1 Thursday, 1 November 2012
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.
6 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, everyone.
7 Yes, would the witness take the solemn declaration, please.
8 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
9 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
10 WITNESS: SERGII MOROZ
11 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, sir. Please make yourself comfortable.
12 Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Excellency.
14 Good morning to everyone.
15 Examination by Mr. Karadzic:
16 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Moroz.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we see 1D26251 in e-court,
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Colonel, do you remember having given this testimony before this
21 Tribunal and in the Galic case? We can see the transcript of that
22 testimony on the screen right now.
23 A. So yes I did -- I provided some information during the Galic
24 Tribunal -- the Galic case, and so I have a chance to look through during
25 several days this transcription I got from Mr. Robinson, and I should say
1 that everything I testified I consider it truth and I was frank 10 years
3 Q. Thank you. If I put the same questions to you as the questions
4 that were put to you when you testified in this case, would the answers
5 you provide be the same answers that we can see in this transcript?
6 A. Yeah, absolutely.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, could I tender
9 this transcript into evidence pursuant to Rule 92 ter, part of a package
10 and with an associated document, the nature of which will be explained to
11 you by Mr. Robinson.
12 JUDGE KWON: No objections?
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: Good morning. No, Your Honours, except that
14 there is a procedural matter unrelated to the witness at transcript pages
15 18194, line 7, to 18203, line 5, which may be redacted.
16 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Robinson.
17 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. We'll take care of that.
18 JUDGE KWON: Very well. I'll leave it to the parties.
19 This will be admitted.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. 65 ter number 1D26251 will be
21 Exhibit D2373.
22 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
23 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President, if we could call up 1D25442.
24 This is listed as an additional exhibit with this witness and the
25 Prosecution has agreed that this document can be admitted, so I would
1 just like to read it and then Dr. Karadzic can read the summary of the
2 testimony of this witness. This document is a letter that was sent to me
3 by the Russian embassy and it pertains to a person who Colonel Moroz will
4 be relating a conversation that he had with. And it says that according
5 to the data of the Ministry of Defence of Russia,
6 Nikolay Vasilievich Rumyantsev, a former member of UNPROFOR, deceased in
7 2008. And we would offer that.
8 JUDGE KWON: Is Rumyantsev the first or the last name?
9 MR. ROBINSON: That's the last name.
10 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Sutherland, do you confirm that?
11 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour. No objection.
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes, this will be admitted as well.
13 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D2374, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE KWON: The report or investigation report of this witness
15 and this Russian officer, Rumyantsev, was it admitted in this case or
17 MR. ROBINSON: He was part of the investigation team whose report
18 is admitted as P1444 -- excuse me, P -- I believe it's P1441.
19 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
20 Yes, please proceed, Mr. Karadzic.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I'll read out a brief
22 summary of Colonel Moroz's testimony in English now.
23 [In English] Lieutenant-Colonel Sergii Moroz was the mission
24 commander of the engineer section of the Ukrainian Battalion of UNPROFOR
25 in Section Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, between October 1993 and
1 October 1994. He worked with the Sector Sarajevo headquarters in the PTT
2 building. His unit's main task during that period was to repair and
3 restore utilities such as electricity, gas, and water and sewage. About
4 a month after 5th of February, 1994, explosion which killed many
5 civilians, Lieutenant-Colonel Moroz had a conversation with a Russian
6 officer who had been a member of the UN investigation team which had
7 investigated the shelling at the market-place. His name was Rumyantsev.
8 He told Lieutenant-Colonel Moroz that the explosion was not caused by a
9 mortar launched from the Bosnian Serb side, and that he believed that a
10 special explosive device had been brought into the market-place.
11 Lieutenant-Colonel Moroz visited the Markale market-place. When
12 he visited the scene, he found it strange that a mortar could land in the
13 place where the explosion occurred, given the unusual trajectory required
14 to land a mortar between the high buildings in the area. During his stay
15 at the PTT building, Lieutenant-Colonel Moroz frequently heard mortars
16 being fired from the immediate area of the PTT building. His colleagues
17 from the Ukrainian Battalion of UNPROFOR told him that they had regularly
18 observed mortars being fired from the immediate area of the Marsal Tito
19 barracks in Sarajevo, where they were stationed. The mortars would draw
20 return fire from the Bosnian Serbs close to the UN positions.
21 [Interpretation] That is the summary and at this point in time I
22 have no other questions for Colonel Moroz. I give the floor to the other
24 JUDGE KWON: Yes. As you have noted, Mr. Moroz, your evidence
25 was admitted in writing in lieu of your oral testimony and now you'll be
1 cross-examined by the Prosecution.
2 Yes, Ms. Sutherland.
3 Cross-examination by Ms. Sutherland:
4 Q. Mr. Moroz, in the summary of your evidence that's just been read
5 out, Mr. Karadzic referred to that part of your testimony in the Galic
6 case regarding what you were told by a Russian officer after the shelling
7 of the market-place in February 1994. In relation to that matter, you
8 said in your Galic transcript that the person that you had an informal
9 conversation with was a Russian military observer or an UNMO called
10 Rumyantsev, that's right, and that's at transcript page 18167. I see you
12 A. Yeah.
13 Q. You said that he was part of the team conducting an investigation
14 of the shelling incident and that's at transcript page 18171.
15 A. Yeah.
16 Q. You also said the report was sent to New York, and that's at
17 transcript page 18166.
18 A. Yeah.
19 Q. It was put to you in the Galic trial that a Russian
20 Lieutenant-Colonel N. Rumyantsev had, as part of an investigations team,
21 signed a report which was sent to New York which had findings which were
22 totally contrary to what is alleged he told you. Do you recall that part
23 of the evidence?
24 A. I should say that, first of all, I've never seen the official
25 report. I referred only to words of this officer --
1 Q. Sorry, Mr. Moroz, so you've never had an opportunity to see this
2 report since you've testified --
3 A. No.
4 Q. -- in the Galic case?
5 A. No, no.
6 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could have Exhibit P01441, please.
7 And Your Honours at transcript page 18174, there is reference to
8 a Galic Exhibit P2661, which is Karadzic Exhibit P01441.
9 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Ms. Sutherland.
10 MS. SUTHERLAND:
11 Q. Mr. Moroz, the document you see on the screen is an
12 investigations report about the incident.
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: And if we can go to page 13 in e-court.
14 Q. Do you see the names, one of the team members as N. Rumyantsev, a
15 Russian UNMO?
16 A. Yeah, I see.
17 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could go to page 11 in e-court.
18 Q. Do you see there the signature and signature block
19 Lieutenant-Colonel N. Rumyantsev?
20 A. Yes, I do see.
21 Q. The report states in paragraph 12 just above the signature the
22 nature of the explosion was caused by a conventional factory produced
23 120-millimetre high explosive mortar bomb which detonated on impact with
24 the ground. The findings also include or indicate the trajectory and the
25 direction from which the shell came - and that's in paragraphs 14 and 15.
1 Do you recall it was put to you that the Prosecution had difficulties in
2 accepting that this person who signed the report with contrary
3 conclusions to what he had allegedly told you was a completely different
4 story? Do you remember that was put to you in the Galic case?
5 A. During Galic case I don't remember that this document was
6 produced to me.
7 Q. The document wasn't produced to you; the facts were. And when
8 that was put to you, that the Prosecution had difficulties in accepting
9 the fact that this person who signed the report with contrary conclusions
10 would have told you a completely different story - and this is at
11 transcript page 18173 - you stated that you didn't know if he signed
12 anything at all because you hadn't seen the report and you said that you
13 saw no reason why he would tell you things contrary to the findings of
14 the team's report.
15 A. Yes, I --
16 Q. Is that --
17 A. -- now I can say the same that everything I told during Galic
18 case about the words of this officer he told me.
19 Q. And that's still your position?
20 A. Yeah.
21 Q. I want to turn now to clarify an answer that you gave in relation
22 to water-supply. At transcript page 18128 to 18129 you were asked about
23 any problems in some parts of the city in terms of supplying water to the
24 civilian population. You said at the bottom of page 18128 and the top of
25 18129 that sometimes, because there was no electricity, there was no
1 pumping of the water and there was a lack of water in the city. Do you
2 remember that?
3 A. Yeah.
4 Q. And on page 18129 lines 6 to 10 you said that drinking water was
5 always available in the city but that it wasn't delivered in a normal
6 manner through pipes to their apartments. You said:
7 "The only difficulties for civilians was that they had to 'take
8 water in reservoir and then go upstairs to their apartments so of course
9 it was difficult for many of them.'"
10 Do you remember that?
11 A. Yeah.
12 Q. The use of the word reservoir in the transcript I just read to
13 you, I take it that you're referring to receptacles for carrying water?
14 A. Ah, so I meant people went downstairs to ground floor because
15 there -- ah -- so the pressure of the water couldn't afford to go up to
16 higher floors and took in tanks and in some -- anything where water can
17 be put, they took water and went upstairs to their apartments.
18 Q. The difficulties that you were referring to, though, weren't just
19 the inconvenience of going -- having to go downstairs and get some water
20 lug it back up the stairs --
21 A. Mm-hmm.
22 Q. -- was it?
23 A. Yeah.
24 Q. That was the only difficulty that you saw for the civilian
1 A. It was only one period, two or three days as far as I remember,
2 that it was great shortage of water and trucks with water tanks were
3 going around the old city and people took water out from these tanks.
4 Q. It's the case though, isn't it, that civilians lived in constant
5 fear when they had to venture outside their homes to get food and water?
6 A. Of course civilians suffered from the situation when each day
7 there was a risk that water can be cut -- could be cut.
8 Q. But the water was cut on a number of occasions and the civilians
9 had to risk their lives lining up to get water, did they not?
10 A. So of course it took times and efforts to take water.
11 Q. And sometimes they were queuing up for days in order to get
13 A. I can't say for this, no, no. Probably one day, yes; two days, I
14 hardly say -- even the two days they couldn't get water. And -- because
15 the next day these tanks with water started driving around the old city
16 and people queuing -- of course queue -- they waited in queues just to
17 get possibility to fill their tanks with water.
18 Q. And of course that was inherent with risk of being targeted by
19 snipers and shells, wasn't it?
20 A. I can't say so because usually these trucks were waiting in safe
21 places where people hardly can be targeted.
22 JUDGE KWON: Could you check the transcript page in Galic. I
23 can't find that passage.
24 JUDGE BAIRD: Neither can I.
25 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could bring it up in e-court. It's on
1 page 16 of e-court of the exhibit.
2 JUDGE KWON: What's the page number in hard copy?
3 MS. SUTHERLAND: 18129, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE BAIRD: And the lines, Ms. Sutherland, what lines are they?
5 MS. SUTHERLAND: 6 to 10, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE KWON: Probably I have a different version. Let us see.
7 Why I'm having a different version?
8 MS. SUTHERLAND: Well, Your Honour, you --
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
10 MS. SUTHERLAND: -- you may have printed out the earlier version
11 which had been uploaded by the Defence into e-court which was -- had the
12 wrong numbering.
13 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, that's correct, Mr. President. When we
14 uploaded this originally somebody used a word version and the page
15 numbers changed so that was called to our attention and we changed it.
16 So what is currently in e-court is different than what was there
18 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
19 MS. SUTHERLAND:
20 Q. Mr. Moroz, you said that the places with -- for the water
21 distribution was normally in safe places, but you know that there were a
22 lot of water distribution points which were out in the open which were
23 easily places where snipers could target markets, trams, and where they
24 were queuing for food?
25 A. Well, of course it was military situation and people always were
1 under risk of being killed, so ...
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MS. SUTHERLAND: I have no further questions.
4 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
5 JUDGE KWON: I think I can put this to you, Ms. Sutherland, in
6 open session. Do we need to put this transcript provisionally under
7 seal, given the redaction you referred to?
8 MS. SUTHERLAND: No, Your Honour. That was in open session but
9 it was -- as it was unrelated to the witness I thought it should be
11 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
12 Yes, Mr. Karadzic, do you have any re-examination?
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just very briefly, Your Excellency.
14 Re-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
15 Q. [Interpretation] Colonel Moroz, today you were told that
16 Rumyantsev said that he did not think that the shell was 120-millimetre
17 shell, although that's what it says in the report. Did you have any
18 information according to which certain UNPROFOR officers were not willing
19 or perhaps couldn't express their personal opinions in public if they
20 weren't in agreement with official reports?
21 JUDGE KWON: Before you answer --
22 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour --
23 JUDGE KWON: -- yes, Ms. Sutherland.
24 MS. SUTHERLAND: -- I object to this question. It's outside
25 cross-examination, and if Mr. Karadzic wanted to ask these questions he
1 could have done it in chief.
2 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Robinson.
3 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. This arises directly from the
4 cross-examination because she's confronted him with an inconsistent
5 statement and Dr. Karadzic is seeking an explanation for one reason why
6 that may have taken place.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber agrees with Mr. Robinson.
9 Please proceed, Mr. Karadzic.
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Mr. Moroz, should I repeat my question or do you remember it?
12 A. Please repeat it once more.
13 Q. Given that you were shown a report that also bears the signature
14 of the officer with whom you had a conversation, now, did you have any
15 information according to which certain UNPROFOR officers were not willing
16 or perhaps were not even authorised to express some of their beliefs in
17 public if these beliefs diverged from official reports or what was
18 contained in official reports?
19 A. I couldn't say I know definite cases of such kind. I can't
20 neither support nor dis -- so no definite answer here.
21 Q. Thank you. When you spoke about water pressure, could you tell
22 the Chamber what such pressure depended on, or rather, what would be the
23 cause of low water pressure and of the fact that water was available only
24 on the ground floor?
25 A. Well, the system of greater part of the city was done in such a
1 way that from water fields near the suburbs of Sarajevo in Ilidza, from
2 that fields engines pumping water on the hill, the place called Mojmilo,
3 where a big water tanks were installed. And from these water tanks,
4 water goes down to the city. First reason of water shortage and low
5 pressure of water in pipes was low level of water in Mojmilo tanks. The
6 main reason of that was that water fields -- the area of water fields in
7 Ilidza very often were shelled and some engines went out of order. The
8 same with electricity line which were -- was -- which was damaged and
9 engines without electricity wouldn't work. For reparation of both
10 electricity lines and engines, time and spare parts needed. Renovation
11 of those systems usually took one, two, up to three weeks. That is why
12 my department engineer, department officers, regularly, each day, went up
13 to Mojmilo and check water-level in tanks. And usually we opened water
14 for several hours in the morning and several hours at night. Because
15 very often only few of engines were operational and not enough water was
16 pumped into Mojmilo tanks.
17 The second reason of low pressure in the system was the
18 following. On the way from Mojmilo to the city there were several wells
19 where -- they were on Serbian and Muslim side, these wells. And closing
20 these wells also can prevent water coming down from the tank to the
21 city -- Mojmilo tank to the city. And very often my section boss, French
22 officer, after checking these wells -- after the signal that no water in
23 the city, checked the -- these wells, and very often one of them was
24 closed. And each time it was the other well. Mostly, as far as I
25 remember, mostly closed the wells were on Muslim side. And among -- in
1 our section among officers we were surprised and even designated [sic]
2 that somebody closed wells and deprived people from water.
3 Q. Thank you. Just one more question, Colonel. You mentioned that
4 the wells on Ilidza were shelled. On whose territory were those wells
5 and who was it who shelled the wells and the transformation stations
7 A. These facilities were on Serbian side and so shelling was done
8 from Muslim side.
9 Q. Thank you, Colonel, for having come here to testify.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, I have no
11 further questions for this witness.
12 JUDGE KWON: Well, that concludes your evidence, Colonel Moroz.
13 On behalf of the Chamber I also would like to thank you for your coming
14 to The Hague. Now you are free to go.
15 THE WITNESS: Okay. Thanks.
16 [The witness withdrew]
17 JUDGE KWON: Could you brief us on the order of witnesses for the
18 week, Mr. Robinson.
19 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. The next witness is
20 Milorad Dzida. He's prepared to begin his evidence today and I was told
21 that the Prosecution is prepared to cross-examine him and we appreciate
22 that very much. Tomorrow -- we don't have any other witnesses for today,
23 and I don't know if he will take the whole day but -- it depends on the
24 Prosecution's cross-examination because the direct examination will be as
1 Tomorrow we will have the testimony of Momir Garic and we don't
2 have any other witnesses after him, and again I don't know exactly how
3 long his testimony will take but it will be mostly a very short direct
4 examination again.
5 JUDGE KWON: Let us see how it evolves.
6 Is the -- yes, Ms. Sutherland.
7 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, if I may be excused. Thank you.
8 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Ms. Sutherland.
9 Let us bring in the next witness.
10 [The witness entered court]
11 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, sir. Good morning, sir.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
13 JUDGE KWON: Would you take the solemn declaration.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
15 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
16 WITNESS: MILORAD DZIDA
17 [Witness answered through interpreter]
18 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Please make yourself comfortable.
19 Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
20 Examination by Mr. Karadzic:
21 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Dzida.
22 A. Good morning, Mr. President.
23 Q. I have to remind myself and I have to ask you to make a break
24 between questions and answers for the benefit of the interpreters.
25 Please, can you tell me what was your rank when you were pensioned off
1 from the Army of Republika Srpska?
2 A. I was a major when I was dismissed from service.
3 Q. Thank you.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to call up 1D6104 in
6 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Major, sir, did you provide a statement to the Defence? Was that
8 statement read out to you in the Serbian language so you could understand
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Is it the statement that you see on the screen and did you sign
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Thank you. Does it accurately reflect what you stated?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Thank you, Major. If I were to put the same questions to you
17 today in the courtroom in lieu of the statement, would your answers be
19 A. Yes.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, I would like to
21 tender the package into evidence. There is one associated document
22 accompanying the statement.
23 JUDGE KWON: I note that it has been signed by the witness and
24 the witness also confirmed it, but I'm wondering why this has the bearing
25 that it is a draft translation? What does it mean?
1 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, this is the way we received it from
2 CLSS. It's an official translation but this is what -- how we received
3 it. So perhaps we can inquire from them whether they would like to
4 finalise that translation.
5 JUDGE KWON: Which is the original, English or B/C/S?
6 [Defence counsel confer]
7 JUDGE KWON: I don't see any B/C/S version for this statement.
8 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, the English is the original.
9 JUDGE KWON: Then why do we have "draft translation"?
10 MR. ROBINSON: Because we added to this document some additional
11 information and there wasn't enough time to do that in Serbian and then
12 have it translated again since it was done after the proofing. So the
13 document is the original translation from CLSS plus the additional
14 information that was added by our team in the additional paragraphs right
15 before the acknowledgement.
16 JUDGE KWON: I don't still follow in full, but do you have any
17 objection, Ms. West?
18 MS. WEST: No.
19 JUDGE KWON: And you're tendering one a document which is
20 65 ter 8279 as an associated exhibit. You do not have no objection to
21 that either?
22 MS. WEST: I do not.
23 JUDGE KWON: Both of the -- both of them will be admitted as next
24 Defence exhibits.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. 65 ter number 1D06104 will be
1 Exhibit D2375 and 65 ter number 08279 will be Exhibit D2376.
2 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
3 Yes, Mr. Karadzic, please continue.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
5 I would like to read a short summary of Major Dzida's statement
6 in English.
7 [In English] Milorad Dzida was a company commander in the
8 216th JNA Brigade in Han Pijesak. On 19 May 1992 the brigade was renamed
9 to the 1st Romanija Infantry Brigade. On 19th of August, 1993, he was
10 transferred to the 7th Hresa Battalion as assistant commander for
11 intelligence and security. On 17th of October, 1994, he was appointed
12 battalion commander in the 1st Romanija Infantry Brigade.
13 Several years before the war there was already an increasing
14 number of ethnically motivated incidents. During 1990 until 1992, he
15 could not see paramilitary units on Ilidza which the Muslims had already
16 formed in the whole Bosnia and Herzegovina at that time. It was
17 well-known that members of Patriotic League and the Green Berets were
18 regularly trained in a secret location at the foot of Trebevic.
19 Upon mobilisation, Muslims in his battalion immediately separated
20 and grouped themselves. They did not want to share tents with the Serbs
21 or take orders from the superior officers unless they were Muslims.
22 Response to mobilisation was also very poor and the Muslims mainly
23 boycotted it. SDA representatives came with the buses and called on all
24 Muslims from the battalion to return home. All Muslims, about 400 of
25 them, left their weapons and went back home.
1 On May the 3rd, 1992, the brigade was sent to Han Pijesak -- sent
2 from Han Pijesak to the Sarajevo sector to Grbavica with the goal of
3 ensuring the unhindered pull out of JNA units from the barracks in
4 Sarajevo which had already become a target of attacks of paramilitary
5 Muslim forces and the Territorial Defence. Firing positions of the
6 120-millimetre and 82-millimetre mortar batteries on the
7 7th Hresa Battalion were in the sector of Debelo Brdo and Mrkovici, with
8 three pieces in each firing position.
9 Muslim forces often used sniper fire against the Serb positions,
10 firing at the motor vehicles -- civilian motor vehicles that -- which
11 were used to route -- the route that went through the zone of
12 responsibility of this battalion. The line of Muslim forces were not
13 far -- very far from the lines of his unit's defence positions and it
14 deliberately went through the residential areas inhabited by Muslim
15 civilians, which is why Mr. Dzida's unit often did not return fire. The
16 battalion fired only in situations when they spotted the firing positions
17 of the enemy who was opening fire on them at that point. Fire was never
18 opened on civilians or civilian buildings. The battalion had strict
19 orders to observe every cease-fire and truce. The Muslim side did not
20 observe the cease-fire and his unit was often attacked while the
21 situation was in place, as was the case of an attack on May 1994 from the
22 direction of Faletici and Zecija Glava, when six Serb soldiers died and
23 other six were wounded.
24 Regarding incident known as G8 which is Markale market-place I, a
25 mixed commission carried out an on-site investigation. On 6th of
1 February, 1994, representatives of general headquarter of VRS, the
2 Sarajevo-Romanija Corps, UNPROFOR, and the 1st Romanija Brigade were
3 taken to the firing positions by the witness, Mr. Dzida. An UNPROFOR
4 commission unexpectedly came to inspect Dzida's unit's positions and
5 mortars. The brigade command informed Mr. Dzida's unit that this
6 UNPROFOR commission would come and inspect their positions in half an
7 hour. The UNPROFOR commission concluded that the mortars were not used
8 for quite some time and that there were no traces of mortar use. In
9 addition, they concluded that the Serb crew did not even approach the
10 mortars recently.
11 A Russian member of the inspecting team measured and calculated
12 the angles around the mortars and had a discussion with the rest of his
13 team. One or two days later a French officer came to Mr. Dzida,
14 battalion commander, and told them that the UNPROFOR had concluded that
15 Mr. Dzida's unit had not opened fire during the Markale incident and gave
16 his belt to the battalion commander Gengo as a present. Milorad Dzida
17 categorically states on the 5th of February, 1994, no shell was fired
18 from those 120-millimetre mortars from any fighting position in the zone
19 of responsibility of his battalion and that those pieces were never moved
20 from their regular firing positions.
21 Just a moment, I think I pronounced something wrong.
22 [Defence counsel confer]
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. I would like to put several questions. I have four brief
25 questions for Mr. Dzida.
1 Before the war did Muslim paramilitaries have training centres
2 only on Trebevic or also elsewhere?
3 A. There was one on Igman and they also went to Croatia to be
4 trained there.
5 Q. When did they go to Croatia for training? Did that correspond
6 with the war in Croatia?
7 A. As far as I know, they were sent to Croatia in 1991.
8 Q. Thank you. In your brigade or in your battalion, did you have
9 mobile mortar positions or were those positions as well as targets fixed?
10 A. In my battalion the mortar positions were stationary and so were
11 the targets that those mortars could aim at.
12 Q. Thank you. How often did UNPROFOR visit and inspect your
13 battalion? Were your battalion's positions known to the nearest UNPROFOR
15 A. Every seven to 15 days our positions were checked and UNPROFOR
16 was familiar with our positions because UNPROFOR was billeted in one part
17 of Mokro which was not very far and they came very often.
18 Q. Did they ever encounter any obstacles to their visits? Were
19 their visits restricted in any way?
20 A. They could visit us freely whenever they wanted to do so without
21 any restrictions. They could come announced or unannounced. So they
22 came and went at their will.
23 Q. Thank you.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, at the moment I
25 have no further questions for this witness.
1 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
2 Mr. Dzida, as you have noted, your evidence was admitted in the
3 form of a statement in lieu of your oral testimony. And now you'll be
4 cross-examined by the Prosecutor.
5 Yes, Ms. West.
6 MS. WEST: Good morning, Mr. President. Good morning,
7 Your Honours.
8 If I can have the usher's assistance with the ELMO, please.
9 Cross-examination by Ms. West:
10 Q. Good morning, Mr. Dzida.
11 A. Good morning.
12 Q. Thank you for meeting with me yesterday, it was very helpful
13 because you and I went over a few maps together and as a result we will
14 save quite a bit of time today. In your statement you indicated that in
15 early May 1992 your unit was sent from Han Pijesak to Sarajevo. And in
16 paragraph 14 of your statement you described the line upon which your
17 unit was deployed. And so yesterday we spoke about that particular line
18 and I gave you a map.
19 JUDGE KWON: I'm not sure if the ELMO is working.
20 MS. WEST: Mr. President, I think I can just do the maps later
21 and over the break they'll be uploaded and we'll do it on e-court.
22 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
23 MS. WEST: Thank you.
24 Q. So, Mr. Dzida, we're going to come to the maps a little bit
25 later, but nonetheless in paragraph 14 you talked about where your line
1 was deployed and you put that out -- and you mapped that out for me and
2 that was a line in the Jewish cemetery; correct?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And in paragraph 15 you spoke about another line of Defence
5 because in August of 1993 you moved units and you went to the
6 7th Battalion, which is an area north of Sarajevo. And we also later
7 will see a line that you drew outlining that line of defence; correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Now also in paragraph 5 of your statement you say in August of
10 1993 you were transferred to the 7th Battalion to the post of assistant
11 commander - this is paragraph 5 - assistant commander for intelligence
12 and security. And it appears in that paragraph you were in that post for
13 over a year; is that right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Can you tell us what your role was as a security officer?
16 A. Co-operation with UNPROFOR and co-operation with the troops on
17 the line.
18 Q. And when you say "co-operation with the troops on the line," be a
19 little bit more specific than that, please.
20 A. I toured my men on the line and I provided them with assistance
21 if any was required.
22 MS. WEST: May we have e-court, please, P04478.
23 Q. Sir, are you aware of the rules of service of security organs in
24 the armed forces of the Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Yes, thank you. And we have -- it's a lengthy -- or it's about
2 33 pages and I'm not going to go through it, but through this
3 document - I suspect you've not read it recently - but through this
4 document it notes a number of the tasks of security officers and part of
5 those tasks - and this would be on page 7 but I don't think we need to go
6 there - is the detection, tracking, and prevention of intelligence
7 activities, is that familiar to you?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Gathering, verification of information for operational needs, was
10 that also one of your other tasks?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And organisation and maintenance of the security organ's
13 information system for purpose of analysing data and intelligence and
14 reporting and informing of that information, was that another task?
15 A. I don't understand the question.
16 Q. Okay. It regards analysing data and intelligence and reporting
17 that up your security chain. Was that something you did as well?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And as regards that chain you had two reporting chains - is that
20 correct? - one to your battalion command but also one to the security
21 command; is that right?
22 A. I reported to the commander and to the chief of the security in
23 the brigade command. I reported to my superior commander in the
24 battalion and the chief of security in the brigade.
25 Q. Okay. Thank you. I think that makes sense. Part of your other
1 tasks as well would have been the detection and prevention of serious
2 crime, would it not?
3 A. I wasn't involved in that. We had no such thing in the
5 Q. Do you mean you had no crime in the battalion or you weren't
6 involved in that as part of your task?
7 A. There was no crime in our battalion which was responsible for
8 protecting Serbian villages. There were people from those villages who
9 were defending their houses, Mrkovici, Gornji and Donji Kresa [phoen],
10 Luke, and so on. They were only defending their families.
11 Q. Okay. I understand what you mean, but one of your tasks, had
12 there been crime committed by your colleagues in the military, that would
13 have been one of the things that you had to look into; correct?
14 A. Well, the commander or the chief of security would probably have
15 ordered me to do this.
16 Q. Okay. Thank you. Now you said earlier that you reported to your
17 superior command in the battalion and the chief of security in the
18 brigade. My question is: Why is it so important to have this dual
19 system of reporting? You're reporting to two separate posts. Why is
21 A. The chief would give me advice, whereas the commander would issue
22 orders to me.
23 Q. And when you say "the chief," you mean the security chief; right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. You would also be informing the security chief of information
1 that you learned that you thought might be important for somebody above
2 you to know; is that fair?
3 A. I don't understand the question.
4 Q. Let me ask it again -- in a different way. Part of the reason
5 that intelligence and security information by its nature is so important
6 is that it's something that needs to be known at higher levels than
7 yours; would that be fair?
8 A. Well, for the security of the men and for the security of the
9 lines, it is necessary to provide information to the command, to the
10 superior command.
11 MS. WEST: May I have P00191.
12 Q. Let's just talk a little bit more about the issue of crime. And
13 you said earlier that would be -- something that in this case you didn't
14 see but that was something that was part of your tasks. What we're going
15 to see in a moment -- these are the guide-lines for determining criteria
16 for criminal prosecution. Sir, if you had become aware that a member of
17 your unit had committed a crime, what was your obligation as a security
18 officer as to whether to report it or not?
19 A. I'd informed the commander and wait for orders or further
20 instructions as to what to do.
21 Q. Okay. So you had an affirmative obligation to report on that;
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. So in front of us we see page 7 in the English, 11 in the B/C/S,
25 of an example of certain criminal offences. And in this example the
1 guide-lines speak in the third paragraph to crimes against humanity and
2 international law. And it says:
3 " ... can be committed by individuals acting on their own, but
4 by their nature these criminal offences are usually committed in an
5 organised fashion in the implementation of the policy of the ruling
7 And it goes on to talk about criminal offences, giving an example
8 of acts against a civilian population. And if I can -- if we can just
9 turn to the next page, please, page 8 in the English, and I'm just going
10 to read a short paragraph. And this regards what we just spoke about,
11 your obligation. It says:
12 "If officers merely find out that units of the armed forces of
13 the Army of Republika Srpska or their members have committed or are
14 committing such acts and take no measures to prevent the consequences or
15 the acts themselves and expose perpetrators to criminal prosecution, this
16 in itself makes them answerable for these criminal offences."
17 Sir, if you merely knew that someone had committed a crime, you
18 had an obligation to prevent or expose them and you did not, you yourself
19 became answerable to that offence; correct?
20 A. I have said that there were no such cases in my battalion. I
21 know that I would have prevented any attempts to act in an incorrect way.
22 Q. Okay. And we understand that from your earlier testimony, but I
23 just want to know if you agree with this principle that had there been
24 crimes and you knew about it and you did nothing about them, then you
25 yourself could be liable for those crimes according to the guide-lines;
1 is that right?
2 A. Correct.
3 Q. In this courtroom we've recently been discussing the shelling at
4 the market-place in February of 1994, and I will continue to talk about
5 that with you momentarily, but there's several paragraphs in your
6 statement that regards events preceding February 1994. And there's one
7 of them that I want to touch upon that jumped out at me and Mr. Karadzic
8 actually asked some questions about it. In paragraph 7 of your statement
9 you said:
10 "During 1990 ..."
11 I'll give you a moment to get there. Paragraph 7.
12 "During 1990" and "1992, I could not see paramilitary units on
13 Ilidza which, as it was later found out, the Muslims had already formed
14 in the whole BH by that time."
15 So just to be absolutely clear, when you say you could not see
16 paramilitaries in Ilidza, you mean Bosnian Serb paramilitaries; right?
17 A. I had Muslims in mind.
18 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter is not sure whether the witness
19 said "we saw them in town" or "we did not see them in town."
20 MS. WEST:
21 Q. All right. Then I don't understand. So as to this paragraph you
22 speak about seeing the Patriotic League and the Green Berets regularly
23 training in Trebevic, but when you speak about Ilidza and not seeing
24 paramilitaries, do you mean you didn't see Muslim paramilitaries or you
25 deny ever seeing Bosnian Serb paramilitaries?
1 A. Muslim paramilitaries.
2 Q. Okay. And did you see Bosnian Serb paramilitaries in Ilidza?
3 A. There were no troops of any kind in Ilidza at the time, but there
4 were the Green Berets and the Patriotic League that were being trained
5 below Trebevic and Igman. Moto Igman was the base for training. My
6 colleagues who worked with me went there for training, my colleagues of
7 Muslim nationality.
8 Q. All right. "There are no troops of any kind in Ilidza," so I
9 think I understand this to mean that there were no SRK troops in Ilidza
10 nor were there any Bosnian Serb paramilitaries in Ilidza; is that
12 A. In 1992, yes, the SRK, but not around 1990 -- in the 1990s.
13 That's what your question was about.
14 Q. No, my question was about during 1990 until 1992 - which is what
15 your statement says - and what I'd like to know is during 1992 did you
16 ever see any Bosnian Serb paramilitaries in Ilidza?
17 A. No, there were none.
18 Q. Okay. Have you ever heard of Arkan?
19 A. I've heard of him through the news, but I never saw him. In 1991
20 I left Ilidza and did not return to Ilidza until the end of the war. I
21 only passed through Ilidza.
22 Q. Okay. Have you ever heard of Legija?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Have you ever heard of Brne Gavrilovic?
25 A. Sometimes during the war.
1 Q. And you understand him to be a paramilitary?
2 A. I'm not sure.
3 MS. WEST: May we have 65 ter 22235, please.
4 Q. Sir, I know you said that you were in and out of Ilidza during
5 those years. Have you ever heard of the name Zeljko [sic] Prstojevic?
6 A. I haven't.
7 Q. Well, I'll represent to you that he was a political figure in
8 Ilidza and he testified here in this case and another case, and he gave
9 some information about this subject matter and I'd like to look at that.
10 This is previous testimony. And on this page in front of us he was
12 "Did various paramilitary" --
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm wondering what the purpose is
14 of pursuing this since the witness says he doesn't know the man and he
15 hasn't been to Ilidza, he didn't go to Ilidza. So how would he know
16 anything about what he said.
17 MS. WEST: Mr. President, that's not what the witness said.
18 JUDGE KWON: No.
19 MS. WEST: Thank you.
20 JUDGE KWON: Please proceed.
21 MS. WEST:
22 Q. And in this testimony he was asked:
23 "Did various paramilitary units come to Ilidza in April and May
24 of June 1992?"
25 And his answer was yes. And on the next page he answered in a
1 more fulsome manner and he said:
2 "Well, I don't know why this is important at the moment. One of
3 those groups is mentioned at the beginning of the intercept. It's Brne's
4 group. Some others like Bokan came to Ilidza for a short while as well
5 as some Chetniks from Zvornik from Republika Srpska, and there are also
6 some groups that simply went in and out of Ilidza. Even Arkan's group
7 spent two or three days in Ilidza."
8 And little bit further down on this page he says:
9 "Brne's group, they were resubordinated to the MUP."
10 As I said, this witness then testified in this case and he was
11 asked about this particular testimony and he -- at transcript 18324 he
12 didn't deny it but he said this:
13 "I didn't work with any of these people, I never asked for any of
14 these people, and as a rule they came on their own free will as an evil."
15 Now you have told us that you were in and out of Ilidza during
16 that period of time, and looking at your original statement, the first
17 one we got, it would suggest your -- you assert that in 1992 there were
18 no paramilitaries in Ilidza. I wonder after hearing this information,
19 does it jog your memory at all as to whether you ever saw or heard about
20 paramilitaries in Ilidza?
21 A. I'm telling you, I left Ilidza in 1991. I went to see some
22 friends on occasion in February 1992, and after that I didn't go to
23 Ilidza again.
24 Q. Okay. So my answer [sic] is: Did you ever see or hear about
25 paramilitaries in Ilidza, notwithstanding your in-and-out nature?
1 A. I did not see them nor did I hear about them.
2 JUDGE KWON: Shall we move on? But before doing that I will
3 confirm with the witness myself.
4 Shall we show him the paragraph 7 of his statement.
5 Mr. Dzida, this is what you stated to the Defence and which was
6 admitted in this evidence in lieu of your testimony. I'll read out the
7 first sentence of this paragraph, 7. Do you understand English,
8 Mr. Dzida?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not very well.
10 JUDGE KWON: So I'll read it to you.
11 "During 1990, until 1992, I could not see paramilitary units on
12 Ilidza which, as it was later found out, the Muslims had already formed
13 in the whole BiH by that time."
14 So here you referred to paramilitary units on Ilidza. Did you
15 mean Serb paramilitary units or Muslim paramilitary units?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, in this statement I
17 said in 1990 up until 1992 I didn't notice paramilitary units on Ilidza.
18 So it says up to 1992. 1992 isn't taken into account.
19 JUDGE KWON: No, my question was whether you meant Muslims or
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Muslims. At the time the Serbs
22 didn't have any units.
23 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
24 Let us proceed, Ms. West.
25 MS. WEST:
1 Q. Sir, when you were interviewed for the first time - so not two
2 days ago, when the original statement was produced - where did that take
4 A. At Pale.
5 Q. And how many people were in the room during the interview?
6 A. There were three of us.
7 Q. Who were the three?
8 A. Two investigators and myself.
9 Q. What were the names of the investigators?
10 A. Slobodan Batinic was one of them.
11 Q. And who was the other?
12 A. The other one was Milomir Savcic.
13 Q. Did you know either one of those investigators before that
15 A. To an extent.
16 Q. Well, when was the first time that you met Slobodan Batinic?
17 A. I don't know exactly.
18 Q. Tell us about -- when you say "to an extent," how is it that you
19 knew him?
20 A. We wouldn't meet each other often, but when we did bump into each
21 other we would greet each other.
22 Q. Well, how many years back is the first time that you met
23 Slobodan Batinic? Was it two years ago? Ten years ago? More than that?
24 A. Perhaps several years ago, perhaps a number of years ago.
25 Q. I'm sorry to be so persistent, but "several" and "number" have
1 many different definitions. Can you give us an approximate number of
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I -- the witness said "perhaps
4 several years ago." Perhaps more years ago than that, so the
5 interpretation wasn't correct.
6 MS. WEST:
7 Q. So I'll just ask you again. How many years ago did you meet
8 Slobodan Batinic for the first time?
9 A. I don't know exactly. A number of years ago we met at some
11 Q. During this interview, did you -- was it recorded?
12 A. Well, a transcript was made.
13 Q. So does that mean, yes, it was recorded, or as you were speaking
14 a transcript was being produced on the spot?
15 A. A transcript was produced.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In answer -- the first answer, line
17 20, the witness said: What we have was produced on that occasion. It
18 means the statement is a result of what was written at the time but it
19 wasn't interpreted correctly. We have problems today.
20 JUDGE KWON: The question was whether it was recorded, and then I
21 don't think we had the answer for that question.
22 Could you ask again, Ms. West.
23 MS. WEST: Thank you, Mr. President.
24 Q. Mr. Witness, was the interview recorded?
25 A. The gentleman made a transcript and later read it out.
1 Q. So are we to understand that as you spoke the transcript was
2 being typed and there was no recording; is that what happened?
3 A. Yes. A transcript was written. It wasn't typed out. It was
4 later typed up.
5 Q. So that -- was that person handwriting on paper as you spoke?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And at a later date, were you able to review the typed
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. How many days later?
11 A. I don't know exactly.
12 Q. Well, just give us the sense as to whether it was within a week
13 or was it months later?
14 A. Not a lot later. Before I got my passport out I received the
15 transcript from the meeting.
16 THE INTERPRETER: The witness mumbled at the end of his answer
17 and the interpreter isn't sure he heard him correctly.
18 MS. WEST:
19 Q. So I'm going to ask this again because I don't think your answer
20 was responsive. You say: "Not a lot later." But how much later were
21 you able to review the typed transcript? Was it a short time or a long
23 A. Perhaps a week later or ten days later. I'm not sure.
24 Q. And when you reviewed the transcript were you given an
25 opportunity to make any corrections to it? Were you given the
1 opportunity to change the words if you thought that that isn't what you
2 had actually said?
3 A. It accurately reflected what I said.
4 Q. So the reason I ask this is we've now just come to the first
5 occasion in this statement where it's -- the word usage is quite
6 ambiguous. And then when you came two days later we have further
7 ambiguity resulting. And so I am wondering how is it that when you took
8 a statement whenever you did, months ago, we now have a statement that
9 ends up being quite different and testimony that is coming out to be
10 quite different. Can you give us a reason as to why there is a
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we be provided with somewhat
13 more precision as regards these ambiguities?
14 JUDGE KWON: I take it it will be forthcoming. Could you refrain
15 from intervening at the moment.
16 Let's proceed, Ms. West.
17 MS. WEST:
18 Q. Sir, can you give us an answer to that question.
19 A. Can you please repeat the question.
20 Q. Yes. As I said, your original statement that we've just spoken
21 about has some issues of clarity, and we just saw an example of one. And
22 you were just interviewed again two days ago and we received another
23 statement that added six more paragraphs. And in particular it added
24 more information that is quite inconsistent with some of the information
25 you gave before. And what I'm wondering is: What happened in the middle
1 of those two events such that the information is now different? So, for
2 example -- go ahead. Go ahead.
3 A. The information that --
4 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter could not understand the first
5 part of the answer.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The information was added to the
7 second statement.
8 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Dzida, could you repeat your answer. The
9 interpreters were not able to hear the first part of your answer.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The information that was left out
11 from the first statement was subsequently added to the second statement.
12 JUDGE KWON: Shall we take a break now, Ms. West?
13 MS. WEST: Please.
14 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Dzida, we'll have a break for half an hour, but
15 you are -- you may be already aware that witnesses are not supposed to
16 discuss with anybody else about his or her evidence -- testimony. Do you
17 understand that, sir?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
19 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
20 We'll resume at 11.00.
21 --- Recess taken at 10.32 a.m.
22 --- On resuming at 11.02 a.m.
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. West, please continue.
24 MS. WEST: Thank you, Mr. President.
25 Q. Sir, as I understand it, in the time-period immediately after the
1 shelling in February, you were present for a visit to the mortar units of
2 your battalion in two locations and members from the VRS Main Staff, SRK
3 staff, and at least one UNPROFOR person was there; is that correct?
4 JUDGE KWON: Ms. West, are you not coming to the issue of
5 ambiguity or inconsistency in his statement?
6 MS. WEST: I -- Your Honour, I can come back to that several
7 times as we go through the statement itself, but I defer to the Court if
8 you have some questions at this moment.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't understand your question.
11 In your question you said -- or you asked me whether we inspected mortars
12 before the shelling or at least this is the way I understood your
14 JUDGE KWON: Please continue, yes, Ms. West.
15 MS. WEST: Thank you, Mr. President.
16 Q. Sir, I'm going to refer everyone to paragraph 17 of your
17 statement and that's a paragraph that was part of your original statement
18 so it was drafted some time ago. In addition, paragraph 29 of your
19 statement, and this was drafted, I think, drafted two days ago, these two
20 paragraphs involve the same subject matter. Some of the information in
21 these two paragraphs is different, and I want to go through that to make
22 sure that we understand exactly what your evidence is.
23 So my first question is: When were you informed that the mixed
24 commission visit was to take place?
25 A. Perhaps half an hour or an hour before the visit took place the
1 brigade command informed by commander, who then appointed me as the team
2 leader, as it were.
3 Q. Okay. And that information we see reflected in paragraph 29, but
4 let's focus back to paragraph 16, please. And there you say on
5 February 5th, which is the day of the incident, "in the afternoon the
6 brigade command informed us that the incident occurred and that a mixed
7 commission would come to the battalion on that or the following day to
8 carry out an on-site investigation."
9 So, sir, this is one of those occasions that we spoke about
10 earlier where the information is different. And you gave us a reason on
11 page 36 a short time ago, that the reason it was different was the
12 information left out from the first statement was subsequently added to
13 the second statement. But here that's not the case at all. The
14 information is different entirely. Can you tell us why that is?
15 A. As far as I know, that morning when that commission arrived, on
16 that very morning I had been informed that I would be the guide or the
17 team leader and that's when I learned about the Markale incident. I
18 didn't know anything about that beforehand. Maybe this was erroneously
19 transcribed. I don't know.
20 Q. All right. Well, we can look at the B/C/S, but as regards the
21 English transcription in 16 we have you learning about this commission on
22 the day of the event, but now you're telling us that they unexpectedly
23 showed up at your positions two or three days after the incident. So
24 tell us right now at this moment what is your independent recollection of
25 when you found out they were coming and when they came?
1 A. They arrived on the 6th. They were announced perhaps half an
2 hour or an hour before they actually arrived. We learned that from the
3 command and we set out on the inspection visit from the command.
4 Q. Okay. And setting out for the -- setting out for the inspection
5 from the command is reflected as that in paragraph 17, but in paragraph
6 29 it appears that you were already at the mortar position and you didn't
7 have to set out at all. Can you tell us now what at this moment is your
8 recollection as to whether you were already at the mortar position when
9 they came or you were at the battalion command when you heard of it?
10 A. At the battalion command, and I went with them in a vehicle
11 belonging to the brigade perhaps. There was a vehicle with Serbian
12 officers, we went to the position, and the UNPROFOR followed us.
13 Q. When you gave this statement several months back and they
14 transcribed it on the occasion but then came back, I think you said ten
15 days later, for you to review it to make sure it was accurate, did you
16 see this part in paragraph 16 and 17 that is inconsistent with what
17 you're saying right now? Did you say to them: This is wrong, this isn't
18 what I said?
19 A. Maybe that was erroneously interpreted or translated to you, but
20 as I've just told you I have ...
21 Q. Sir, I don't want to cut you off, but I understand that you say
22 that the B/C/S version is probably correct and it's perhaps that the
23 English translation ended up being wrong; is that right?
24 A. This is how I see things. Either things have been erroneously
25 translated or your questions are wrong. I apologise. I'm a soldier.
1 I'm not a legal expert. I'm not a lawyer. But you're putting wrong
3 Q. Okay. Let's look at 65 ter 24012, please. And we'll continue to
4 talk about these mortar positions. In paragraph 17, so this is the
5 statement from many months ago, you talked about taking them to two
6 locations of firing positions where the team examined the mortars. And
7 then you give us more information. But we're going to stop there because
8 yesterday when you and I spoke I showed you a map. If we could zoom
9 in -- if we can focus in on the two areas with three little dots. I
10 asked you to put the position of the mortars, because in paragraph 15 you
11 said the firing positions of the 120- and 82-millimetre mortar batteries
12 were in two places. In Mrkovici you had three pieces and in Debelo Brdo
13 you had three pieces. Do you see those two locations here on the map in
14 front of you?
15 MS. WEST: I'm not sure -- does the witness have -- no, I believe
16 he does. I wonder if we might be able to zoom in a little bit closer.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can see that.
18 Q. Okay. So now you'll have the opportunity to write on the screen,
19 and we can circle which three are the Mrkovici mortars and which three
20 are the others. You can take that pen and if you can for me circle the
21 three that are Mrkovici, please.
22 A. [Marks]
23 Q. Put an M --
24 A. This may not be very precise, but I have encompassed them.
25 Q. Okay. Thank you very much. Can you put an M next to that,
2 A. [Marks]
3 Q. And now circle the three mortars that are at Debelo Brdo, please.
4 A. [Marks]
5 Q. And put a D on that.
6 A. [Marks]
7 Q. Can you sign it and put the date, it's November 1st.
8 A. [Marks]
9 MS. WEST: Mr. President, may we have a number for this?
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour, that will be Exhibit P5952.
12 MS. WEST:
13 Q. Sir, yesterday when we spoke you told me that two of the mortars
14 at Debelo Brdo were 120-millimetres and one was 82; correct?
15 A. Yes, that's correct.
16 Q. You also said as regards the Mrkovici mortars, two of those were
17 120 and one was 82; correct?
18 A. Correct.
19 Q. Okay. So this is a total of six. I now want to look at
20 paragraph 28 of your report and this is additional information you gave a
21 couple days ago. And in that paragraph you say you'd like to add that in
22 our unit we had two 120-millimetre mortars and two 82-millimetre mortars
23 and none of these four mortars were aimed towards the city. Okay, so
24 this is a total of four mortars. Are these four mortars in addition to
25 the six you showed me on the map or are these part of the six that you
1 showed us on the map?
2 A. Those mortars were reported to UNPROFOR. UNPROFOR knew about
3 them. We didn't have any other. I left out one 82-millimetre one
4 probably by mistake.
5 Q. All right. Just so we are completely clear, this talks about
6 four mortars. On the screen you talked about six. Are these four part
7 of those six or should I understand that there's a total of ten?
8 A. Please, there were four in one position and another four in
9 another position. In each position there were two 120-millimetre ones
10 and two 82-millimetre ones, and that applied to both positions. I left
11 out one 82 -millimetre one.
12 Q. All right. So I think this could be a translation. Paragraph --
13 excuse me, line 15 you said there were four in one position and four in
14 another position, but on the map we saw three in one position and three
15 in another position. Do you mean four or three?
16 A. Four.
17 Q. Okay. And of the four at Mrkovici, how many were 120?
18 A. Two.
19 Q. And of the four at Debelo Brdo, how many were 120?
20 A. Two.
21 Q. And in regards to paragraph 28 you talk about four mortars and
22 you said that none of these were aimed at the city. So now we have got a
23 total of eight mortars I think from looking at what you've said and four
24 not aimed at the city. Were the other four aimed at the city?
25 A. All the mortars were aimed at the enemy positions. Some of them
1 against one part of the line and the others against the other part of the
2 line. The azimuth was set. The crew was not well trained and they did
3 not have to move the mortars too much because the two lines - ours and
4 theirs - were very close to each other; and they opened fire only on
5 prior approval after an enemy attack.
6 Q. Thank you. Well, let's try this again. Were any of those
7 mortars aimed at the city? You told us they were aimed at enemy
8 positions. Were any of those positions in the city?
9 A. No. All of them were outside of the city.
10 Q. So from your position, north of the city, all of them were either
11 to the east or to the west, but none of them pointing in a southern
12 direction towards the city?
13 A. You're right.
14 Q. All right. Paragraph 18 you talked about those mortars and --
15 being fixed and I think we just sort of covered that a bit as well.
16 Mr. Karadzic asked about this during his questions, whether there were
17 any mobile mortars in your battalion. Can you tell us just to be sure,
18 were there any mobile mortars in your battalion?
19 A. In my battalion there were none. They were all stationed in
20 their own positions in Mrkovici and Debelo Brdo.
21 Q. So there were no mobile mortars in your battalion but there were
22 mobile mortars in Mrkovici and --
23 A. No.
24 Q. Okay. But there were mobile mortars in Mrkovici and Debelo Brdo
25 but they just did not belong to your battalion; is that correct?
1 A. It is not correct. There were no mobile mortars. Those were the
2 two positions and mortars were there stationed from day one to the last
3 day, to the day on which they were all withdrawn from those positions.
4 Q. Okay. But nonetheless you know -- I'm sure you know a bit about
5 mobile mortars. And can you confirm for us that they are generally able
6 to move easily and assemble with relative ease?
7 A. There were crews on mortars, but they were not a hundred per cent
8 well trained and they could not work with mobile mortars. That's why
9 they were stationed. They had their firing positions and targets on the
10 enemy lines --
11 THE INTERPRETER: And the interpreter didn't catch the last part
12 of the answer.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- in case of their attack.
14 MS. WEST:
15 Q. That's not responsive to my question. My question is more
16 general. In regard to mobile mortars, are they generally easy to move
17 and assemble?
18 A. I really don't know, believe me. In our defence sector, we did
19 not have any mobile mortars. I'm talking about the defence sector of my
21 Q. Well, you only went to your battalion in 1993, as I understand
22 it. So you started off, as I understand it, in 1990. So there must have
23 been some occasion when you were exposed to mobile mortars. Can you tell
24 us whether they're easy to camouflage?
25 A. I can't speak about something that I didn't do. I was in the
1 battalion from 1993 to 1994, from [as interpreted] the 17th of October.
2 Q. Sir, at paragraph 17 you speak about the site visit from the
3 commission, and you say that the team, the commission, examined the
4 pieces in detail. They measured the azimuth, made some calculations,
5 spoke with several soldiers from the 120-millimetre crew, and I heard the
6 words of the interpreter who was on the team that it was not possible
7 that fire had been opened from those pieces the day before.
8 Tell us exactly what they did to determine that there had been no
9 firing the day before, and that would be the 5th?
10 A. I think that in January a cease-fire was signed. We adhered to
11 that cease-fire. The weapons were cleaned and covered. When we arrived
12 at the weapons, one could see that they hadn't been used in a long time.
13 They uncovered the weapons, they looked at the barrels, they measured the
14 azimuth. I believe that a Russian officer did that with the assistance
15 of the others. Then they measured everything and then they agreed that
16 no fire had been opened from that position, and I claim with full
17 responsibility that that's what they stated or at least that's how things
18 were interpreted to me.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] On line 8, page 45, "until the 17th
20 of October" and not "from the 17th of October, 1994."
21 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
22 Let's continue.
23 MS. WEST: Thank you very much.
24 Q. So you've just -- you mentioned here that they were cleaned and
25 covered and you had said that we had adhered to the cease-fire, and this
1 is something that you and I spoke about yesterday. You told me that
2 there was -- that there had been a cease-fire since the beginning of
3 January; correct?
4 A. Yes, I claim that and I have just repeated it.
5 Q. Very good. So during that time there was no shooting from SRK
6 positions into BiH territory or into the city; correct?
7 A. No.
8 MS. WEST: May I have P01562.
9 Q. Let's look at the day before, please.
10 MS. WEST: P01562 and I think maybe he might be switched over.
11 Q. So this is dated February 4th. It's about 10.53 at night. This
12 is an UNMO reporting. This is the evening before. And in the middle it
14 " ... BiH in during this period - 64 mixed, 14 AAA. No BiH
15 outgoing heard or seen. BSA outgoing - 8 mixed," and I think it says "50
16 AAA. Two explosions heard but could not be placed on either BiH or BSA
17 side of confrontation line."
18 Now, this is just the evening before in which we are seeing
19 shells coming into the BiH territory and shells going out of the BSA
20 territory. This truce that you speak of, was this truce ongoing on the
21 day before, on February 4th?
22 A. I claim that that truce was ongoing even thereafter, and no
23 single shell was fired by my battalion because there was no need to fire
25 Q. Okay. But we're not just talking about your battalion. You had
1 confirmed to me that it was a cease-fire and I said there was no shooting
2 from SRK positions into BiH or the city and you said no.
3 MS. WEST: Let's go to the next page, please.
4 Q. To look at this more closely. The next page is February 5th. So
5 this is the morning of the incident and this is about 7.00 a.m., and
6 again towards the bottom UNMOs have confirmed the following:
7 "BiH in - 22 mixed impacts, BiH out - none observed, BSA
8 in - none observed, BSA out - 3 mortars."
9 Sir, this would suggest that UNMOs observed, they actually saw,
10 three mortars coming out of the BSA territory. Were you aware of any of
11 this on the morning of the 5th of February?
12 A. I wasn't.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have to object. Line 9.
14 Ms. West said that in her first question she asked about the
15 Sarajevo-Romanija Corps, but in the first question it doesn't say that
16 she asked about the corps. Page 46, lines 6 to 9, the witness wasn't
17 told that this referred to the activities of the Sarajevo and Romanija
18 Corps. The answers he provided related to his battalion.
19 MS. WEST: Thank you to Mr. Karadzic. I understood that I did
20 say that at line 12. "So during that time there was no shooting from SRK
21 positions into BiH territory or the city; correct?" And the answer was
22 "no." Perhaps the -- there was a misunderstanding, but I'll continue.
23 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
24 MS. WEST:
25 Q. Now, on February 5th you were physically posted on your defence
1 line, right, so you're in the area north-east of the city?
2 A. I was in the battalion command.
3 Q. Okay. The Trial Chamber has heard evidence from scheduled
4 incident G7, an incident that took place on February 4th in which three
5 120-millimetre shells hit civilians in Dobrinja and eight were killed and
6 that -- those shells that the Trial Chamber has heard came from BSA-held
7 territory. Now I'm not at all suggesting that that came from your
8 territory, but I wonder being a security officer and being in a location
9 that is not so far away if you had heard about that?
10 A. I haven't heard about that.
11 Q. All right. A few minutes ago you mentioned the examination of
12 the mortars at the locations. You in a general way described that
13 examination - I assume it applies to both locations - but you said that
14 you saw a Russian UNPROFOR officer performing the examination. Is that
16 A. In that mixed team there was also a Russian officer, in the team
17 that went to inspect the weapons. That was my understanding.
18 Q. Okay. And was he the only UNPROFOR member there, this Russian
20 A. No. It was a mixed team, a mixed UNPROFOR team, as I said. As
21 far as I could see, according to his establishment he was a member of the
22 artillery and there was a colleague of his who measured the azimuth and
23 he too was an artillery man.
24 Q. So how many in total, how many UNPROFOR members were there?
25 A. I can't remember exactly how many of them there were. There were
1 more than five or six officers, and in addition there was the
3 Q. Okay. When you say five or six officers, you mean UNPROFOR
4 officers; correct?
5 A. Yes, yes.
6 Q. And there were also members of the VRS Main Staff; correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. How many?
9 A. One or two as far as I can remember.
10 Q. There were also members of the SRK brigade command; correct?
11 A. There were two from the SRK and there was one person from the
12 corps command. There was an officer and a junior officer from the SRK.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We have a problem with the
14 interpretation again. From the 1st Romanija the witness -- the witness
15 said from the 1st Romanija and from the corps. Two from the
16 Romanija Brigade and from the corps there was one person, but I don't see
17 that the witness confirmed anything about the Main Staff.
18 JUDGE KWON: Yes, there's some confusion because Ms. West
19 referred to SRK brigade command. That was confusing.
20 MS. WEST: Indeed it was. My apologies. Let's see if we can
21 clarify this.
22 Q. Of the people from the corps staff, how many exactly came?
23 A. I apologise. Perhaps we're mixing the staff and the corps up.
24 There were two from the staff, that was from the main command, from the
25 corps command; one or two from the brigade command, there were two. From
1 the 1st Romanija there were two.
2 Q. And of any of these people who came, do you remember any of their
3 names? Did you know any of them?
4 A. I remember Jakovljevic, a warrant officer, he was from the
5 brigade. I think the late Mile Pajic, captain first class, was also
7 Q. Now, in paragraph 18 you indicated that after a few days a
8 group - this is another group - of UNPROFOR soldiers and officers came
9 for a regular inspection of the battalion. And I'm just going to stop
10 right there. I asked you about what you meant when you said "regular
11 inspection" when we spoke yesterday. And when I asked you about this you
12 said that these inspections happen every week or sometimes every two
13 weeks; right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And Mr. Karadzic also asked you about this today and I think to
16 him you said they came often and they came at their own will; correct?
17 A. Yesterday I also told you that we had regular and irregular
18 checks. The regular ones were announced and irregular ones were controls
19 when they would come without having announced their visit and then they
20 would carry out their inspection. I provided you with this information
21 yesterday if you can remember.
22 Q. I do. Thank you very much. And you also said that these
23 inspections happened right up until the time of February 1994, and that's
24 true; right?
25 A. I haven't understood your question.
1 MS. WEST: May we have P1441, please. And if we can have e-court
2 page 44.
3 Q. I'll ask you again in a moment.
4 MS. WEST: If we can go towards the bottom, please.
5 Q. This is the investigation report that UNPROFOR conducted of the
6 incident and it was finished by the middle of February, and part of that
7 investigation involved a technical investigation but interviewing people
8 as well. And at paragraph 4 as regards the BSA positions, the
9 investigation reports that:
10 "These positions have not been visited in at least four months
11 and cannot be located with any accuracy. Since October 1993, UNMOs have
12 been denied freedom of movement in this brigade area, although most shots
13 fired from the area can be observed from UNMOs in adjacent areas."
14 Now, sir, this area they're speaking about is your area. So let
15 me ask you this: What is your memory of the last UNPROFOR inspection of
16 your mortar positions in the time before February 1994?
17 A. I think there was an inspection sometime in January.
18 Q. Was that just one inspection?
19 A. And there were others on two occasions. They came when we had
20 holidays. They got me from my home and the second time I was in the
21 command when I escorted them there to visit the positions.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we be precise. Are we
23 talking about the Kosevo Brigade or about the 1st Romanija Brigade? So
24 that the witness isn't confused. He can't understand English so could we
25 specify what we're referring to.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I understood this, it
2 says the Koseva Brigade here.
3 MS. WEST:
4 Q. Hold on -- if I can just ask the question again.
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
6 MS. WEST: Thank you.
7 Q. Sir, speaking about your unit - we're not speaking about any
8 other - speaking about your unit when was the last inspection that you
9 remember prior to February of 1994?
10 A. The last inspections were carried out in January. One inspection
11 was after Christmas or some holiday. I was at home in any event because
12 I have a child born on the 14th of January. Perhaps it was on his
13 birthday. They went to fetch me at home and I had to take two UNPROFOR
14 members to inspect the weapons. The second time I was up there and I
15 know that we were there on that occasion too. On the first occasion the
16 inspection was announced; on the second occasion, it hadn't been
18 Q. And of these inspections that you speak about in January, were
19 any of these inspections of the -- your mortar positions or your
20 positions in Mrkovici?
21 A. We visited both positions.
22 Q. Both Mrkovici and Debelo Brdo; correct?
23 A. Yes. When you leave from the command to pay these visits, first
24 you come to Debelo Brdo and then you continue to Mrkovici. So this is
25 the route we always followed. First we would inspect the position at
1 Debelo Brdo and then the one at Mrkovici.
2 Q. So later in this same paragraph you say and you can say it again:
3 "I can categorically state that on the day in question no shell
4 was fired from those 100-millimetre [sic] -- from any firing position in
5 our zone of responsibility."
6 And it appears from reading this that your conclusion is based on
7 the inspection and then the words you heard from the French major through
8 interpretation, that your battalion had nothing to do with it. Now,
9 these -- this statement that you heard from the French major, this
10 happened a few days after the inspection; correct?
11 A. After the first inspection, when they arrived there, yes, it was
12 the regular inspection that they carried out. It had been announced. We
13 visited everything and then went to the command. He then gave my
14 commander and myself some belts as a present.
15 Q. Okay.
16 A. And this is how it was interpreted. No one had approached our
17 mortars for a long time, so it had been established that our mortars
18 hadn't been used.
19 Q. So it appears from your statement in -- even in both versions
20 that at some point this follow-up visit from the French major happened at
21 about February 8th or 9th. Does that sound right to you?
22 A. More or less, yes.
23 Q. Okay. And at the time, were you aware that the UN in the
24 meanwhile had ordered a full investigation of the incident and that a few
25 days later an extensive team of UNPROFOR investigators came to start
1 their investigation? Were you aware of that?
2 A. I was aware of that.
3 Q. So assuming what you say is correct and that this French officer
4 did indeed tell you that your battalion was not responsible for these
5 shells and your concession that you're aware that another full
6 investigation is about to be carried out, do you think it's possible that
7 when the French major said that he was being completely candid with you?
8 A. In the field on our side I think that the team that inspected us
9 were candid. I'll give you an example. On the 18th of September, 1994,
10 that's my birthday, there was a mixed team that paid a visit. It came
11 from the other side, an UNPROFOR team, and there were attacks before
12 their arrival and after their arrival although there was a truce. And on
13 that date in September we lost three men and three were wounded. So, in
14 fact, there were six casualties. Some of the men who were wounded also
15 died. I'll never forget that date because it was my birthday and the
16 fighting continued late into the night.
17 Q. Okay.
18 A. And during this truce when we were repairing the trenches we lost
19 more men than we did in the course of the fighting because the Muslims
20 did not fully respect the truce.
21 Q. Thank you, sir, for that information.
22 Let's go back to your statement. At paragraph 17 in the last
23 sentence as regards this inspection you say that:
24 "In the name of the brigade Warrant Officer 2nd Class Jakovljevic
25 compiled a report on the incident for the use of the SRK."
1 And this report, did you ever see this report?
2 A. Yes. I can't remember it exactly, but I have a vague
3 recollection of it. The warrant officer was in the command. He worked
4 in the brigade.
5 Q. And the report indicated that the SRK or your battalion was not
6 responsible for that shelling; correct?
7 A. I think so.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In the previous answer the witness
9 said that: I know when it was compiled and sent, but this does not
10 appear in the transcript at all.
11 THE INTERPRETER: The witness is kindly asked to slow down a
12 little bit for the sake of the interpretation.
13 THE ACCUSED: "But I have a vague recollection of it."
14 [Interpretation] But I know when it was drafted and when the report was
16 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
17 MS. WEST: Thank you.
18 Q. Sir, obviously this -- that inspection was a very important event
19 and so can you confirm with me that you would assume the report went up
20 the chain of command?
21 A. The report said how long the inspection lasted and it mentioned
22 what had been done at the positions. The report that was given that was
23 translated stated that the mortars were not used.
24 Q. Okay. And so my question is: That report, did that report go
25 through the chain of command? Was that report sent up?
1 A. It was sent to the corps command.
2 Q. And you, being a security officer, you would have reported your
3 own observations to your command and up the security chain as well;
5 A. It wasn't necessary because Warrant Officer Jakovljevic from the
6 same service was present at the on-site investigation.
7 Q. What was his first name?
8 A. I know his surname is Jakovljevic. I can't remember his first
9 name. I don't know. I'm not sure.
10 Q. Are you aware of where he lives now?
11 A. He was living in Germany. I don't know if he's still alive.
12 Q. When was the last time you saw him?
13 A. In 2004.
14 Q. Where?
15 A. In Romanija because he went to his place of birth.
16 Q. Now, it's -- it's not clear to me that you ever actually saw a
17 copy of the report. So did you ever see a copy of the report?
18 A. I saw a copy of the report because I was sitting next to him when
19 he drafted it.
20 Q. And so that would have been in February of 1994; correct?
21 A. On the same day that the inspection was carried out. Once the
22 inspection had been completed.
23 Q. Are you aware that this site visit that you talk about played no
24 part in the formal investigation that UNPROFOR did resulting in the
25 report on February 15th? Are you aware of that?
1 A. No.
2 Q. Okay. But you would agree with me that it would be quite odd
3 that it played no part? Because this site visit you speak about is an
4 immensely valuable piece of information; wouldn't you agree?
5 A. That's how it should have been, but if it wasn't -- in my
6 opinion, that's how it should have been.
7 Q. Do you know who Colonel Radoslav Cvetkovic is? And that spelling
8 is C-v-e-t-k-o-v-i-c.
9 A. Perhaps by sight. I don't know.
10 Q. Have you heard of his name before?
11 A. I have, but I don't know him personally. Perhaps I know his
12 surname, but not his first name.
13 Q. I want you to look on the screen in front of you because this is
14 a problem for my own mispronunciation. You can see his name spelled out,
15 Radoslav, and his surname. Do you recognise that name?
16 A. It just says "Radoslav" here. There is no surname.
17 Q. Okay. We'll move on because we'll see it again.
18 MS. WEST: May I have P1441, page 56, please.
19 Q. So this is a recording of a meeting which the Trial Chamber has
20 just recently heard some evidence on. It took place on February 13th.
21 And it took place between Colonel Gauthier, another Colonel Rumyantsev,
22 and Major Hamill, and it was a meeting with Colonel Cvetkovic.
23 JUDGE KWON: Cvetkovic.
24 MS. WEST: Thank you.
25 Q. And if we go down to the fourth paragraph we can see the
1 discussion with him. But he was the BSA representative for the purposes
2 of this investigation. And here it says that:
3 "He discussed numerous aspects of the incident in theoretical
4 terms and offered his personal opinion concerning the validity of events
5 as portrayed by the media. He had no specific evidence to offer of
6 direct relevance to the investigation."
7 And we'll stop right there.
8 Now this meeting is taking place on February 13th and your site
9 visit took place - we're not entirely clear - but days earlier. Do you
10 think that the findings from your site visit would have been relevant for
11 him to know at this meeting, since he is the BSA representative?
12 A. Could you please repeat your question.
13 Q. The information that you gathered from your site visit, you've
14 told us you've agreed that it was very important information. And that
15 information would lead one to the conclusion that the shells did not come
16 from Mrkovici. Yet, the BSA representative on this very issue on
17 February 13th, days after your site visit, it appears had no knowledge of
18 that site visit at all. Does that seem odd to you?
19 A. If he represented the Serbian army, he should have been aware of
20 the fact. Something may have been missed. But I can claim that he
21 wasn't present when this inspection or visit was carried out at Mrkovici.
22 Q. You're right and I think -- I don't disagree with you when we
23 talked about the people you thought was there. But you did mention that
24 the report that was written you were sure went up the chain of command.
25 So don't you think somebody like this who was actually appointed to
1 represent the Bosnian Serbs would have had access to that report?
2 A. That report was sent to the superior command, and I believe that
3 he had access to that report.
4 MS. WEST: May I have 65 ter 21323 , please.
5 Q. What you're going to see shortly is his report about this very
6 same meeting. It's a February 14th document. And on page 1 of the
7 English at the bottom we see that he was appointed to be a member of the
8 international committee and on the day before he met with
9 Colonel Gauthier and another two members of the committee. If we go to
10 the next page, the same on the B/C/S, he gives a number of things that
11 the committee informed him of, some facts, and that's 1 through 5. And
12 then he says:
13 "As a rep of the VRS I was asked by the members of the commission
14 for technical information proving that the Serbian side did not launch
15 the shell."
16 According to your testimony, there was evidence that the Serbian
17 side, at least at Mrkovici, did not launch the shell. Do you have any
18 sense as to why somebody in this position would not have known that
20 A. I really don't know why they didn't have the information.
21 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter missed the last part of the
22 witness's answer.
23 MS. WEST:
24 Q. Can you just repeat the last part of your answer.
25 A. I really don't know why they didn't have the information. The
1 information was dispatched. I was personally there sitting next to the
2 person who dispatched the information from my communications centre, and
3 we got the feedback to the effect that the information had been received.
4 Q. If we continue on with this document, he -- here he's saying that
5 he tried to find out more information through informal conversations and
6 this is what he found out. And it goes 1 through 4, and basically
7 he's -- finds out that they don't have enough information to prove the
8 guilt of the Serbs with any certainty. And then he says:
9 "Having learned all this I based my work on the commission on the
10 following. I strongly denied the possibility that a shell was launched
11 from the Serbian side and offered the commission to visit the suspected
12 place" --
13 JUDGE KWON: Just a second.
14 MS. WEST: Yeah.
15 JUDGE KWON: You are reading a bit fast and I'm not sure if we
16 have that page in front of us.
17 MS. WEST: Apologies.
18 JUDGE KWON: Do we need to go to the next page, Ms. West?
19 MS. WEST: It's page 3.
20 JUDGE KWON: And the B/C/S. Probably next page?
21 MS. WEST: Probably the next page in the B/C/S as well, please.
22 Q. And what we see is number 1 in the middle of the page on both
23 B/C/S and English.
24 "I strongly denied the possibility that the shell was launched
25 from the Serbian side and offered the commission to visit the suspected
1 place, asserting that we did not have, nor have we ever had, a
2 120-millimetre mortar on this part of the front line."
3 Why would he offer this to UNPROFOR if they had already visited
4 the position?
5 A. I believe that he was certain that shells were never fired from
6 there. That's why he offered that to UNPROFOR. The shell was indeed
7 never fired from there.
8 Q. Yes, but he offered the commission to visit the suspected place.
9 If the commission had already been there, why is he making this offer?
10 Does this make any sense to you?
11 A. I assume that other people were members of the commission than
12 those who participated in the commission on the 6th.
13 Q. He then says:
14 "We do not have nor have we ever had a 120-millimetre mortar on
15 this part of the front line."
16 Well, we've heard testimony from you that you've had, I think we
17 came to the conclusion, two 120-millimetre mortars in Mrkovici; is that
18 right? Do I have that correct?
19 A. There were two 120-millimetre Mrkovici and two 82-millimetre. We
20 reported that to UNPROFOR. UNPROFOR was always there. They inspected
21 the site. There is no reason for me to deny that fact.
22 Q. Sir, I want to share with you some testimony the Trial Chamber
23 received regarding this same meeting we've been talking about. And it's
24 a summary of Hamill's testimony P1994 -- excuse me, it's the testimony at
25 transcript 6109, and it's when Hamill at the same meeting spoke to
1 Cvetkovic and Cvetkovic confirmed a number of 120-millimetre mortars in
2 Mrkovici, and he said, Cvetkovic being, that: They had not fired that
3 particular round. However, in the previous year they had fired 30- to
4 40.000 rounds into the city. Why were we so concerned about one round
5 when they had fired so many?
6 Sir, I suspect, according to your position, none of these rounds
7 of which he speaks, these 30- to 40.000 rounds, were fired into the city
8 within the month before February 1994; is that right?
9 A. As far as I know, they were not fired in February or even before
10 I arrived. There were never so many rounds fired from Mrkovici. We made
11 sure that we responded to attacks on our lines of defence to the places
12 where the most fierce fire had come from. We tried to account for every
13 single shell fired.
14 Q. I just want to back up to something we spoke about before the
15 break when we were talking about your interview that resulted in the
16 first statement. And you said at that interview there were three people:
17 Yourself; Slobodan Batinic, who was somebody that you knew before; and
18 then you said there was a third person. Can you tell us again who that
19 third person was?
20 A. I also mentioned Savcic.
21 Q. Is that the name of the third person?
22 A. His last name, yes.
23 Q. What was his first name, please?
24 A. I believe that his first name was Milomir.
25 Q. And had you ever met him prior to that interview?
1 A. Yes, on occasions.
2 Q. When was the first occasion?
3 A. I'm not sure about the exact date, but it was sometime at the
4 beginning of the war.
5 Q. And you were a little bit uncertain about when you originally met
6 Slobodan Batinic, but was that also during the period of the war?
7 A. I can't remember exactly. I believe that I met him at a party
8 that was given by one of our common friends, and thereafter we met on
9 several occasions.
10 Q. Thank you, sir.
11 MS. WEST: Mr. President --
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] But none of those meetings were
13 pre-arranged. They were all chance meetings.
14 MS. WEST:
15 Q. But nonetheless, you knew both of these gentlemen before your
16 interview; correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 MS. WEST: Thank you, Mr. President.
19 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic, do you have re-examination?
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Excellencies. I have the
21 need to clarify, as many things that are still ambiguous after the
23 Re-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
24 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, on page 22 you were asked about your
25 deployment in the area of the Jewish cemetery while your brigade was
1 still within the JNA. Was there a reason for the JNA to be there? Did
2 the JNA have some sort of infrastructure there? Why were you deployed
4 A. My unit was given a task and we arrived there to help the command
5 of the 4th Corps and the Marsal Tito barracks to withdraw from their
7 Q. Thank you. And what about the hilltop above the Jewish cemetery,
8 was there a facility there?
9 A. There was a barracks under Debelo Brdo. It was a subterranean
11 Q. Thank you. But it's not one and the same Debelo Brdo that you
12 discussed with the Prosecutor?
13 A. No, there are two places by the same name around Sarajevo. One
14 is on Trebevici in the direction of Lukavica and the other one is a
15 different Debelo Brdo between Kresa and Sepucka [phoen].
16 Q. Thank you. You were also asked about the work of the officers in
17 charge of security and intelligence. Is there a difference in the work
18 of the intelligence and security officer in the battalion, in the
19 brigade, and in the corps?
20 A. I believe that their tasks are almost identical. The only
21 difference being that some belong to higher commands, whereas those in
22 battalions are in charge of the security of the defence of the line and
23 some other such things. My task when I arrived there was to carry out
24 the digging in and to secure the troops in order to reduce the number of
25 casualties to a minimum.
1 Q. I'm waiting for the interpretation, and I'm also asking you to
3 A. Fine. Okay.
4 Q. You were also asked why you reported to the command and to your
5 professional life of service, meaning intelligence and security. What
6 regulated your reporting? Was it your decision or is it -- was it
7 regulated by a document?
8 A. A security officer is subordinated to the chief of security and
9 the battalion commander.
10 Q. Thank you. Was that something new that you introduced?
11 A. That's how I was trained. I attended a course and that's what I
12 was told at that course.
13 Q. Thank you. You were also asked about crimes and you said that
14 your troops were peasants from neighbouring villages. Did they know each
15 other well?
16 A. Yes, they did.
17 Q. Were there any criminals among them?
18 A. As far as I know in our unit there were no criminals. They were
19 all there in order to defend their own homes. There were no criminals.
20 Those were all people who lived off their own two hands before the war,
21 and during the war they had to defend their homes and their property.
22 Q. Did you carry out any offensives with the intention of crossing
23 over to the Muslim territory and occupy it?
24 A. No, there were no offensives, just the defence sections. We only
25 defended ourselves.
1 MS. WEST: Mr. President, this was not addressed in the cross.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I be allowed to explain.
3 Crimes are usually carried out in occupied territories --
4 JUDGE KWON: No, no, move on to your -- another topic.
5 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me.
6 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
7 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President, I think what
8 Dr. Karadzic is trying to say is that the implication that crimes against
9 Muslim civilians was not reported by him. This goes directly to why he
10 may not report crimes against Muslim civilians. If you need a further
11 explanation, I can give it, but I don't want to say too much in front of
12 the witness.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE KWON: Would you like to reply, Ms. West?
15 MS. WEST: No.
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE KWON: Well, carry on, Mr. Karadzic.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Can you answer? Did you cross over to the territory where Muslim
21 civilians resided behind your lines?
22 A. As far as I know, nobody from the defence sector of my battalion
23 ever crossed over to the Muslim territory. I personally never did that.
24 Q. Thank you. Did the Serb troop and the Muslim troop know --
25 troops know each before the war?
1 A. Muslim and Serb troops knew each other before the war and they
2 would call out to each other during cease-fires. But there were also
3 cases that we couldn't bury our dead during the day, we had to do it
4 during the night, because they would immediately open fire at us.
5 MS. WEST: I'll object now if Mr. Karadzic continues on with this
6 type of question, but I think it wasn't addressed in the cross.
7 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'll come to that. You will see
9 that we will come to that.
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Major, sir, during cease-fires, which part of the front line were
12 you in charge of?
13 A. I can only talk about the defence sector of the 7th Battalion,
14 and later on when I was transferred to Nisici I can talk about the
15 defence sector of the 4th Battalion.
16 Q. Thank you. How far is Dobrinja from your positions?
17 A. Dobrinja is in a different part of the city.
18 Q. And what about Kobila [phoen] Plana? How close is it?
19 A. It was far from the positions of the 7th Battalion.
20 Q. Thank you. I would like to call up 65 ter 24012 again.
21 You were asked on page -- on one of the last pages about
22 Mr. Cvetkovic. Do you know --
23 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. If you are referring to Cvetkovic's
24 report, it is 65 ter number 21323.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] First of all I will need a map.
1 Can it be zoomed in.
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. I know you're not an artillery man; however, can you perhaps tell
4 us what do vertical lines represent?
5 A. The vertical lines denote co-ordinates, I believe. Perhaps I
6 have forgotten what I knew.
7 Q. To which side of the earth do they denote? How are they
9 A. From the meridians -- I have forgotten how things go. I have not
10 come across a map for perhaps 10 or 15 years.
11 Q. Very well. Can we agree that they point towards the north?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Whereas the horizontal lines are turned eastwards?
14 A. Yes.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the usher be asked to assist
16 the witness with the pen.
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Do we agree that the lines that denote north and east are at a
19 90-degree angle?
20 A. Yes, we do agree.
21 Q. And now look at the square with three mortars.
22 A. Yes, I follow.
23 Q. Could you draw a line splitting the 90-degree angle into two
24 45-degree angles?
25 A. I have to do this to split that square into two.
1 Q. So the mortars are within the azimuth larger than 45 degrees;
2 isn't that correct?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Could you please put today's date on the map and sign it. I
5 would like to tender either this document or the document that was shown
6 to the witness by Madam West. Perhaps this one. And let's keep it on
7 the screen.
8 A. [Marks]
9 Q. Do you know what was alleged about the azimuth from which the
10 shell was fired? I'm sure that you will remember from the media and the
11 United Nations report.
12 A. I believe that a reference was made to either 17 or 18, I'm not
14 Q. Thank you.
15 A. I don't know if my memory serves me well.
16 Q. Thank you.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can the document please be received
18 into evidence?
19 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D2377, Your Honours.
21 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. In the zone of 18 degrees, did we have any artillery or mortar
24 A. No, we didn't have any.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And now can we look at
2 65 ter 21323.
3 JUDGE KWON: It was your intention, Ms. West, not to tender that
4 document I gather?
5 MS. WEST: Yes, that was my intention. If Mr. Karadzic wants to,
6 then I have no objection.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
8 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Do you remember this document where it allegedly says that
10 Mr. Cvetkovic said to the UNPROFOR commission that we didn't have any
11 mortars on that axis?
12 A. I never heard that.
13 Q. Can we go to the following page. I believe that it is on page 53
14 but no it is not. I'm talking about a different thing. Can we go to the
15 following page. You will see what he claimed on behalf of the Army of
16 Republika Srpska. Please go to the following page. Under 1 it says:
17 "I strongly deny the possibility that this shell was launched
18 from the Serbian side and offered the commission to visit the suspected
19 place, asserting that we did not have nor have we ever had a
20 120-millimetre mortar."
21 Does this apply to the 18 degrees or the 50 degrees? And the 50
22 degrees is the azimuth of Mrkovici; right?
23 A. I suppose that he may have meant that there is nothing at the 18
24 degrees position.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this
2 document as well.
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
4 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D2378, Your Honours.
5 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. On page 53 of today's transcript, Madam West told you this: It
7 seems that you drew your conclusion that shells were not fired from there
8 from the words you heard from the French officer. Did you base your
9 conclusion that shells were not fired from there on what the Frenchman
10 told you or did you know it even without him and he just reinforced you
11 in your belief?
12 A. I knew that personally even without them, but they reinforced my
13 knowledge because I know and I claim with full responsibility that the
14 shell was not fired from there.
15 Q. The Kosevo Brigade, or rather, your battalion did -- was not the
16 in the Kosevo Brigade and your positions did not overlap?
17 A. The Kosevo Brigade was on our right-hand flank, our positions did
18 not overlap.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now take a look at P1652 in
20 e-court. Could we zoom in on bullet point 1. The witness can read it or
21 perhaps I can read it. It says General Milanovic, the Chief of the
22 General Staff, and he issues an order, or rather, he proposes that the
23 UNPROFOR "immediately form a mixed commission of military experts from
24 representatives of UNPROFOR, the Republika Srpska army, and the so-called
25 BiH army which will by 0800 hours on 6 February 1992 at the latest, under
1 UNPROFOR's protection, start establishing the ballistic and all other
2 circumstances which led to the disaster, and discover which side
3 committed the crime."
4 Do you agree that this was drafted on the same day when the
5 explosion took place, on the 5th February?
6 A. I believe that this came on the 6th February, or rather, it was
7 sent on the 6th February in the evening. I don't know. I only remember
8 this order, I remember that it arrived, but when the commission arrived
9 to inspect there were no Muslims among them. Maybe they did not
10 introduce themselves to us. Maybe they were wearing UNPROFOR uniforms so
11 we didn't know who they were really.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. West.
14 MS. WEST: Your Honour, there's been a number of leading
15 questions. I've declined to comment in the effort of saving time, but I
16 have to make a remark at this point.
17 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Ms. West.
18 Bear that in mind, Mr. Karadzic.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Excellencies, I apologise, but this
20 is my 13th or 14th witness, so I'm still new to this. However, I'm
21 trying to save time.
22 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Thank you very much, sir. I have no further questions.
24 MS. WEST: Mr. President, may I make one comment, and I am
25 conscious of the time. When I started the cross we were speaking about
1 some maps that the gentleman and I looked at yesterday. We didn't have
2 them in e-court. We now do. It was just two maps that we reviewed
3 yesterday with representatives from the Defence. If there is no
4 objection, one map just shows his position when he was near the Jewish
5 cemetery, that's 65 ter 24011; the other map just shows the defence line
6 of the 7th Battalion, 65 ter 24013. I can ask him questions or I could
7 ask they just be admitted.
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Robinson.
9 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President, we don't have any objection if
10 she asks questions about them.
11 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Given the time, we can continue.
12 It's time to take a break usually, but I take it there's no
13 further witness for today?
14 MR. ROBINSON: That's correct, Mr. President.
15 JUDGE KWON: So shall we continue?
16 I'll consult the Registrar.
17 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
18 JUDGE KWON: So the Registry will be asking whether there's
19 enough tape for the remainder of this session. I don't think it will
20 last more than five or ten minutes.
21 MS. WEST: I would hope not.
22 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
23 JUDGE KWON: Let's proceed.
24 MS. WEST: Thank you. May we have 65 ter 24011, please.
25 Further cross-examination by Ms. West:
1 Q. Sir, yesterday you and I looked at two other maps. You remember
3 A. I do.
4 Q. Okay. And the map that you see in front of you, if we can zoom
5 in. Towards the bottom there's a blue line. In paragraph 14 of your
6 report you talked about May 1992 when your company was deployed along a
7 line. Now this blue line, does that represent where your company was
9 A. Yesterday I said that this map is very imprecise. You can't see
10 everything very well, but roughly speaking that would be the position.
11 Q. Thank you very much. If you can sign and date this, please.
12 JUDGE KWON: Now --
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the witness wear -- could the
14 witness mark where the barracks, the Bosut barracks, were located here.
15 JUDGE KWON: I see no problem.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know whether it's better
17 with my glasses or without them.
18 JUDGE KWON: Shall we zoom in further before he marks the
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Bosut barracks should be at the
21 end of this line, Mr. President, below Debelo Brdo.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could you mark that
23 with the letters KB.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] K --
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I was thinking about Bosut, B.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've used the Cyrillic script.
2 I've marked it in bold. This is where it should be.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Below the letter K; is that
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, it's a bit difficult to mark
6 things on this screen.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I give the floor to Ms. West.
8 We need your signature and the date.
9 MS. WEST: Can this have a number, Mr. President?
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
11 THE REGISTRAR: P5953, Your Honours.
12 MS. WEST: And now if we can have 65 ter 24013, please.
13 Q. Sir, we looked at another map yesterday, sir. And you drew out
14 the line of defence for the 7th Battalion. And as we had a long
15 discussion about this yesterday, there was some difficulty with that, and
16 you complained a bit that the map was not detailed. And I want to make
17 sure that the Trial Chamber understands that to be the case, but
18 nonetheless you did your best to give the approximate line of defence of
19 the 7th Battalion. We're going to see that shortly. And is this the map
20 we looked at yesterday?
21 A. I think so.
22 Q. All right. And at one point in this line there's a bit of an
23 extension, and if we can zoom in we might see it. Can you confirm for me
24 that extension you put some lines through it because in the process of
25 making this line there was a mistake. So the line goes in a --
1 A. I crossed out this line up here because you can't see
2 Duboki Potok on the map because we were on the left side of Duboki Potok
3 and the Muslims on the right side. If you mark here the flow of the
4 river, the left bank was ours. So that's how we marked these things, the
5 left- and right-hand side. And down here there was a graveyard in a
6 middle of a field. I mentioned that a while ago. And here this upper
7 line shouldn't be taken into account, only the lower one.
8 Q. And --
9 A. We passed by just above Pasino Brdo.
10 Q. Okay. Thank you very much. I think you've clarified --
11 A. And our command, the location of our command, is missing here
12 because this map is a very poor map or the copy is bad, I don't know
14 Q. Okay. But the location of your command, as it's missing on this
15 map, but it is to the extreme right - correct? - of the screen where we
16 see the blue line end; is that right?
17 A. Yes. Up here in this corner, that's where it should be.
18 Q. Okay. Can you sign and date this map, please.
19 JUDGE KWON: I don't think he needs to sign it because it's
20 already signed and he confirmed. We can admit it --
21 MS. WEST: Thank you, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE KWON: -- as it is. Yes, that will be done.
23 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P5954, Your Honours.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, I can't see
25 anything on this map. I can't locate an important feature, the
1 Grdonj hill. The map is completely unclear.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's completely unclear.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] How is it that we can't have a
4 better map?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the Grdonj hill
6 should be somewhere here, at the end of the line where we see this arrow,
7 that's my opinion, and I drew it very roughly because you can't see where
8 Duboki Potok is located and so on. There's a small Muslim village there
9 and I know that they held that. I know that we didn't enter their
11 JUDGE KWON: There are many ways to locate the Grdonj hill if
12 necessary. But --
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, that's not my
14 concern, but I was wondering whether it was possible for the witness to
15 draw a precise line in relation to the Grdonj hill, but I will refrain
16 from carrying on with these comments.
17 JUDGE KWON: I have a couple of questions for the witness but I'm
18 not sure whether we need to take a break or not. Let's carry on. Shall
19 we upload his statement, paragraph 28.
20 Questioned by the Court:
21 JUDGE KWON: I think it's covered fully by Ms. West but there are
22 still some ambiguous points and I'm going to raise this with the witness.
23 Sir, in your statement given to the Defence in paragraph 28 you
24 stated like this:
25 "In relation to paragraph 18 of this statement" paragraph 18 is
1 referring to the regular visit, regular inspection by the UNPROFOR, "I
2 would like to add that in our unit we had two 120-millimetre mortars and
3 two 82-millimetre mortars."
4 So this is incorrect statement according to your evidence? It
5 should read "four 120-millimetre mortars and four 82-millimetre mortars."
6 Am I correct, sir?
7 A. That's what it should say, two at one position, two at another,
8 so two each. There was two 120-millimetre ones and two 82-millimetre
9 ones. That's what UNPROFOR had been informed of and UNPROFOR was aware
10 of that fact. It's not correctly written out here and perhaps I
11 incorrectly marked the positions yesterday. You have to understand that
12 this is the first time in 57 years that I have appeared before a
14 THE ACCUSED: [No interpretation]
15 JUDGE KWON: Please don't overlap while the interpretation is
16 going on, Mr. Karadzic.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we ask the witness what he
18 means by saying one position and another position.
19 JUDGE KWON: No, I'm -- so shall we upload Exhibit P5952. This
20 is the map where you pointed out the location of the -- of those mobiles,
21 but you were -- you confirmed that from each position one mortar is left
22 out. So it should be four each, one on Mrkovic and one in Debelo Brdo;
24 A. Yes. The 82-millimetre mortar is missing.
25 JUDGE KWON: Very well. So my question is this: When the
1 Joint Commission visited your place, how many mortars did they see on
2 each place?
3 A. Four at each place.
4 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
5 A. The barrels had been covered to prevent the rain and snow from
6 falling onto them.
7 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Unless my colleagues have questions for
8 you, that concludes your evidence, Mr. Dzida. On behalf of the Chamber I
9 would like to thank you for your coming to The Hague. Now you are free
10 to go.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, I was only
12 interested in Mrkovici and the number of mortars there, not Debelo Brdo.
13 So this is what gave rise to the issue perhaps.
14 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
15 Yes, you may be excused.
16 [The witness withdrew]
17 JUDGE KWON: Is there anything to further raise -- to be raised?
18 Yes, Mr. Robinson.
19 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. We would ask that the Chamber
20 could resume tomorrow at 9.30 instead of 9.00, but that Dr. Karadzic be
21 brought here at the same time so that he could consult with
22 Mr. Sladojevic after the proofing of tonight's witness, which
23 Dr. Karadzic is not going to be able to be involved in and have enough
24 time to question the witness when the trial begins.
25 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Tieger.
1 MR. TIEGER: I've tried to calculate the times, Mr. President. I
2 think that is cutting it far too close, and unless the Trial Chamber is
3 going to build in an extra session for tomorrow -- the -- we've advised
4 Mr. Robinson previously that the estimated cross-examination time is
5 three and a half hours. I should also note that there are documents on
6 his list to which the Prosecution will be objecting and for which if he
7 seeks admission Mr. Karadzic will have to take the witness in
8 examination-in-chief. I'm also noting that re-direct times have tended
9 to expand. So I simply don't think that will work unless there's some
10 extra time built in at the other end, and I don't know that that's
11 something that could be arranged. So I wouldn't recommend a late
12 starting time.
13 JUDGE KWON: As long as we are sitting for four and a half hours
14 you would not object to the late start, would you?
15 MR. TIEGER: Well, I mean, if we had our normal time, I wasn't
16 going to ask for additional time; but if we have a late start that
17 cuts -- first of all if we had the normal four and a half hours, then
18 we'd have four hours. That means that Dr. Karadzic takes 30 minutes -
19 and he's been taking at least that long, it seems to me - with redirect
20 and everything else included previously, that would leave precisely the
21 three and a half hours for the estimated cross-examination. It seems to
22 me that's cutting it all very -- a little bit close. My recommendation
23 at this moment would be -- perhaps we would start a few moments late like
24 9.10, for example. If Dr. Karadzic gets here by 8.30 or 8.40, that
25 should leave more than ample time to discuss whatever took place at
1 proofing which I don't -- I mean, perhaps he's anticipating that this
2 witness is going to come very far off the draft statement, but I -- other
3 than something extremely unusual, that adjustment should resolve any
5 JUDGE KWON: I thought if we were to start at 9.30 we would end
6 up at 3.15 or something like that.
7 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, another solution could just -- if
8 you could ask that Dr. Karadzic could be brought here at 8.00 we could
9 start at 9.00 and have the same solution if that's possible.
10 JUDGE KWON: That's beyond the Chamber's capacity, but I will
11 consult the Registrar.
12 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
13 JUDGE KWON: We'll sit -- we'll start tomorrow at 9.30 and we'll
14 see how it evolves, but the Chamber is minded to sit for longer hours if
16 The hearing is now adjourned.
17 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.48 p.m.,
18 to be reconvened on Friday, the 2nd day of
19 November, 2012, at 9.30 a.m.