deduct from the sources from the documents
22 available to me. But I think the overall strength and the overall
23 composition as you have laid it down here in this chart is the one that I
24 would agree to.
25 MR. BOURGON:
1 Q. Thank you very much, General.
2 There's another document that I would like to show you at this
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] As the Chamber will not have
5 questions for the witness on the basis of this document, you mentioned
6 Municipal Defensive Staff Zenica. Could you tell us what it means,
7 "1 Municipal Defensive Staff (Zenica)." The municipal defensive staff of
8 Zenica. Is this a military or civilian structure that you have integrated
9 within the ABiH?
10 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] I think that the best thing would
11 be to ask the witness to explain what he believes this means. Could he
12 define for us the Municipal Staff.
13 Q. [In English] [Previous translation continues] ... are you able to
14 explain what was the Municipal Staff of Zenica? And we see that there are
15 other Municipal Staffs. For example, I refer to Operational Group East,
16 and we see there are five municipal defence staffs, one in Visoko, one in
17 Vares, one in Kiseljak, one in Kresevo, and one in Fojnica. Are you able
18 to explain to the Trial Chamber what was or what were these municipal
19 defence staffs?
20 A. I am not quite sure whether I'm capable of doing that, because I
21 never looked into that in detail. But, sir, the corps was built up of
22 territorial forces, and the municipal defensive staff were elements of
23 those territorial forces prepared for the defence of the country, and
24 those were elements of the military, also of the civil authorities in the
25 area, which were capable of defending their area of responsibility, and
1 they were then incorporated into the corps forces operating in that area
2 for the unity -- for the sake of the unity of command.
3 Q. General, moving on or pursuing in this area, because indeed it is
4 a very -- it is a very important issue, were you able to conclude on the
5 basis of the documents that were given to you how the evolution of the
6 creation of the 3rd Corps proceeded from the end of 1992 until the
7 1st November 1993? And I mean exactly the relationship between what you
8 have referred to as Territorial Defence and the 3rd Corps.
9 A. Well, the Territorial Defence was the basic organisation in the
10 area, which was then taken over by the 3rd Corps and the other corps,
11 included as the basis of the forces for those corps, and therefore the
12 Territorial Defence as such did not prevail; it became a part of the -- of
13 the corps forces.
14 Q. And were you able to conclude from the documents given to you
15 that at some point in time during the year of 1993 initially the district
16 staff, which was the element above the municipal defence staff,
17 disappeared and was amalgamated into the 3rd Corps, and this was a
18 procedure that evolved from the beginning until the end, in terms of
19 creating military structure from the corps and step by step amalgamating
20 this structure to create a more effective chain of command and control
21 within the 3rd Corps?
22 A. You just explained it in a better way than I tried to do it
24 Q. Thank you very much, General.
25 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I would like to
1 tender this document into evidence. Could we have an exhibit number for
2 the document, since the witness has recognised that it is an accurate
3 reflection of the information contained in the document that he's been
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, with regard to this
6 document presented by the Defence, it goes to prove that the 3rd Corps in
7 fact only had 73 per cent of the full strength, 32.000 men; whereas,
8 43.000 men constitute the full strength, and there is a general scheme, a
9 general representation of how the 3rd Corps was constituted. It mentions
10 four independent brigades; the 7th Mountain Brigade, the 301st Brigade,
11 the 309th Brigade, and then it mentions five operational groups which were
12 deployed. The document also refers to the Municipal Staff, which seems
13 linked to places such as Kakanj, Busovaca, Visoko, et cetera. What is the
14 Prosecution's position as far as this document is concerned?
15 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, I note from the document on the upper
16 left, immediately following "3rd ABiH Corps" in parentheses it
17 indicates "end of June 1993." If, in fact, Mr. Bourgon is prepared to
18 confirm that this picture portrays the 3rd Corps at the end of June 1993,
19 we certainly have no objection to this document being admitted into
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. The Prosecution
22 says that this document reflects the situation at the end of June.
23 MR. BOURGON: [Microphone not activated]
24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
25 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. My --
1 the Prosecution's comment, saying that this concerns the 3rd Corps at the
2 end of June 1993, with regard to this comment we can say that it was
3 certainly the situation in June 1993. But to answer the question more
4 precisely, I would have to have a look at the document or the date,
5 because the information concerning the numbers contained in the document
6 come from one of the two sources. Unfortunately, I can't remember whether
7 it's the document dated August or the 23rd of June. So with your leave,
8 Mr. President, I could check that during the break, and then respond in
9 more precise terms to the comments my colleague made.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. We will give this
11 document a number after the pause. For the moment, it will be on standby.
12 MR. BOURGON:
13 Q. [In English] [Previous translation continues] ... and that is
14 this document is a summary of a commanding general's responsibility. In
15 fact, it is a summary of a commandant's responsibilities. And I would
16 like you to take a look at this document and confirm that this is what on
17 a daily basis a commander does and that these are a fair representation of
18 what a commander does on a day-to-day basis.
19 A. It's a very new document. To provide a vision --
20 Q. This is a document I put together myself, General.
21 A. To provide a vision, because the "vision" is the new term. If
22 you don't have a vision, you're nothing.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. The witness has told the
24 Defence that "to provide a vision" is a recent concept, which was probably
25 not in force in 1993. Would the witness confirm that the idea of
1 providing a vision was one that did not exist in 1993.
2 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, I would call it to provide a guidance,
3 rather than a vision, and that's what he's doing. He gives the main
4 guidance, the mental and the operational guidance, and I think that's what
5 you want to say here.
6 MR. BOURGON:
7 Q. General, I would ask you to maybe if you have something to write,
8 to cross out any information with which you do not agree in this document
9 and to sign this document, the aim being to have a document that portrays
10 daily occupations, responsibilities, and actions of a commander, and more
11 specifically a corps commander, in 1993.
12 A. How much time do you give me?
13 Q. If you need time, I better withdraw the document. It's up to
14 you, sir.
15 A. May I ask a question, Mr. Bourgon?
16 Q. Absolutely.
17 A. I just don't understand what you would like to say by the -- the
18 second bullet from -- from below, "to create a sense of involvement in
19 decision-making and share commitment." I don't understand what it
20 means, "To create a sense of involvement in decision-making."
21 Q. What is meant when I wrote this, because it is taken from one of
22 the references I read, and it was explained in that reference as meaning
23 to have -- to feel that the leadership is part of the same mission and
24 that they shared the same goals in their decision-making process.
25 A. Okay. Okay, I understand. I just wanted to be enlightened.
1 Yes, sir. I haven't scratched anything out.
2 Q. Would you please, General, initial this document.
3 A. I just did.
4 Q. Thank you very much.
5 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I would like to
6 tender this document into evidence, and I would like an exhibit number for
7 the document.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] General, there is one question
9 I would like to ask you in order to clarify something. You have proved
10 that the contents of this document -- you have confirmed the contents of
11 the document. But as a former member of the military, is there anything
12 that is missing in the document? And I'm thinking of the relations to the
13 civilian authorities that must have occupied the corps commander on a
14 24-hour basis, the relations to the media, et cetera. In your opinion, is
15 this a complete document or are there some elements that are missing?
16 THE WITNESS: Sir, these are the major missions of the commander,
17 and it incorporates also the cooperation with the media, information
18 operations, taking care of refugees and all these things. But this is a
19 kind of his decision-making in leadership directive, which he will
20 encompass for what he is supposed to do, so I would not like to enumerate
21 all these additional things which -- which fall under his decision-making
22 process. I think this is a part of his command responsibility, as I see
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
25 Mr. Mundis, the Defence would like this document to be admitted
1 into evidence. It has been identified by the witness, who doesn't
2 criticise it. What is the Prosecution's position with regard to the
4 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, the Prosecution is not quite sure of
5 the purpose of the document, particularly in light of the witness's
6 question to Your Honour that this is part of the command responsibility.
7 But perhaps that goes more to weight. So we have no objection as to the
8 admissibility of the document.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
10 Mr. Registrar, could we have an exhibit number for the document,
12 THE REGISTRAR: [Interpretation] DH152 will be the exhibit number
13 of this document.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You can continue, Mr. Bourgon.
15 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
16 Q. [In English] To add to the question you have just answered,
17 General, would I be right in saying that it would almost be an impossible
18 task to enumerate everything that a commander may be asked to do in the
19 exercise of his command because it all depends very much on the
20 circumstances and the nature of his mission?
21 A. Yes, sir. I was, I think, rather well prepared to command the
22 corps, but once I have done this, I had to do things I never have dreamed
23 of before, that I would ever be forced to do this. So you really have to
24 have an ad hoc decision whether this encompasses this or not. But I
25 think, again, it's in the daily routine that you have to be flexible
1 enough to deal with all the things which you have to deal with.
2 Q. And, General, based on your experience, having been a commander
3 for most of your life - and I think we -- it's fair to say that it is for
4 most of your life you have been commanding troops - would it be fair to
5 say that the exercise of command is very difficult, is complex, and that
6 in fact it can be referred to as being a calling?
7 A. Well, sometimes I don't know what -- whether the --
8 whether "calling" is the proper term, because I don't -- I'm not familiar
9 with this term. But I tell you very often it's -- it's a very tough
10 burden which you sometimes like to -- to skip and escape.
11 Q. And if I provide you with an example where commanders are faced
12 with a decision sometimes where they may have to sacrifice the lives of
13 their own troops knowingly for the success of an operation, would I be
14 right in saying that a decision such as this one - and I think very few
15 people face such a high threshold of decision-making - but my issue is
16 this type of decision, is that what we refer to when we speak about the
17 burden of command?
18 A. Yeah.
19 Q. And would I be right in saying that because it is a very detailed
20 profession and that there are many components to the exercise of command,
21 that it is also very much an individual matter and a subjective matter in
22 that two commanders placed in the same situation may react differently and
23 yet both be effective and good commanders?
24 A. Yes, sir.
25 Q. I move on now, General, to my next part of my cross-examination,
1 which deals with the law applicable to the operations of the 3rd Corps in
2 Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1993. And my first question, General, is
3 whether from reading the documents that you have been given, whether you
4 were able to conclude or to note - because not a conclusion but to see -
5 that because General Hadzihasanovic was waging war on his own national
6 territory, that the civil authorities were still in operation in 1993.
7 A. Yes, sir.
8 Q. And that there was a relationship between the various civil
9 organisations, in terms of the fact that they had duties towards the
11 A. Yeah.
12 Q. I refer to one specific document, which is the decree law or
13 decree -- sorry, I will get close to the microphone -- the decree with the
14 force of law on defence. And this document was given to you. And I'm
15 looking at the number. All I have is the ERN number. But I will try to
16 give you a better number.
17 A. Is this -- sir, is this the same, the decree with the powers of
18 law of the armed forces? Because sometimes the translations are mixed up.
19 Q. I don't think it is the same document, General. This is the
20 decree with the force of law on defence.
21 A. Okay.
22 Q. And this document covers the relationship between the various
23 civil organisations and quickly mentions the army but also determines that
24 there were responsibilities of the civil organisations towards the army.
25 I'm sorry, General, it's just been indicated to me that maybe you
1 did not receive this document.
2 A. It's not I am aware of; therefore, I asked this question.
3 Because it's almost identical in -- in the wording, but I think I haven't
4 seen this one.
5 [Defence counsel confer]
6 MR. BOURGON:
7 Q. This document actually, General, is the basic document that
8 determines the relationship between --
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Bourgon, so that the Trial
10 Chamber can find its bearings, could you indicate the number of this
11 document of the Prosecution's -- the Prosecution number or the PT number,
12 because we have a table here and then a list of documents that were
13 provided to the witness should be referred to too.
14 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. This
15 document wasn't provided to the witness, according to my notes. It's my
16 mistake. I worked on this document in order to prepare my
17 cross-examination. I was certain that he had received it, since it's
18 really an essential document. We'll check this during the break,
19 Mr. President. We'll check the exact number of the document to see
20 whether the Prosecution has put forth this document and to see whether
21 it's been admitted, because all the governmental documents are ones that
22 the Defence has agreed to have admitted, and unfortunately, Mr. President,
23 I believe that this document hasn't even been tendered by the Prosecution.
24 But I'll check this during the break in order to avoid any problems.
25 Thank you, Mr. President.
1 Q. [In English] General, I move on with my questions. I see we have
2 ten minutes before the technical break. What I wanted to go over with
3 you, in terms of legal regime applicable: You are in fact able to confirm
4 that the civil authorities, civil organisations, were indeed operating --
5 A. Yes, sir.
6 Q. -- in Central Bosnia at the same time as the 3rd Corps was
7 conducting its operations.
8 A. Yes, sir.
9 Q. Are you able to also confirm that the mission General
10 Hadzihasanovic was entrusted with and that his responsibilities were
11 solely limited to military matters and that things such as civil -- or law
12 enforcement were not his responsibility?
13 A. Yep.
14 Q. Were you able to confirm that an organisation referred to in a
15 documents as MUP, M-U-P, was operating in Central Bosnia?
16 A. Yeah.
17 Q. Were you able to confirm that civil security organisations were
18 also operating in Central Bosnia?
19 A. I think I read about civil security organisations passim in the
20 written statements of some witnesses, but I didn't look into much detail
21 in this one, because I was not interested in that.
22 Q. Did you -- or were you able to confirm from the documents given
23 to you that there was a relationship or cooperation being exercised
24 between the 3rd Corps and civil organisations, and more specifically the
1 A. I think this is a clear necessity that they had worked together,
2 being in the same area of responsibility.
3 Q. But from the documents that you have read, were you able to
4 confirm that indeed they were cooperating?
5 A. Yes, sir.
6 Q. Were you able to confirm from the documents you've read that the
7 justice or judicial system was also still in operation?
8 A. I know about the district military courts. I don't know about
9 the other courts. But there must have been a justice system, because the
10 corps commander ordered the brigade commander to provide for legal
11 assistance on their level from the population, in which they -- they
12 operated. So there must have been this organisation still working.
13 Q. And, General, given that you were asked to give an opinion on any
14 measures taken by the commander of the 3rd Corps, did you find it
15 necessary to determine what those relationships were between civil
16 organisations - namely, the MUP, the judicial system, and the 3rd Corps -
17 in order to determine whether such measures had or had not been taken by
18 General Hadzihasanovic?
19 A. I only realised, sir, that there was a cooperation, but I don't
20 know about the individual measures through which this cooperation took
22 Q. But as you mentioned yesterday, General, if, to take the example
23 of the German Army, once a commander is aware of a violation of the law,
24 no matter what type of violation, he must see to it that something is done
25 about the violation --
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 A. Yeah.
2 A. -- and in some cases he will have the power to deal with it
3 personally; is that right?
4 A. Yeah.
5 Q. And that in other cases he will have to refer the matter to the
7 A. That's absolutely true.
8 Q. And if I take this situation, is that the type of system that you
9 saw from the documents that were given to you as being applicable in
10 Central Bosnia in 1993?
11 A. Yes, sir.
12 Q. You mentioned that there were no, in Germany, disciplinary --
13 military -- sorry, district military courts.
14 A. Yeah.
15 Q. Did you notice from the documents given to you that district
16 military courts were created only in times of war?
17 A. Yeah.
18 Q. And that district military prosecutor's offices were also only
19 created in times of war?
20 A. Yeah.
21 Q. And that the district military prosecutor's office had
22 responsibilities to investigate cases of violations and to bring the
23 matter to the district military courts?
24 A. Yes, sir.
25 Q. And that to do this the district military prosecutor could obtain
1 information from various sources, including but not limited to the
2 3rd Corps and its subordinate units?
3 A. Yes, sir.
4 Q. And that the -- if I look at the handling of violations in
5 Central Bosnia in 1993, would I be right in saying that this system worked
6 on the following levels: First, there were disciplinary offences which
7 could be divided in two, in terms of disciplinary fault and disciplinary
8 violation, and that those would be handled inside the military?
9 A. Yes, sir.
10 Q. And that these would usually be dealt with by a military
11 disciplinary court, which was inside the military.
12 A. Yeah.
13 Q. And that this military disciplinary court had in itself some
14 levels where some matters could be dealt with by an assessor or a judge
15 sitting alone; in some matters two judges, called a council; and in other
16 matters by three assessors or judges sitting together?
17 A. Yes, sir.
18 Q. And that the offences, the disciplinary offences, there could be
19 cases where an offence would qualify both as a violation or a disciplinary
20 violation, the more serious type, and a criminal act in accordance with
21 normal criminal system of the state?
22 A. Yeah.
23 Q. And that in such cases it would be possible, according to
24 Article 6 of the Manual on Military Discipline, that a normal criminal act
25 could be treated and handled as a disciplinary violation.
1 A. I think so.
2 Q. Nevertheless, you mentioned in your report, and you will agree
3 with me that pursuant to Article 5 for a perpetrated criminal act or
4 misdemeanour military persons were responsible to the normal criminal law
5 system of the state?
6 A. Yes, sir.
7 Q. The second level of court --
8 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I think that I will
9 stop here, because I have another ten minutes for the witness. I will
10 continue after the break.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. It's now half past
12 10.00. We will resume at five to 11.00.
13 --- Recess taken at 10.29 a.m.
14 --- On resuming at 11.00 a.m.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Bourgon, you have the floor
17 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
18 At this stage, Mr. President, I should like to clear up two
19 questions that were raised during the first part of this morning's
21 First of all, Mr. President, the question of the diagram
22 illustrating the 3rd Corps and the forces under the responsibility of
23 General Hadzihasanovic. Having consulted the files and the documents, I
24 am able to confirm that the numbers regarding the number of troops date
25 from the end of June 1993; whereas, the composition of the units dates
1 from the end of August. As I had information coming from two documents,
2 I'm able to say that the figures come back from the -- date from the end
3 of June 1993.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, the Defence has
5 explained that June is the date when the number of soldiers was registered
6 and the composition of the 3rd Corps was as it existed at the end of
7 August. That is what the Defence is telling us.
8 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President. And Mr. Bourgon for that
10 In light of this clarification, Mr. President, the Prosecution
11 has no objection if the Defence still would like to tender that document
12 into evidence.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
14 Mr. Registrar, will you give us an exhibit number, please.
15 THE REGISTRAR: [Interpretation] It will be DH153.
16 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
17 Regarding the second question raised at the end of the hearing
18 before the break, it has to do with the document entitled, "Decree with
19 the force of law on defence." It is a document which is already on the
20 file. This document has the number DH29. It is Exhibit Number DH29. It
21 was a document tendered by the Defence during the cross-examination of a
22 witness. We could also add, Mr. President, that this document was
23 provided to us by the Prosecution together with all the -- all the other
24 documents that were disclosed to us by the Prosecution prior to the
25 beginning of trial.
1 Finally, Mr. President, we can also confirm that this document
2 was not given to the witness who is currently before the Chamber.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. The Chamber will
4 have a look at that document, DH29.
5 DH29 is in B/C/S. Is there a English translation?
6 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I have the
7 translation with me. It's a translation given to us, we believe, by the
8 Prosecution, as it has a translation code.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Could the registrar see whether
10 we have DH29/E.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, we do have the English translation.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
13 Please continue, Mr. Bourgon.
14 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
15 Q. [In English] General, following this technical break, I would
16 like to move on and I have just a few additional questions on the judicial
17 system and the way violations of the law could be addressed by the
18 commander of the 3rd Corps. And before the break, we -- you confirmed
19 that you were aware of the disciplinary regime and of the military
20 disciplinary court which was within the military.
21 A. Yes, sir.
22 Q. And we were now looking at the, on one hand, the district
23 military prosecutor's office, as well as the district military court. And
24 you confirmed from your reading of the documents the existence of both of
25 these bodies.
1 A. Yes, sir.
2 Q. And we confirmed that there were responsibilities which were
3 entrusted to the district military prosecutor, in terms of investigating
4 offences and making sure that he would bring the matter up to the district
5 military court.
6 A. Yes, sir.
7 Q. And we also confirmed that information to do this could be
8 provided to the district military prosecutor from a variety of sources,
9 including the 3rd Corps, as well as its subordinate units.
10 A. Yes, sir.
11 Q. You will agree with me, General, that both the district military
12 prosecutor's office and the district military court are agencies or
13 organisations - I'm not sure exactly what term to use - that are external
14 to the 3rd Corps?
15 A. Yeah.
16 Q. As would be the system in Germany that you are used to, but they
17 bear the name "military" because they were created in times of war.
18 And that once an issue, or once a complaint has been brought to
19 the attention of the district military prosecutor by the 3rd Corps -
20 meaning whether it is the commander of the 3rd Corps or one of its
21 subordinate units - then that for all intents and purposes the duty of the
22 commander has been accomplished.
23 A. Yeah.
24 Q. Nevertheless, you mention in your report that should the
25 commander feel that not enough is being done by this district military
1 prosecutor or the district military court, that it would be his duty to do
2 something about it.
3 A. Yes, sir.
4 Q. And you confirm in your report that this is exactly what General
5 Hadzihasanovic did by bringing the matter to the attention of the court.
6 A. Yes, sir.
7 Q. Sorry, did bring this to the attention of the supreme
9 A. Of the supreme headquarters. That he was not very happy with the
10 situation, the things were dealt with.
11 Q. And he did complain that this was having an impact because it
12 wasn't going fast enough.
13 A. Yes, sir.
14 Q. Now, the -- I mentioned before the break that there were three
15 levels of justice. Would I be right in saying that the third level of
16 justice was the special military court?
17 A. Yeah.
18 Q. And that the special military court could be created by a
19 military commander within the military upon being authorised to do so by
20 his superior?
21 A. Yes, sir.
22 Q. And that this would only take place in very specific
23 circumstances, meaning that it would be during the state of war such a
24 special military court may be established, but the conditions was if in
25 the assessment of the commander of a regiment or a brigade, the conditions
1 for conducting criminal proceedings before a competent district military
2 court either did not exist or were difficult and that the combat situation
3 required that proceedings be conducted without delay.
4 A. Yeah.
5 Q. And you are able to confirm from the documents that were given to
6 you that General Hadzihasanovic did create or authorise his subordinate
7 units to create special military courts.
8 A. He authorised them, yes, sir.
9 Q. And that in fact subordinate units did create special military
11 A. I think I did not read about the establishment of a special
12 military court. I don't remember this.
13 Q. I will refer later to a document, rather than wasting time --
14 A. Okay.
15 Q. -- on showing you a document. I will refer to a document later
16 to confirm this issue.
17 You are able to confirm, however, General, that the type of
18 offences for which this special military court would be used were usually
19 combat-related offences, such as surrender to the enemy, joining the enemy
20 forces, or undermining morale in combat.
21 A. Yes, sir.
22 Q. And that the commander who established a court would also be the
23 one who would appoint the judges and there would be five members to this
25 A. Yes, sir.
1 Q. And you are able to confirm that the only possible sentence that
2 this court could give was a death sentence.
3 A. Yes, sir.
4 Q. And that if the district -- if the special military court, even
5 if it found someone guilty, if it disagreed or did not wish to impose the
6 death penalty, that it would then be -- have to refer the matter to the
7 district military prosecutor.
8 A. Yeah.
9 Q. And that if the death penalty or the death sentence was
10 pronounced, it could be carried out on the order of the unit of the
11 commander who had awarded the death sentence.
12 A. Yeah.
13 Q. And that this would be done by a firing squad.
14 A. Yep.
15 Q. You would agree with me, General, that looking at the law
16 applicable to the operations of the 3rd Corps, that there was indeed,
17 first on one hand, working civil organisations who were responsible for
18 law enforcement?
19 A. Yeah.
20 Q. And that as far as military issues are concerned, or military
21 violations, there was a three-level system, starting from disciplinary
22 violations, moving on to criminal acts or misdemeanour, and another
23 different type, which were the offences that the special military court
24 could deal with.
25 A. Yes, sir.
1 Q. And that General Hadzihasanovic did take some steps for this
2 system to operate at the three levels.
3 A. Yeah.
4 Q. If I may -- if I may continue on one matter dealing with the
5 legal regime applicable. And that is just to confirm, because there may
6 have been some confusion. If in your view -- I would like to ask you to
7 give me your views as to whether General Hadzihasanovic would have been
8 responsible for violations of the law committed by civilians; for example,
9 in Zenica.
10 A. No.
11 Q. And would I be right in saying that General Hadzihasanovic was
12 not responsible for violations which would be committed, to give another
13 example, by members of BritBat?
14 A. No.
15 Q. And that he would not be responsible either for violations
16 committed by international observers or members of the European Community
17 Monitoring Mission?
18 A. No.
19 Q. And that he would not be responsible for violations committed by
20 the MUP --
21 A. No.
22 Q. -- or by the HVO.
23 A. By the?
24 Q. HVO.
25 A. No.
1 Q. The enemy. Or by the Serb forces.
2 A. No.
3 Q. So, in fact, you would agree with me that General Hadzihasanovic,
4 his responsibility with respect to handling violations was limited to
5 soldiers or members of the military who were under his effective command
6 and control.
7 A. Yeah.
8 Q. I now move on, General, to the next part of my cross-examination,
9 dealing with the military situation of the 3rd Corps in specific terms.
10 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Mr. President, at this stage the
11 Defence, in order to save time, would like to resort to a hypothetical
12 case. We would like to show the witness a list of facts relating to the
13 situation in which the 3rd Corps found itself and within which the command
14 of the 3rd Corps operated during the period covered by the indictment, as
15 well as on the dates which are relevant from the standpoint of the
16 indictment. We would thus like to submit these facts. We will not be
17 tendering any documents. We would only like to review these facts with
18 the witness as an imaginary case, a hypothetical case. So the Defence
19 would like to obtain from this witness his opinion regarding facts, and
20 later on we will try to prove this to the Chamber but we will first submit
21 these facts to the witness in order to fully take advantage of his
22 presence and his capacity as an expert witness.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Chamber would like to hear
24 the opinion of the Prosecution. But in order to summarise the procedure
25 you are suggesting, you're going to show to the military expert, who is in
1 front of us, taking into account his knowledge of the situation in
2 Bosnia-Herzegovina, of military rules, the constitution of the 3rd Corps
3 and all the other facts that he has command of, you are going to ask him
4 his opinion about some fictitious facts and you are going to ask him
5 questions on the basis of a hypothetical case, this is a hypothetical case
6 but which could be real at the same time, for the witness to give his
7 opinion and interpretation of the situation as you will present it to him.
8 What is the position of the Prosecution regarding this suggested
9 procedure which would allow an expert to give his opinion regarding
10 different possible scenarios or facts which may have or could have
11 occurred? What is your position, Mr. Mundis?
12 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
13 The Defence discussed this with the Prosecution prior to this
14 morning's hearing. My understanding from Mr. Bourgon was that this was
15 largely going to be discussion relating to the map or maps that are behind
16 the witness. In principle, Mr. President, and in light of the
17 jurisprudence of this Tribunal with respect to expert witnesses, the
18 Prosecution does not object to hypothetical situations being put to the
19 witness, again with the understanding that the questions are clear to the
20 witness that they are hypothetical questions and may or may not stem from
21 the actual facts of this case or the evidence which is before this Trial
22 Chamber. So as long as everyone is aware of -- of the procedure that's
23 being used, the Prosecution has no objection to this process being used
24 with the expert witness.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] If I understand, these
1 questions could be posed within the framework of an officer's training
2 course in a war college. You show them facts and ask them to assess them.
3 So, Mr. Bourgon, as there are no objections, you have the floor.
4 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] To be a little bit more precise, to
5 avoid all confusion, what we would like to ask the witness is that he has
6 already had opportunity to review a number of documents he was provided
7 with by the Prosecution, and he formed an opinion based on the documents
8 he had access to. What we would like to do with the expert witness is to
9 give him a series of additional facts in written form and to ask him if
10 adding these facts to those he was aware of, what would have been your
11 opinion regarding two or three particular matters.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Please proceed.
13 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] I should like to submit the series
14 of facts to the witness, and I would like to ask Mr. Usher to be kind
15 enough to distribute these documents.
16 Q. [In English] General Reinhardt, you have been provided by the
17 Prosecution with a series of facts, a series of documents, and you have
18 been asked to reply or to provide your opinion on the basis of these
20 A. Yes, sir.
21 Q. What I would like to ask of you at this time on a hypothetical
22 basis is to look at the facts that are on this document, and as you look
23 at these facts, to do the mental exercise of adding these facts to your
24 own knowledge that you have made to this point, and then I will ask you
25 one or two questions on the basis of the sum of all the facts, only with
1 the caveat, of course, that the facts that you are provided with by the
2 Defence today are facts that are at this stage hypothetical. Do you
3 understand the procedure that I would like to follow with you?
4 A. I'm not quite sure, but I'll try. Because I -- I'm not quite
5 sure whether the things which I see here are all hypothetical, but okay.
6 Q. To make myself a bit more clear, these are facts and everyone in
7 the courtroom will be well aware that these are facts that the Defence
8 will endeavour to prove at some point during this trial --
9 A. Yeah.
10 Q. -- thus, when we do so, validating your opinion. So there is no
11 surprise, in terms of the -- for the Prosecution, in terms of the
12 procedure being used. And basically what we could have done instead is to
13 show you one document for each of these facts or to go with -- and some
14 kind of evidence. But for now, we simply wish you to look at these facts
15 in order to save time and then it will be our own burden to do that. But
16 your role today is to provide an opinion, and to save time we'd like you
17 to confirm -- to provide your opinion on the facts that you have been made
18 aware of plus these ones.
19 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Mr. President, may I proceed?
20 Thank you.
21 Q. [In English] So I will proceed -- I will proceed, General, to go
22 quickly with you over these facts one by one.
23 A. Okay.
24 Q. And there are 40-some of these facts. The first ones relate to
25 the political situation. So I would say that this would be a hypothetical
1 situation that: "On 6 April 1992 Bosnia-Herzegovina was recognised as an
2 independent state by the European Union and the United States; that on the
3 same day it proclaimed its independence and that it was attacked by JNA
4 and Bosnian Serb forces. The Serb forces occupied the majority of the
5 Bosnian territory." I will speak a bit slower to ensure the translators
6 have the time to catch up with me.
7 "On the 2nd of May, 1992, the capital of Bosnia, Sarajevo, was
8 attacked and put under siege, and there was a blockage of state organs,
9 economic, industrial, as well as military resources."
10 "On 9 January 1992, the SDS proclaimed the Republic of the
11 Serbian People with the aspiration of integrating it into the Federal
12 Republic of Yugoslavia."
13 "On 12 May 1992, the Bosnian Serb Assembly voted to create the
14 Army of the Serbian Republic and effectively transforming the JNA units
15 remaining in Bosnia into commands of the new army. On the same day the
16 Constitutional Court of Bosnia declared that these decisions taken by the
17 Republic of the Serbian People were illegal."
18 Moving on to the next page: "On 18 November, the Croatian
19 Community of Herceg-Bosna proclaimed its existence and claimed to be a
20 separate or distinct 'political, cultural, economic, and territorial
21 whole' in the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Its purposes included
22 the establishment of closer ties with Croatia, as evidenced by the HZ HB's
23 use of the Croatian currency and the Croatian language. These aspirations
24 were supported by Croatia, which granted Croatian citizenship to Bosnian
1 General, are we moving together on this, or am I going too
2 fast or --
3 A. No, it's all right.
4 Q. -- are you able to follow?
5 A. It's all right, sir.
6 Q. Thank you, General.
7 Moving on: "On the 18th of November, the HZHB was founded with
8 the intention that it should secede from Bosnia and Herzegovina and with a
9 view to unification with Croatia."
10 "On the 8th of April, 1992, the Presidency of the HZHB at an
11 emergency session issued a decision establishing the HVO as the 'supreme
12 defence body of the Croatian people' in HZ HB."
13 General, before we move on, are we -- are you familiar with the
14 terms that we are employing so far in these facts?
15 A. Yes, sir.
16 Q. General, I would ask also that you disregard any mention that is
17 in the column to the right of the document which appear in this instance
18 by mistake and should not have been there.
19 A. Okay.
20 Q. "On the 10th of April, 1992, Mate Boban decreed that the Bosnian
21 Territorial Defence, which had been created the day before, was illegal on
22 HZHB territory."
23 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] My colleague has some comments he
24 would like to make, Mr. President.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis.
1 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President. I'm wondering if I might
2 briefly address the Trial Chamber in the absence of the witness.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Microphone not activated]
4 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the Presiding Judge, please.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Microphone not activated]
6 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Mundis, you have the
9 [The witness stands down]
10 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President. I'm actually hesitant to
11 get to my feet, but the Prosecution is a bit concerned with the procedure
12 used for a number of reasons.
13 First of all, the notion of hypothetical facts, as the
14 Prosecution understands it, might be slightly different from the use of
15 that term or that concept by the Defence.
16 The facts that they are putting to the witness, there's actually
17 at least two different categories of these facts. The first kind of set
18 of facts that we have here are facts which are actually in evidence and
19 are before the Trial Chamber as reflected in the source column, where the
20 Defence either cites to "ADM," which I take to be an admission by the
21 Prosecution and the Defence, or an exhibit number.
22 Consequently, Mr. President, those are not, the Prosecution would
23 submit, hypotheticals. They are clearly facts which are in evidence.
24 With respect to some of the other facts that are set forth, those
25 facts may or may not be true, and I haven't had the chance to thoroughly
1 go through this document, having just received it. Many of these facts,
2 however, at first glance appear to be facts which one or the other party
3 submitted to the other in terms of pre-trial admissions, which the parties
4 did not agree to based on the fact that there is not an ADM source in the
5 right-hand column; or alternatively, or perhaps both, these are facts
6 which were the subject of the litigation concerning judicial notice in
7 which the Trial Chamber refused to judicially notice these facts.
8 Now, those facts may or may not be considered as hypotheticals.
9 They simply might be facts which are true but are irrelevant to these
10 proceedings or facts which have been, as Your Honours are well aware,
11 perhaps established by a Trial Chamber but which are currently pending on
13 And again, the Prosecution is of the view that these are not
14 necessarily hypothetical facts, as the Prosecution understands that term
15 to be used, and were also -- some of these facts may or may not be within
16 the expertise of this witness.
17 And finally, I'm not sure it appears -- and this is why I
18 hesitated before rising to my feet. It appears that Mr. Bourgon is going
19 to put all seven or eight pages of these facts to the witness and see how
20 his opinion changes, if it in fact does change, based on the totality of
21 all these facts. And again, I'm hesitant, I was hesitant to rise to my
22 feet, Mr. President, but I'm not sure if this is the best way to get this
23 type of evidence before Your Honours, particularly because these facts,
24 some of them are in evidence, some of them are not in evidence, some of
25 them may be hypothetical facts, some of them may be facts which have yet
1 worked their way through the Appeals Chamber, and there's a variety of
2 different types of facts in this document, and we simply need to put our
3 concerns about this document and the approach taken by the Defence on the
4 record for Your Honours' consideration.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. The Defence will respond.
6 The Prosecution has stated that there are certain facts mentioned
7 that have already been admitted. These aren't hypothetical facts.
8 There's nothing hypothetical about them. They have already been
10 In addition, the Prosecution stated that in the case of certain
11 elements, judicial notice was requested and this wasn't granted for a
12 certain number of elements following the decision that we rendered a while
13 ago. And the Prosecution believes that by following this procedure, you
14 are attempting to tender into evidence certain facts that were rejected.
15 The third point raised by the Prosecution is that the facts that
16 you are referring to - and you have qualified them as hypothetical, but in
17 fact these are facts that you yourself are interpreting - the witness
18 might not be in a position to recognise these facts and have an opinion
19 about the facts.
20 As the witness is not present, I'll provide you with an example
21 which is very telling: You could ask the witness to confirm or not to
22 confirm that in the territory under control the HVO was involved in
23 systematic ethnic cleansing. You might ask the witness to assess the
24 conduct of the HVO in such a case. All of this might give rise to
25 problems in that the Trial Chamber doesn't see the purpose, so you should
1 explain to us what you are trying to prove, because when you examine a
2 witness, the purpose of the examination is to prove something. What are
3 you attempting to prove? If you want to prove that the report that he
4 drafted could be amended or could have been amended if he had been aware
5 of certain facts, if that is the case, you could summarise everything very
6 easily and say that it seems that such and such was the case, and you
7 could ask whether the situation such as you have described it is such that
8 his report might be amended in light of these new elements. That would
9 enable the witness to express his position, then.
10 Mr. Bourgon.
11 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
12 I'll try and address the concerns of the Prosecution and the
13 concerns the Trial Chamber has evoked.
14 I would like to provide you with the following explanations: As
15 far as the procedure is concerned, it's quite common and it is a procedure
16 that is followed almost everywhere in courts when an expert witness is
17 called to testify. The role of an expert witness is to assist the Trial
18 Chamber, as the witness has certain expertise and can aid the Trial
19 Chamber in performing its duties. This is knowledge or expertise that the
20 Trial Chamber does not have and can enable the Trial Chamber to obtain
21 additional information.
22 In this case, the Trial Chamber agreed to hear a witness, as
23 suggested by the Prosecution, to hear a military expert, and the Trial
24 Chamber has authorised this witness to express his opinion, given his
25 qualifications, to express his opinion about certain issues.
1 What the Defence would like to do, Mr. President, is to obtain
2 this witness's opinion, because that is the purpose for which this witness
3 is present. We would like to hear this witness's opinion about certain
4 issues. As I have said, this is a procedure which is used everywhere. We
5 mention a hypothetical case, and then the witness expresses his opinion
6 with regard to this hypothetical case.
7 When referring to a hypothetical case, Mr. President, the case
8 might be partially true, partly unproved, partly in dispute, but that is
9 not what is at stake. The issue we're dealing with is to know whether the
10 instructions given to the witness, whether the purpose is to know whether
11 what we tell a witness of is hypothetical. We then ask the witness to
12 take into consideration all the facts we have presented him with, and we
13 would then ask him a couple of questions that have a direct link to his
14 sphere of expertise. The witness may be in a position to bear in mind all
15 these facts and to answer these questions.
16 In our opinion, Mr. President, the witness could go even further
17 than just confirming that his report could be amended. He could provide
18 us with expert knowledge and expert opinion that could be new and
19 different and he could express this opinion.
20 As to the value of this opinion, it would have no value unless
21 these facts were proved in whatever manner at some subsequent time. In
22 such a case, the burden the Defence would have, if I wanted to validate
23 this and give probative value, would be to show that this -- that these
24 facts are actually true.
25 If the Defence only manages to prove 75 per cent of the facts
1 mentioned, the Trial Chamber would be in a position to determine whether
2 these -- whether the witness would have provided the Trial Chamber with
3 his opinion, with the opinion he provided the Trial Chamber with [as
4 interpreted]. If all the facts are proved, the Trial Chamber would reach
5 the conclusion that the expert's opinion is in fact very significant and
6 has high probative value and could affect other evidence. The Trial
7 Chamber could assess to what extent the opinion expressed by the expert
8 witness about facts that he knows aren't true, the witness knows that
9 these are hypothetical facts but we can ask him: If these facts are true,
10 what is your opinion in such a case?
11 When I go through these facts, if the witness fails to understand
12 them, he can ask for explanations; not about the historical character of
13 the facts but about what we're trying to illustrate by referring to
14 certain facts.
15 The other procedure that we could follow, Mr. President, is to go
16 through the Defence's evidence, and that would take up two weeks of
17 hearings. This is the procedure we have decided to follow in order to
18 save time, because we don't think there are any surprises. All these
19 facts have been obtained from documents and from other evidence that we
20 want to tender into evidence, and we are sure that we will be able to
21 tender them into evidence in order to validate the opinion of the expert
23 For these reasons, Mr. President, we believe that we should be
24 granted leave to proceed in this manner, in order to save time. And as
25 I'm aware of the risk - because there is a risk - as I'm aware of the risk
1 that if these facts aren't proved in the course of the proceedings, this
2 could affect the probative value of the opinion of expressed by the
3 witness today.
4 Thank you, Mr. President.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Before I give the
6 floor to Mr. Mundis, in order to be quite clear about this situation, the
7 Trial Chamber would like to note that you have explained your procedure,
8 your plan, and you have told us about the Defence's position, the
9 Defence's strategy.
10 As far as expertise is concerned, there are several procedures we
11 could follow: There's your procedure, which you have just explained; and
12 there's another efficient procedure that could be followed, and that is to
13 ask questions -- put questions to a witness about what he has said, and
14 the Defence, within the framework of the common-law procedure, could call
15 another expert witness, who could repeat the same things but following the
16 Defence's manner, and then the Trial Chamber will assess the situation.
17 This is another procedure that could be followed. You prefer to follow
18 the procedure you have mentioned; that is your right.
19 On the other hand, in order to allow you to continue, you said
20 that at the end of this procedure, you will ask the witness two questions.
21 As the witness is not present, could you tell us about the two questions
22 that you were going to ask the witness.
23 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
24 I should have included that in my earlier submission. The
25 questions that I will put to the witness have a direct link to the
1 questions that have -- that were put to him in his report. In particular,
2 it concerns the effect -- the impact of being in such a situation, what
3 the impact on the command responsibility would be, on the possibility of
4 taking measures, on the valuation of the measures that were taken. And it
5 would concern the question as to whether it would be reasonable to proceed
6 in such a manner in such circumstances.
7 Other hypothetical cases could be presented today and tomorrow we
8 could address certain other issues, but these questions are questions that
9 have been raised in the expert's report, and they are questions that have
10 been raised by the Prosecution.
11 Thank you, Mr. President.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis.
13 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, thank you.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, you understand that
15 you have called a military expert as a witness and the Defence can
16 counterattack with regard to the contents of the expertise if they think
17 that the expertise -- the expert report is prejudicial to the Defence, and
18 it's the Defence's strategy they want to proceed in this manner. What
19 does the Prosecution have to say in the light of what Mr. Bourgon has just
21 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, certainly the Prosecution does not
22 contest in any way the right of the Defence to cross-examine the witness,
23 nor does the Prosecution contest the right of the Defence to put
24 hypothetical questions to the witness. Our position is that these are not
25 necessarily hypothetical facts. We're more concerned with the procedure.
1 Let me, in light of the comments, the final comments made by my
2 learned friend Mr. Bourgon, let me identify the issue as the Prosecution
3 sees it, because I think it might be a little more clear, in light of what
4 Mr. Bourgon has said.
5 Mr. President, assuming we follow the procedure that the Defence
6 has started - that is, Mr. Bourgon reads the entire eight-page document to
7 the witness and then puts a couple of questions to him concerning how his
8 report may or may not be different in light of these facts - we are then
9 left, Mr. President, with the dilemma of knowing which of these facts
10 would have led the expert to change his report. Then when we get into the
11 Defence phase and the Defence attempts to prove these facts or does
12 perhaps prove all of these facts, or let's assume they only prove 50
13 per cent of them, we won't know if those are -- if those are the facts
14 that led this expert to change his report. The only way we will know
15 which facts led him to change his report, if in fact that is the case, is
16 for the Defence to put each of these facts individually to the witness, in
17 the terms of, "General Reinhardt, if you knew that Bosnia and Herzegovina
18 was recognised as an independent state on 6 April 1992 by the EU and the
19 United States, would your opinion have changed; yes or no?" And if, of
20 course, he says yes, it would have changed, how would it have changed?
21 Then to proceed to the second fact and the third fact and the fourth fact.
22 And I understand, Mr. President, that that's a time-consuming
23 process, but to put all of these facts to the witness, without knowing
24 which of these facts would lead him to change his mind, means that when we
25 get to the Defence phase and they establish, say, only half of these
1 facts, we won't know if those are the facts that would have led this
2 expert to change his opinion or not. It's a question of getting this
3 procedure on the record in such a way that we all understand at the
4 conclusion of the trial how the expert's opinion would have changed based
5 on these facts.
6 And if his opinion would have changed, how it would have changed,
7 et cetera. And so that's our real concern. And I -- I understand this is
8 a timely process, but the Prosecution would submit it's the only way that
9 we'll be able to know which of these facts would have changed the expert's
10 opinion, if in fact any of them would change his opinion.
11 Of course, the other possible way of doing this, Mr. President,
12 would be to provide these facts to the witness perhaps at the end of
13 today's proceedings and have him come in tomorrow and explain, using a
14 tick-box system or something, that this fact would have changed his
15 opinion and this fact would have changed his opinion but the rest
16 wouldn't. I'm just giving an example. That might be another way.
17 But our position, Mr. President, particularly in light of what
18 the Defence have said, is that we need to know which of these facts would
19 result in a change in his opinion, and how.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Mundis.
21 The Prosecution has clarified the debate. According to what
22 Mr. Mundis has said, the fact that one reads out eight pages of facts to
23 the witness might give rise to confusion, because with regard to the
24 totality of the facts we won't know which ones are the ones that might
25 make the witness amend his report. As a result, it might be better to
1 refer to each fact individually and then the witness might say, "Yes, I
2 agree," or "I don't agree," "I'll change something," et cetera.
3 The first fact, recognising the independence of Bosnia and
4 Herzegovina, we could ask the witness whether he is aware of this or not.
5 And then we could take note of his answer and proceed. That is one manner
6 of proceeding. In such a case, we'll be in a position to assess the
7 so-called hypothetical facts.
8 The other solution suggested by the Prosecution, which would also
9 enable us to save time, would be to show the witness the document -- to
10 provide the witness with the document and the witness could examine it in
11 the evening and return having ticked the relevant facts. But in such a
12 case we won't have an adversarial debate.
13 There are about 40 facts referred to, but we could proceed very
14 rapidly because, given the witness's past, the witness can understand
15 matters very quickly and answer very quickly. So you could ask the
16 witness these questions very quickly. We could go through all the 40
17 questions very rapidly.
18 What do you think about this, Mr. Bourgon?
19 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
20 The issue raised by my colleague, Mr. President, it is that the
21 expert provides an opinion about a given subject. The question was put to
22 the witness, and the Defence doesn't want to go through each individual
23 fact because when you take these facts on an individual basis, it might
24 not affect the witness's opinion.
25 The Defence would like to proceed by examining themes or
1 subjects. The first subject concerns the situation; the second subject is
2 the issue of the Mujahedin; the third subject is the issue of Dusina; the
3 fourth one is the issue of Maljine; and finally, we have the events in
4 Miletici. This is the procedure we wanted to follow.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a minute. I'm not
6 following you at all any more, because in the document that I have we have
7 the heading, "The situation." There are three pages that concern the
8 situation. That is followed by a page entitled, "Mission." Then, "The
9 situation in Central Bosnia." It's composed of two pages; and then, "The
10 problems encountered by the 3rd Corps." You mentioned Dusina, Maljine.
11 Where can this be found?
12 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Mr. President, that is the first
13 theme. We have a similar document for each subject.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So there's another document.
15 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Absolutely, Mr. President. This is
16 the procedure we wanted to follow in order to save time. Because as we
17 have already said --
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please show us the other
19 documents so we can see things more clearly.
20 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Unfortunately, Mr. President, I
21 don't have these documents with me. They are prepared, but I don't have
22 them with me, because today I wanted to deal with the subject of the
23 situation. And as I said at the beginning of the cross-examination, I
24 will then go on to the question of the measures taken and then I will be
25 referring to specific documents and tomorrow I want to deal with four
1 other hypothetical cases.
2 And the situation we're in at the moment, Mr. President, is that
3 the expert witness will examine a subject, a situation. For example, if I
4 refer to the events in Dusina - I think there are 27 facts that concern
5 Dusina - we can present these 27 facts to the witness which concern all
6 the events in Dusina from the beginning to the end of the relevant period.
7 We could tell the witness, "Don't worry about whether this is true or not.
8 That's not what's at stake. If the facts are true, what is your opinion
9 as a military expert with regard to the events that transpired and are
10 referred to in this document?" The witness would then give us his
11 opinion, and it would then be for the Trial Chamber to assess the
12 probative value of what the witness has said. Because when the expert
13 replies to the question he won't say, "Yes, my opinion has been modified."
14 He should say, "Yes, my opinion has been modified because of such-and-such
15 a fact," and he would then inform the Trial Chamber of his opinion and
16 just for the Trial Chamber to assess the response in the light of the
17 evidence presented in the course of the proceedings.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] As far as I'm concerned, I'm
19 not at all convinced that such a procedure might be interesting for the
20 Defence. It will take up a lot of time. And according to what you have
21 said, the expert would only give an assessment of hypothetical events, and
22 then you would say, "If this hypothesis was true, would you have changed
23 your report?" So this is a procedure you would like to follow and that
24 would take up a certain amount of the Trial Chamber's time.
25 It's for you to conduct the defence as you see fit, but as far as
1 judicial procedure is concerned, we have certain questions. But it is for
2 you to conduct the cross-examination as you see fit. We are concerned
3 about not wasting time. Above all, we don't want to cause prejudice to
4 either of the parties. The witness can only remain here until Friday, and
5 Friday will be the day on which the Judges will be asking the witness
6 questions. We will follow a quite different procedure. So you still have
7 today and tomorrow. This is how you want to proceed.
8 We will withdraw to debate the matter, because you have raised an
9 issue that has to do with the time we will be using, so we have to
11 We'll be back in a few minutes' time.
12 --- Break taken at 11.58 a.m.
13 --- On resuming at 12.07 p.m.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The hearing is resumed.
15 The Chamber has deliberated regarding the question of the
16 procedure in view of the objections presented by the Prosecution.
17 The Chamber notes that the aim sought by the Defence was to find
18 out whether the expert, in view of certain facts, would confirm the gist
19 of his report or would he modify certain points after reviewing certain
20 facts which have been described either as fictitious or real, supported by
21 questions put by the Defence.
22 Within this context, the Chamber notes that one difficulty
23 emerges straight away, and that is if the expert modifies his assessment,
24 the assessment contained in his expert report, on the basis of which facts
25 or evidence would his assessment be modified.
1 Therefore, the Chamber is of the opinion that in the interest of
2 the -- of obtaining full benefit from the expert witness, that we should
3 proceed as follows: The expert should be shown the document which you
4 have prepared as well as the other documents and the other questions. The
5 expert will have the rest of the afternoon and the evening to review those
6 documents. And when the hearing is resumed tomorrow, after having time to
7 study the documents, the expert will reply to the questions you have
8 prepared for him and then the expert will confirm whether he stands by his
9 report or whether certain parts of his report would be modified or amended
10 in view of the elements contained in these documents.
11 These documents should also be provided to the Chamber in their
12 totality because we have to be -- have to familiarise ourselves with them;
13 and the same applies to the Prosecution, which means that we still have
14 time which may be used by the Defence for other questions, and tomorrow we
15 can take the day to apply this technique, which is a little unusual, after
16 all, so that the Defence may, in accordance with his strategy -- their
17 strategy and their aims, put the questions to the witness.
18 I give you the floor, Mr. Bourgon. This means that you should
19 have in your possession all the documents -- relevant documents.
20 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the Defence thanks
21 the Chamber for their ruling. We will act accordingly, and I will move on
22 to another section which is not related to these documents, and later on
23 we will provide the witness with these documents at the end of the day so
24 that he can study them. Therefore, I will go on to another line of
25 questioning now.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
2 Mr. Mundis, I hope there's no obstacle remaining, in view of the
3 fact that you yourself suggested this procedure.
4 MR. MUNDIS: No, Mr. President, none whatsoever. I simply wanted
5 to draw to the Trial Chamber's attention with respect to timing issues.
6 As Your Honour has noted, the witness needs to depart on Friday. I do
7 recall from meeting the witness two and a half weeks ago that he has an
8 engagement Friday evening in Berlin, and we may need to raise the
9 possibility of extended hours if -- if that has to happen, Mr. President,
10 that would need to be done tomorrow afternoon, rather than extending our
11 sitting on Friday, and I'm simply drawing that to everyone's attention, so
12 that if we do have time pressures steps might be taken this afternoon to
13 address with the witness and the Defence.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Regarding time, let us not
15 forget that Mr. Kubura's Defence also needs two hours. Therefore,
16 Mr. Bourgon, how much time will you need tomorrow roughly to apply this
17 procedure? Because let us not forget that we need another two hours for
18 the Defence team for Mr. Kubura, in view of the fact that Friday has been
19 reserved for the questions of Judges, additional questions by both
20 parties. Therefore, we must also not forget that the witness has certain
21 engagements for Friday evening.
22 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we have already
23 taken a little time, but it was quite inevitable. But we believe that if
24 the documents are given to the witness, we will have four series of facts.
25 We will need about 30 minutes per series, which will mean a maximum of two
1 hours, and then two hours will be left for my colleagues representing
2 Mr. Kubura's Defence.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Therefore, in theory we will be
4 able to complete everything tomorrow.
5 Without any further ado, Mr. Usher, will you go and bring in the
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] All the documents and the
9 questions, please, need to be distributed at the end of today's hearing;
10 and for us as well.
11 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the questions are
12 not in writing; however, the documents will be ready. What we could do,
13 we have two documents with us which we can give to the witness straight
14 away and give him all the others by the end of the day, as well as the
15 documents -- as well as the questions.
16 [The witness entered court]
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] General, we asked you to leave.
18 This was only because we had to discuss certain procedural problems so
19 that we could plan our work for today, tomorrow, and Friday, in view of
20 your own obligations. So we have agreed on a certain procedure:
21 Documents will be given to you, which you will be able to look through at
22 peace this afternoon and the evening; and then the Defence tomorrow will
23 put questions to you on the basis of those documents. In this way, we
24 will be able to save time.
25 We are now resuming the hearing, and the Defence will have
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 another line of questions for you now.
2 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
3 Q. [In English] General, we will move on to a different aspect, or
4 the next line of questioning in relation to the cross-examination based on
5 your expert report. The next issue I wanted to raise with you was the
6 issue of measures taken by General Hadzihasanovic. And to begin this
7 section, I would like to refer you to paragraph 9.4.12 of your report,
8 which is on page 27.
9 Sorry, General, this is more 9.4.14. Do you have this report
10 with you now?
11 A. Yes, sir.
12 Q. In this paragraph 9.4.14, you refer to the report which was sent
13 by General Hadzihasanovic dealing with the legality in the Army of Bosnia
14 and Herzegovina and that this report deals with a large number of cases
15 forwarded to the military disciplinary court of the 3rd Command. And then
16 you go on to say: "But there was not a single member of the 3rd Corps
17 Command that has committed a disciplinary offence." And you quoted this
18 from the report of 10 August 1993.
19 A. Yeah.
20 Q. If I go -- and you go on in the same paragraph that then General
21 Hadzihasanovic explained the situation of the two district military courts
22 and that he commented on their legal proceedings and he basically
23 said, "It is alarming and intolerable." Is that a fair statement?
24 A. Yes, sir. This is just a quotation.
25 Q. And he complained that there were hundreds of unfinished very
1 difficult cases which had been there for a long time - I'm not real
2 reading from your report but paraphrasing - including murder, rapes, and
3 similar offences, and that can produce a catastrophic result for the
4 enforcement of order and legality in that area and even in the combat
6 And then you go on to say: "But summarising the situation, he
7 came to the conclusion that regarding the criminal offences that have been
8 committed, not a single one was committed by any of the members of the
9 3rd Corps Command."
10 My first question in relation to this paragraph, General, relates
11 to footnote 151. Footnote 151 refers to the document PT1156. I would
12 like you to read the footnote at 151 and to confirm that you were
13 referring to the report of the Canton Court in Zenica dated 10 May 1993.
14 A. Yes, sir.
15 Q. Now, I would say, would you agree with me that there may be a
16 mistake because the Canton Court in Zenica did not exist in 1993?
17 A. This was 2002.
18 Q. 2002. So this footnote, then, is not something that dates back
19 to 1993 but that dates back to 2002.
20 A. Yeah. Concerning cases of 1992 and 1993.
21 Q. Okay. Now, if we go back to what you were saying, in terms of
22 this document, you understand that the Canton Court did not exist in 1993,
23 but what happened is that the Canton Court basically took over the files
24 of the district military court.
25 A. Yeah.
1 Q. Did you understand that from document PT1156?
2 A. I did.
3 Q. And it would appear from this letter, I guess you would agree,
4 that there was a request sent to the court, to the Zenica cantonal court,
5 on 10 May -- the request was sent on 28 March 2002.
6 A. Yeah.
7 Q. Are you aware of who sent this request for information to the
8 Zenica cantonal court?
9 A. No.
10 Q. And if I would refer to you to what the questions which were
11 requested in this document, my first question was -- I guess if we go to
12 the third paragraph -- or the second paragraph, it appears that the answer
13 provided would cover the questions that what was the decree law on
14 district military court, a document that you have seen, and that this is
15 the basic document that created the Zenica district military court for the
16 Zenica district and that this court covered the following municipalities:
17 Kakanj, Zavidovici, Zenica, and Zepce.
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And that was between January of 1993 and March 1994.
20 A. Yeah.
21 Q. So I guess one could assume, because we do not have the question,
22 that the question raised at that time was: Was there an existing district
23 military court in Zenica? And if so, on the basis of what document in
24 that time frame? I can't be precise with the question, but one could
25 assume that this was the question that was asked.
1 A. I think so too, yeah.
2 Q. And during that period, then it says that in addition to the
3 municipalities listed and because of the blockade of the city of Sarajevo,
4 the court also covered additional municipalities; namely, Visoko, Breza,
5 Vares, Olovo, and the part of Busovaca that was under BH army control.
6 A. Yeah.
7 Q. So basically the question must have been what were the villages
8 or the territorial jurisdiction of the Zenica district military court.
9 A. Yeah.
10 Q. And then you've got the name of the judges, so I guess the
11 question was: Who were the judges during this time frame?
12 A. I thought so too, yeah.
13 Q. And we have a number of judges.
14 And the next paragraph goes on to say that: "This court, in
15 accordance with the instructions of the Federal Ministry of Justice, took
16 over the documentation of the Zenica district military court."
17 A. Yeah.
18 Q. And the question must have been: Where are the documents from
19 the district military court?
20 A. Yeah.
21 Q. And then the next paragraph goes on to say that: "According to
22 information from the register of this court, which was taken over," then
23 they go on to cite three cases.
24 A. Yeah.
25 Q. First there was the case of Mirko Vlajic, and this appears to be
1 a member of the HVO who was accused of war crimes on 9 June 1993 in
2 accordance with Article 142 of the Criminal Code.
3 A. Yeah.
4 Q. And that this indictment was rejected.
5 A. Yeah.
6 Q. Then it goes on to state two more cases, and I refer to the
7 second page of the document, the case of Dzemal Zahidovic. Now, even
8 though it is not mentioned, are you able to confirm that Dzemal Zahidovic
9 is of Muslim origin?
10 A. I don't know what origin he is from.
11 Q. Would that be an important fact for you to know in order to
12 determine if any measures had been taken by General Hadzihasanovic against
13 members of the Bosnian army?
14 A. Yeah.
15 Q. Now, we don't know from this paragraph whether he is a member of
16 the Bosnian army or if he maybe is a civilian, but we know that he was
17 accused of committing a war crime against Article 142; is that right?
18 A. Yeah.
19 Q. And the third case mentioned is that of Mr. Vinko Vidovic, and it
20 says that he was found guilty because he committed something on 16 April
21 1993 and that this was, again, a war crime against the civilian
22 population. That is correct?
23 A. Yeah. And he was a member of the HVO.
24 Q. Of the HVO. So on the basis of the three cases that are there,
25 these are three war crimes cases; you would agree?
1 A. Yeah.
2 Q. And two are members of the HVO; the first and the third. And the
3 second, we don't know who he is.
4 A. Yeah.
5 Q. But it would have been important for you to know if he was indeed
6 a Muslim in order to find out the measures taken by General
8 A. Yeah.
9 Q. The letter goes on to say that: "These are three cases, and
10 these are the only ones tried for war crimes during the period of that
11 court's existence."
12 A. Yeah.
13 Q. So only three war crimes cases.
14 And they said according with BH army members, in that period
15 there were no BH army members who were accused of having committed a war
17 A. Yeah.
18 Q. We can deduct this from this statement.
19 A. Yeah.
20 Q. So for you having this information, this might have been one of
21 the reasons that led you to conclude that actions or measures were not
22 taken all the way by General Hadzihasanovic.
23 A. I took this here, just to support what he said before, that based
24 on his knowledge no members of his army have committed war crimes.
25 Q. Okay.
1 A. And I took this as an independent source, which basically
2 supports what he has claimed in that document before.
3 Q. Okay. Now, that is the -- and then the letter goes on to say
4 that whoever sent this request -- we have a fair idea, but we can't
5 confirm who sent the request. And that's the information that was
6 provided to yourself in assessing the question that was posed to you.
7 A. Yes, sir.
8 Q. And I referred to -- back to the paragraph 9.4.14, where you talk
9 about the 10th of August report and say he did complain about the legal
10 system --
11 A. Yeah.
12 Q. -- but he confirmed -- and you say, on two occasions, which is
13 footnotes 150 and 151, that not a single member of the 3rd Corps Command
14 has committed a disciplinary offence. That is footnote 150.
15 A. Yeah.
16 Q. And that at the end of the paragraph, regarding criminal offences
17 that have been committed, not a single one was committed by any of the
18 members of the 3rd Corps Command.
19 Now, you understood from this paragraph, of course, that what
20 General Hadzihasanovic was referring to was members of his headquarters.
21 That means none of the persons in his headquarters had committed a
22 disciplinary offence or -- or a crime.
23 A. I would extend this, because for me the 3rd Corps Command
24 encompasses all the forces under his command.
25 Q. That was your understanding --
1 A. This is my understanding of the term "3rd Corps Command."
2 Q. And if I was to suggest to you that "3rd Corps Command" really
3 meant his headquarters, would that change your opinion on things?
4 A. Well, this would somehow limit the scope of -- of what is said
6 Q. Just before the break, I would like to take this document, the
7 August report, that was sent by General Hadzihasanovic on the legality --
8 A. Yeah.
9 Q. -- and just to confirm with you what your understanding of "3rd
10 Corps Command" was. Could you take this document, which is PT780.
11 A. Yeah.
12 Q. I refer to you to the second paragraph, which says that: "The
13 3rd Corps Command analysed again the state of legality."
14 A. Yeah.
15 Q. From your understanding of this sentence, is the general
16 referring to the complete corps or to his headquarters?
17 A. He talks about the 3rd Corps Command and subordinate command in
18 units. In my understanding, the way this has been written, it's the
19 entire command.
20 Q. This specific sentence, General.
21 A. I'm not talking about -- I'm not -- I don't want to take out this
22 specific sentence out of the context of the document. For me the context
23 of the document basically talks about his entire command.
24 Q. If we go into this document in more specific details, we see that
25 within this document he is speaking about number and type -- I refer to,
1 sorry, to page 2 of 8, the number and type of disciplinary offences,
2 possibly committed criminal offences and other misdemeanours. And then he
3 goes on to state that: "Since the military disciplinary first instance
4 court was created this year, there were five --" and then something is
5 missing, "...were started."
6 A. Mm-hm.
7 Q. And then he goes on to talk about the types of offences, misuse
8 of official position, taking of military property, careless performing of
9 military service.
10 And then, in terms of this type of offences, then he talks about
11 the work of the disciplinary court, and he says: "More attention should
12 be given to the disciplinary court because it's not working quickly
14 And if we refer to the gist of his report, where you quoted
15 himself as saying that: "There are hundreds of cases." And I quote again
16 from your report: "There are hundreds of unfinished very difficult cases
17 which lie there for a year." And he was talking about murder, rapes, and
19 Now, how could General Hadzihasanovic put in a letter that there
20 is no offences committed by members of the 3rd Corps Command if your
21 interpretation of "3rd Corps Command" is right and at the same time saying
22 that there are hundreds of unfinished cases, including murder and rape
23 that lie there?
24 A. Maybe I don't understand the question, but I think a corps
25 command, which is a rather restricted group of soldiers and NCOs and
1 officers, normally doesn't commit war crimes. They are sitting most of
2 the time behind their desk and doing staff jobs. And the numbers which we
3 are just quoting here -- which you just quoted here could not have been
4 affected by members of the staff but only of the entire area of
5 responsibility of General Hadzihasanovic. And that again brings me back
6 to the way that I see that he is talking about his entire corps; i.e.,
7 corps headquarters, plus the subordinate units, and not only about the
8 corps command, i.e., the corps headquarters.
9 Q. And would it be possible, General, that you are wrong in this
10 respect and that he was referring only to his headquarters?
11 A. I would never say that what I said is the Bible. I don't know
12 whether I am absolutely right. I just tell you about my interpretation as
13 I see this from my -- my way of reading it and interrelating it to other
14 information I got.
15 Q. And this is really a definite piece of information which led you
16 to conclude that no measures had been taken by General Hadzihasanovic, at
17 least up to the end, as you were saying.
18 A. No. I have never said that he didn't have taken any measures.
19 You don't quote me correctly in this regard. I even refer to cases where
20 he had taken all the measures which I think have to be taken. So I just
21 said he was interested in what's going on in the court; he was interested
22 also to speed it up. He was very unhappy with the situation as it has
23 developed with the court. And there were cases which were important for
24 him to follow up on his disciplinary -- for disciplinary reasons of his
25 forces. And this is what I say here, and not what you just implied I had
2 Q. But would I be right in saying that this is the information that
3 you had with respect to at least this type of measures and that you were
4 under the belief from this document because you had no additional
5 information that those were the measures taken by the 3rd Corps before the
6 Zenica district military court?
7 A. This is right, sir.
8 Q. And in doing so, then this probably led you - and correct me if
9 I'm wrong - to basically go on to the paragraph where you quoted, where
10 it's -- I quoted this at the beginning of my cross-examination, when you
11 were saying that he did feel responsible, he did take preventative action,
12 but he wasn't willing to take the extra step and to punish, to ensure that
13 crimes would not be committed again.
14 A. Well, you take this, again, out of the context, because the
15 context for -- for me in the whole statement is not that members, soldiers
16 of his organic 3 Corps Command committed war crimes. We are talking
17 specifically about the Mujahedin. And I said that he as a general
18 said, "No soldiers of my command, which were under my direct command,
19 committed anything like this, as far as criminal activities against human
20 law and international law were concerned." This is the interpretation as
21 I see this.
22 Q. And if, General, I think -- because I think we need to stop for
23 the break.
24 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Mr. President, what time do we have
25 to have the break?
1 One last question, Mr. President, with your leave.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please go ahead.
3 MR. BOURGON:
4 Q. General, I'll show you information which is different to this
5 which you had to show that in fact more than 1.000 reports had been filed
6 before the Zenica district military court over the course of one year.
7 A. Mm-hm.
8 Q. Would that change your views with respect to the measures taken
9 by General Hadzihasanovic to punish and ensure that crimes would not be
10 committed again?
11 A. I can put my statement until now only on the documents and
12 material given to me and analysed by me. If there is additional
13 documents -- if there are additional documents, additional information
14 pertaining to that, I'm sure willing to consider this and maybe also
15 change my -- my position.
16 Q. So, General, what I propose we do is that -- the question is: I
17 will propose to you the same question after the break without giving you
18 the answer as to whether there is or is there no information, asking for
19 your opinion whether the fact that more than 1.000 cases being filed
20 before the Zenica district military court would change your opinion on the
21 measures taken by General Hadzihasanovic to punish people to ensure that
22 crimes would not be committed again.
23 A. Yeah.
24 Q. Just to get your opinion at the beginning of -- when we come back
1 A. Okay.
2 Q. Thank you very much, General.
3 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we could have the
4 break now.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. We will resume at
7 --- Recess taken at 12.39 p.m.
8 --- On resuming at 1.04 p.m.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You may continue, Mr. Bourgon.
10 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
11 Q. [In English] General, we left just before the technical break on
12 a question that I mentioned I would be putting to you at the beginning of
13 this last session for today.
14 Before I put the question to you, however, I -- I need to once
15 again apologise to the translators and -- I'm sorry, to the interpreters,
16 who have warned me yet again that I speak too quickly and that to ensure
17 that there was a pause between myself and yourself. I apologised
18 yesterday. I apologise again today. I will endeavour to give the
19 interpreters sufficient time to properly do their job.
20 So with respect to the question I wanted to put to you, General,
21 this question was - and I will try to summarise the question - you have
22 been given information with respect to complaints filed before the Zenica
23 district military court --
24 A. Yes, sir.
25 Q. -- is that correct?
1 A. Yes, sir.
2 Q. And this letter state that is throughout a certain period of time
3 there were three cases for war crimes brought before this court.
4 A. Yeah.
5 Q. Two of which were against HVO members and one against probably a
6 civilian that we don't know of, because we don't know whether he's a
7 Muslim or HVO, but we know for a fact based on this letter that he was not
8 a member of the army.
9 A. Yeah.
10 Q. And that this helped you to conclude that at least before this
11 body there were a limited number of cases that had been brought by the
12 3rd Corps. And my question to you before the break was: If I would show
13 you that in fact more than 1.000 cases were brought before this court
14 whether this would change your mind in terms of the measures taken by
15 General Hadzihasanovic to go the extra step and punish to ensure that all
16 violations, any type of violation, would not be repeated again.
17 A. Yes, sir, it would, presuming that those 1.000 cases were brought
18 before the court by the 3rd Corps, because we know that within the
19 3rd Corps we had some 18 brigades, if I remember correctly, and some 16
20 Municipal Staff, and they also could bring forward cases like this. So I
21 assume that the majority of those cases you're talking about, then, were
22 brought forward by the corps headquarters.
23 Q. And, General, would I be right in saying that if the corps
24 commander issues an order to his brigades and to all of his units to
25 ensure that all criminal cases are brought forward to one of the three
1 levels, including the disciplinary -- sorry, including the district
2 military court, that any case brought forward by a brigade could be
3 attributed as meaning putting into action the order of the corps
5 A. I agree with that, sir.
6 Q. Now, I mentioned the figure 1.000. You will agree with me that
7 this would be probably a very high figure for a corps in a period of about
8 12 months to have 1.000 criminal cases. Would that be a very high number?
9 A. I think it's a high number. In it's -- it's also reflected in
10 many reports, when the commanders were concerned about the problems within
11 their forces that -- and most of the -- they were disciplinary problems
12 which have been probably handled at the corps, at that level, and they
13 were very unhappy with the way their soldiers reacted sometimes.
14 Q. And if I would cut this figure in two, 500 would still be a very
15 high number.
16 A. It would be a very high number.
17 Q. As a matter of fact, it's not the figure that is important but
18 actually that measures were taken when a violation was brought to the
19 attention of the commander.
20 A. Yes, sir.
21 Q. And you are aware of the fact, General, based on the documents
22 that you have been given, that in addition to the Zenica district military
23 court, there was also the Travnik military court.
24 A. Yeah.
25 Q. At this point in time, General, I would like to give you a series
1 of documents that I would like to produce before this Chamber and to enter
2 in a procedure we call for identification so that we can use these
3 documents and ask you some questions on these documents.
4 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Mr. President, could the usher
5 distribute these documents. We have two binders containing a series of
6 documents and divided on the basis of 11 different subjects. We have two
7 series of binders, so that it's more -- it's easier for everyone to use.
8 We have one series for you, Mr. President, and one for the binder [as
9 interpreted]. And for the others present in the courtroom, we have
10 prepared the same sort of document but in envelopes and divided on the
11 basis of subjects.
12 We'd like to apologise to the Judges because unfortunately, when
13 we were preparing the binders, we didn't have enough binders for you. We
14 have documents for everyone, but we only have two copies of these series
15 of documents which are in binders.
16 Mr. President, it is the Defence's intention to have these
17 documents marked for identification in bundles on the basis of each
18 subject. We will proceed on the basis of each individual theme and mark
19 one bundle with a number for identification.
20 Q. [In English] [Previous translation continues] ... may I ask you
21 to take this binder and to turn -- take the first binder and turn to tab
22 number 2.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The interpreters suggest that
24 to the extent that this is possible, we put the documents on the ELMO.
25 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
1 Q. [In English] May I ask you, General, to take the --
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis.
3 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
4 Just for clarification, when Mr. Bourgon says, "Tab 2," I assume
5 that this would be folder 2 for those of us who don't have binders? Is
6 that --
7 MR. BOURGON: This would be folder number 2, but the theme
8 is "Judgement by the district military court in Zenica," including 23
10 Q. General, if I may ask you to turn to the first document in this
11 tab. It is a document dated 11 March of 1993 going from the 3rd Corps
12 Command and is addressed to all subordinated command of the 3rd Corps.
13 May I ask you, please, to take a look at this document.
14 A. Yes, sir.
15 Q. Can you for the benefit of the Trial Chamber explain what is your
16 understanding of this document.
17 A. I think the corps commander asks his subordinate commands that
18 all criminal activities as far as they have been committed and have been
19 tracked should be forwarded to his headquarters so that his headquarters
20 is capable of seeing what happened and how the things have been followed
22 Q. Are you able to confirm, General, based on the date of this
23 document that this is not contemporaneous to either the events in Dusina,
24 Miletici, or Maljine?
25 A. It's not.
1 Q. Can I ask you to move to the next document under this tab. This
2 is a document dated 3 September 1993. It comes from the 3rd Corps
3 Military Police Battalion and is addressed to the 3rd Corps chief of
4 security. Do you have this document?
5 A. Yes, sir, I have it.
6 Q. May I ask you, General, to take a look at this document and to
7 comment on basically what this document is about, and I would ask you to
8 focus on paragraph 3, "Application of military police measures against
9 members of the BH army."
10 And also, General, on --
11 A. I'm not so fast, sir. I'm not so fast.
12 Q. I'm sorry, General.
13 A. I really see this for the first time.
14 Q. I'm sorry, General.
15 A. So, please, at least I have to have the chance to read it before
16 I comment on it.
17 Q. Please accept my apologies. This is a...
18 A. Okay.
19 Q. And also to paragraph 4 of the same document.
20 A. Yes, sir.
21 Q. And, General, please to simply read the headings of the following
22 paragraphs, beginning with paragraph 5, "Confiscated items"; and on
23 page 4, "Escort of convoy columns and checking and escort of UNPROFOR
24 vehicles"; on to paragraph 7, "On-site investigations and searches." Can
25 you please, General, comment on the contents of this document.
1 A. I would say this is a condensed report of the Military Police
2 Battalion of the 3rd Corps about their activities in a certain period of
3 time and what they have done in order to endorse the discipline and morale
4 of the BH army soldiers. They say how many people they have been -- they
5 had taken care of, how many of those people have been forwarded as a case
6 to the prosecutor's office, and how many things and what they have done as
7 far as confiscation of the items is concerned.
8 Q. And, General, can you confirm that this report covers the
9 activities of the Military Police Battalion for one single month?
10 A. Yeah.
11 Q. And can you confirm that the number of criminal and disciplinary
12 reports submitted at paragraph 4 by the Military Police Battalion?
13 A. There is a -- a great number; it's 32 individuals which -- whose
14 cases have been forwarded.
15 Q. Sorry, I thought you were still reading.
16 So, General, on the basis of this document, what would you
17 conclude about measures being taken to punish members of the 3rd Corps for
18 violations, whether they be disciplinary or criminal?
19 A. I -- I see this document for the first time, and it shows that
20 the military police, at least -- and I don't go for all these checkpoints
21 and these things -- and the escorts, but the disciplinary cases and the
22 consequences taken out of them and the criminal offences, like plundering
23 and robbing, took their case very seriously.
24 Q. And I would ask you, General, to turn to the third document under
25 this tab. This is a report forwarded by the Military Police Battalion of
1 the 3rd Corps, which is addressed to the security sector of the 3rd Corps
2 and dated 20 March 1994, and the subject is, "The report on criminal
3 reports filed." Do you have this document, General?
4 A. Yes, sir, I have it.
5 Q. Can you please look at the contents of this report.
6 A. I only can scan it, I think, during that period of time, but
7 there are quite a few cases.
8 Q. Can you confirm that at paragraph (c) on page 1 we are talking
9 about 295 soldiers of the BH army were the subject of a criminal report
10 and 17 officers of the BH army, and that covers the period from
11 14 September 1992 to 1 March 1994?
12 A. Yeah.
13 Q. And looking at paragraph (d), the structure of crimes, I would
14 ask you to follow me from crime to crime for at least the first couple,
15 and whether you can confirm that we have a case for aggravated theft,
16 theft of a weapon or piece of combat equipment; that we have eight reports
17 filed for involuntary manslaughter; and that on the next page - I will
18 simply refer to the first three categories - "incorrect and careless
19 handling of an assigned weapon"; "assault of a military personnel in the
20 course of their duties"; "false impersonation"; and finally "murder" for
21 16 reports.
22 Would it be fair to say, General, that the report of the Military
23 Police Battalion for this period shows that they did take their duties
24 very seriously and that they applied the orders issued by the commanding
25 general, Enver Hadzihasanovic, commander of the 3rd Corps?
1 A. They did.
2 Q. May I ask you, General, to turn to tab 11, which is in the second
3 binder that has been provided to you. Under this tab, General, you only
4 have a list of documents, and I would ask the court usher to bring
5 document DH119, please.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, the Defence has
7 requested document DH119.
8 MR. BOURGON: If I may be of assistance to the registry, I
9 believe that I provided you with a list of five documents that I would
10 like to show the witness one by one.
11 Q. General, can you please take a look at this document dated
12 10 January 1994, which is a report on the work of the Travnik district
13 military prosecutor's office for 1993.
14 A. Yes, I have it.
15 Q. Can you, General - and I understand this is a four-page
16 document - I would like to draw your attention to the second paragraph,
17 where it says that: "The prosecutor's office is a newly formed organ."
18 Do you have the same document that I have?
19 A. Yes. I'm just with the second paragraph starting: "When
20 carrying out his basic functionary."
21 Q. Sorry, I was talking about the third paragraph. It was the
22 second after number 1. Sorry, General.
23 A. "However --"
24 Q. Starting with "however."
25 A. Okay.
1 Q. "However, it should be stressed that this prosecutor's office is
2 a newly formed organ which began in 1993 and that this paragraph
3 highlights difficulties encountered by the prosecutor's office."
4 A. Yeah.
5 Q. And that the next paragraph stresses also other difficulties and
6 that of other judicial organs and law enforcement organs which did not
7 keep the pace for the work of the district military prosecutor.
8 A. Yeah. This is somehow almost in the same direction as the
9 complaint of General Hadzihasanovic in August of the year before.
10 Q. And that when we go on to the page 2, I would like to mention --
11 to draw your attention to the fourth paragraph, where it says: "Turning
12 to cooperation of the security organs of the Republic of Bosnia and
13 Herzegovina Armed Forces, military police, there are big differences in
14 this. In fact, cooperation is outstanding on occasions. However, there
15 are also cases of turning a blind eye as well as attempts of commanders to
16 overrule the organs of military justice. Although this has been
17 completely prevented in work to date."
18 THE INTERPRETER: Could a copy be placed under the ELMO, please.
19 MR. BOURGON:
20 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... the fact that in some cases
21 commanders are not satisfied with the rapidity with which the Office of
22 the Prosecutor is working or that those commanders were in pitch battle
23 operations that prevented them from cooperating better.
24 A. I think this -- just a minute. Yeah. I can't read it any more.
25 If I read this directly, it talks about the beginning of the
1 operations when it was very difficult, and it has changed in the meantime.
2 And it's difficult because as he says, the commander sometimes had a blind
3 eye towards all these cases. But we also have cases, at least in the
4 documents which I saw, that the military police didn't do their job
5 properly. They started plundering and looting themselves and tried to get
6 as much out of the pie as upon. So sometimes they were just not doing
7 their job appropriately, and that's what he says here.
8 Q. And in this document, this paragraph -- the next paragraph down
9 says that: "The criminal reports submitted to this prosecutor's office
10 are generally incomplete and have certain deficiencies."
11 A. Let me just have a look, because it's not here in --
12 Q. Oh, sorry.
13 A. A little bit technically complicated, but we'll find a way.
14 Okay, I've got this.
15 Q. And would that be -- would it be a fair statement to say that
16 this could be a direct result of the fact that the people working within
17 the army on the legal side lacked the proper qualifications to do their
18 work properly?
19 A. It could be that they lacked the proper qualifications. It also
20 could be that they were just not enough in manning the spaces they were
21 supposed to man.
22 Q. And if I turn to the next page of this document, General, on
23 page 3.
24 A. Which paragraph, please?
25 Q. Page 3, just under the heading, "2. Criminal reports received."
1 And I read with you: "In the report period, the prosecutor's office
2 received a total of 823 criminal reports concerning 1.044 persons and
3 measures prescribed by law were undertaken for all reports received, in
4 other words, proceedings were initiated."
5 A. Okay.
6 Q. Would it be a fair statement to say that this office did all of
7 the work that it was supposed to do when being seized of a report coming
8 from the military?
9 A. Yeah, it looks like.
10 Q. And as we confirmed this morning, when the commander did file a
11 report or send the report to the district military prosecutor, for all
12 intents and purposes he had fulfilled his duty and he was basically ready
13 to have whoever the perpetrators were punished with the intent of stopping
14 this type of criminal behaviour.
15 A. I'm absolutely with you.
16 Q. I'd like show the witness document DH120, 120. And I'd like to
17 show the witness the first document, because there are six documents under
18 the heading "DH120."
19 And I would simply ask you, General, to look at every one of these
20 documents and confirm that you have six monthly reports and that there is
21 a figure of criminal reports filed in each of these reports on a monthly
23 A. Yes, sir.
24 Q. Would it be fair to conclude, General, on the basis of these
25 reports that, one, monthly reports were filed by that office, but that
1 there was regular and continuous judicial activity coming from reports
2 which were filed to the district military prosecutor's office?
3 A. Yes, sir. From November on onwards. These are the things.
4 MR. BOURGON: I would like to have the witness shown document
5 DH121, please.
6 A. This is like Christmas.
7 Q. General, can you confirm that you have a document --
8 A. No, not yet.
9 Q. Oh, sorry.
10 A. We're still struggling to get the document.
11 Now I have a document.
12 Q. That contains a number of tabs; as a matter of fact, eight
13 different tabs.
14 A. Well, right now I have to count. There's no tab whatsoever on
16 Q. But is there a first page on this document which refers to
17 numbers from 1 to 8 Bravo and actually refers to 10 cases?
18 A. It looks like, yeah.
19 Q. This is the first --
20 A. This is the first --
21 Q. The first page.
22 A. The first page, yeah.
23 Q. And you look at inside the first case and confirm that this is
24 indeed a criminal report addressed to the district military prosecutor's
25 office on the 23rd of March, 1993?
1 A. I have -- I have to search now, because what I have here on the
2 first page --
3 Q. The first report.
4 A. It's not what you're talking about.
5 Q. Sorry.
6 A. Let me try to find it.
7 Q. This is dated 23 March 1993.
8 A. Now I've got it.
9 Q. Can you confirm, General, that this is a report based on the
10 second paragraph, starting with the word "because," that this is a report
11 because there is a suspected homicide which had been committed?
12 A. Yeah.
13 Q. I will leave this document aside due to time constraints and ask
14 you, General, to move back to the first binder that you have been given
15 and to look at the first tab.
16 A. Okay.
17 Q. I would ask you to look at the title of the first tab, where it
18 is mentioned, "Measures taken by Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina 3rd Corps
19 and its subordinate units in relation to training."
20 A. Okay.
21 Q. And to look at the first document which is in this package dated
22 10 July 1992.
23 A. Got it.
24 Q. Would you confirm that this is an order, albeit before the time
25 of General Hadzihasanovic, to form a training centre in Zenica for the
1 training of recruits?
2 A. Yeah.
3 Q. Can you confirm on the basis of the documents that you have
4 received that at that time the state of war was already in force and that
5 there was already going a conflict at that time in Bosnia and Herzegovina?
6 A. Yeah.
7 Q. Due to lack of time, I will simply ask you to refer back to the
8 first page, General, and to simply look at the title of the documents,
9 including -- included under this -- under the heading title and to look at
10 the -- the date referring to these documents.
11 A. In July 1992, yeah.
12 Q. And then, if we go down, to look at the title of all documents,
13 5 December 1992 with the seminar on intelligence; 8 January
14 1993, "Formation with lawyers"; 24th January,1993, "Training centre for
15 recruits"; 3 March 1993, "Information on how to carry training"; 16 March,
16 1993, "Training of medical orderlies"; 3 April, "Preparation for upcoming
17 combat operations." And if we would like at this document, it would speak
18 about training. And then, "Technical training" on 12 April "for crews of
19 armoured vehicles"; and then, "Further training for recruits" on the 26th
20 of April, 11th of September; and also, "training of commanders" of the 7th
21 of October.
22 Without having had the benefit of looking at all these documents,
23 would you say that what I've just shown you is information that you did
24 not possess with respect to efforts made to train the people, despite the
25 adverse conditions in which General Hadzihasanovic operated?
1 A. This is true. I didn't have this material. But I also wrote in
2 my statement that it became obvious that they tried to train. And as I
3 said yesterday, there are pauses in the operations which have to be used
4 for this kind of training. So I think this was the proper way to do it.
5 Q. If I ask, please, to turn to tab number 3, under the
6 heading, "Investigation and inspection." And I would simply ask you,
7 General, to look at the third document which is referred to on the first
8 page and to read the title of this document.
9 A. "Report on the commission for establishing factual situation in
10 the villages of Susanj and Ovnak." Is this the one?
11 Q. Yes, General. Is that, on the basis of the documents you have
12 been shown by the Prosecution, does that refer to a factual situation that
13 you have been made aware of in the documents; whereas, there was an
14 investigation in Susanj concerning the death of a number of people and
15 that a commission was established to find out what had happened?
16 A. I'm not aware of this document.
17 Q. I would ask you - and this will be the last document I will show
18 you today - simply to go to this specific document, which is the last one
19 under this heading, and to glance through this document, and if you can
20 tell me basically what this document is about, or you understanding of
21 this document. It's a document dated 15th of June, 1993, and it is a
22 document which is addressed by the 3rd Corps Command to the commander of
23 3 Corps as well as to Supreme Command headquarters of the Republic of
24 Bosnia and Herzegovina at the forward command post in Zenica. The report
25 is also addressed to the president of the district military court in
2 A. Well, if I read this -- if I scan it and don't read it, it seems
3 that some 90-plus people have been killed in two villages and a commission
4 was established for investigating what happened there, a commission in the
5 way you just described it before this morning, in order to -- to get more
6 light into that case. I think this is the shortest way I can put it.
7 Q. And would that be the result of the case -- the result of the
9 A. It would never be the result of the investigation. This is the
10 first step to start an investigation, to find out what happened, and then
11 more steps would follow based on the results of this investigation -- of
12 the outcome of this investigation.
13 Q. I'm not sure you have the right document, but I believe that this
14 was the result of the investigation.
15 If you look at the last line of the document.
16 A. Yeah.
17 Q. That the two first paragraphs establish how the order was given
18 and by whom, and then it says that: "After the order was received, what
19 the commission actually established."
20 A. Okay. I wasn't that far yet.
21 Q. I perfectly understand, General, because it's a three-page
22 document and it's not easy for you to be given these long documents to
23 look at. But could you conclude that this would be a thorough process,
24 whereas an incident takes place, a commission is appointed, the commission
25 does its work, and following the work of the commission it issues a report
1 which is not -- which is sent to all those interested; meaning the
2 commander of the 3rd Corps, the Supreme Command headquarters, and the
3 president of the military district court, and that in this specific case
4 this was the end of the procedures because no fault could be found?
5 A. Okay. I think this is the way I would expect the things to be
7 Q. I must stop here, General, because of time, and I promised the
8 President of the Trial Chamber I would not go over my time. I thank you
9 very much for answering my questions.
10 What I would like to do tomorrow is we'll have a couple of
11 documents to show you with this, but then we will move on with the
12 procedure that I believe the Presiding Judge will explain to you.
13 A. Okay.
14 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] That completes my cross-examination
15 for today, Mr. President.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] What we said a moment ago is
17 that the documents, Mr. Bourgon, must be given to the witness straight
18 away for him to be able to have them at his disposal for the rest of the
19 afternoon and the evening so as to be able to respond to your questions
20 tomorrow, and also the questions that you intend to put to him.
21 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Mr. President, with your
22 permission, I can give the witness one document straight away. I told you
23 a moment ago that I had two, but the second one has certain errors, so I
24 can't produce it and give it to the witness. What I intend to do is to
25 promise to give these documents about 4.30, to have four sets of documents
1 ready and the four questions, and I can give them to the Prosecution, to
2 the Judges, and to the Victims and Witnesses Unit, which -- so that the
3 witness can look through them this afternoon.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So provide those documents
5 before 4.30. The Victims and Witnesses Department will have a copy.
6 General Reinhardt, you have followed what has been said. There
7 are documents which you need to have, but I'm afraid they can only give
8 you one now; is that right? So you're going to receive one document now.
9 The rest of the documents will be made available to you in the Victims and
10 Witness Unit of this Tribunal as of 4.30. So if you could drop in and
11 pick up those documents, because you will need them to look at them this
12 afternoon and the evening, because the Defence intends to ask you
13 questions about those documents tomorrow. Would it be inconvenient for
14 you to come and pick up those documents at 4.30 this afternoon?
15 THE WITNESS: I don't know how many documents this will be.
16 Maybe I need a truck? Hopefully not.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] According to what the Defence
18 tells us --
19 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] There will be four documents which
20 will in total amount to about 20 pages.
21 THE WITNESS: That's all right.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Therefore, you will have 20 or
23 so pages on the outside.
24 But you can already give the witness the first document.
25 THE WITNESS: Okay.
1 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] This document is probably in the
2 possession of the registrar, because I already distributed it. And I have
3 marked my own copy in pencil, so I don't wish to give it to the witness.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So, Mr. Usher, will you pick up
5 the document that you gave to Madam Residovic.
6 So you already have the first document.
7 THE WITNESS: I have one document, sir, and I will be here at
8 1700, but I don't know where to find the office where I get this. Maybe
9 at the counter or some place. I -- it could be replaced or so. I don't
10 know. Somebody should tell me.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Bourgon, who is familiar
12 with the building, he will let you know.
13 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] To simplify things, Mr. President,
14 representative of the Victims and Witness Unit will be able to carry the
15 documents to the General to avoid any misunderstanding. So I shall have a
16 meeting with my learned friend from the Prosecution, give him a copy, and
17 at the same time a copy for the Victims and Witness Unit, and they can
18 have this copy sent to the witness.
19 THE WITNESS: Okay. Thank you.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So the Victims Unit will
21 contact you and provide you with these documents in due time.
22 If there are no further questions, the hearing is adjourned for
23 today, and we will all resume again tomorrow at 9.00.
24 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.53 p.m.,
25 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 6th day of
1 May, 2004, at 9.00 a.m.