Page 30237
1 Wednesday, 14 November 2012
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.26 p.m.
5 JUDGE KWON: Good afternoon, everyone. We are sitting today
6 pursuant to Rule 15 bis, with Judge Morrison being away due to official
7 reasons.
8 Yes, Mr. Robinson.
9 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. We would like to make a
10 motion to ask the Chamber to reconsider its ruling that was made
11 concerning the mode of testimony of the next witness, Dusan Zurovac. And
12 the reason for that is simply that due to the technical difficulties
13 which we've experienced this week, we have four witnesses still in
14 The Hague to testify over these next two days in which we have shortened
15 work hours, and these people have come -- been here all week and it's
16 very difficult for them to come back. They're working and it's a
17 hardship for them to have stayed here without testifying and also not
18 to -- to be asked to return.
19 So we accept fully that we should not provide the Trial Chamber
20 with more than one revised statement, which we did with Mr. Zurovac and
21 we won't do that ever again; and we also understand that there are
22 materials in paragraphs 2 through 11 in his statement that are not
23 relevant and need not be admitted. But having learned those lessons,
24 without -- we would appreciate it if we could proceed by Rule 92 ter to
25 minimise the time that we would take with this witness's testimony so
Page 30238
1 that the other witnesses can still be heard during the week. And our
2 apologies for our errors in the way we have approached this particular
3 witness's documentation.
4 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Tieger, would you like to respond.
5 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Mr. President, thank you. I'm moving over to
6 this end so I can maintain eye contact with the entire Bench. That's why
7 I'm over here.
8 First of all, as a preliminary matter, we don't agree that this
9 is an exceptional circumstance or situation warranting reconsideration.
10 We deal with scheduling issues all the time, for better or worse. This
11 is a matter that we understand involves a relatively short adjustment.
12 We understood from Mr. Robinson the anticipated time for viva voce would
13 be 30 to 45 minutes, in which event the impact is given the amount of
14 time that would normally be taken by or has been consumed by 92 ter
15 submissions and summaries consisting of 10 to 15 minutes, so the impact
16 would be negligible. In any event, this kind of routine and customary
17 scheduling issue is not such that it rises to the level of
18 reconsideration that would upend a Trial Chamber decision.
19 But more importantly, let me get to the issues involved.
20 Mr. Robinson's proposal to eliminate paragraphs 1 through 11 or 2 through
21 11 really addresses only one part of the issue and clearly the smallest
22 part. The Trial Chamber's principal concern and the one that clearly had
23 the greatest adverse impact on the Prosecution was the steady
24 proliferation of exhibits throughout the course of the week. Now, I
25 emphasise, this comes against the backdrop of hundreds and hundreds of
Page 30239
1 65 ter violations by the Defence, that is, its failure to provide,
2 pursuant to the Rules, adequate factual summaries of what witnesses
3 were -- what factual issues witnesses were expected to testify to, a
4 matter which left the Prosecution, if it had any hope of attempting to
5 conduct adequate preparation, utterly dependent on the statements. So
6 while under these circumstances the appropriate remedy might well have
7 been to simply preclude any eliciting of the belated information, the
8 Trial Chamber crafted a compromise that would hopefully discourage the
9 Defence from engaging in this practice in the future but allowed it the
10 option and opportunity to elicit such evidence, as was included in that
11 final submission that it saw fit but in the context of a viva voce
12 presentation.
13 Mr. Robinson's proposed solution basically vitiates that
14 compromise. So by eliminating only the material that is admittedly
15 marginal or even meaningless, it allows the accused basically the full
16 benefit of the criticised practice and imposes upon the Prosecution the
17 full burden that the remedy, at least in part, sought to address.
18 So under these circumstances, we consider that there really are
19 only two possible legitimate alternatives. One is maintaining the
20 Court's decision to have all evidence led viva voce. And if the Defence
21 is unhappy with that solution, then the only recourse would be to return
22 to the situation that existed before the addition of the belated
23 information, belated exhibits, and simply lead 92 ter the original
24 statement, that is, paragraphs 1 through 20. Any other proposed solution
25 would be unfounded and unfair.
Page 30240
1 I should note that Ms. West is actually leading the witness. I
2 don't know if she has anything to add that may be of use in this
3 analysis, but other than that, that completes my submissions.
4 JUDGE KWON: My apologies for calling up on Mr. Tieger.
5 But, Ms. West, do you have anything to add?
6 MS. WEST: I do not, Mr. President. Thank you.
7 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, I don't want to prolong the discussion,
8 Mr. President.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 JUDGE KWON: Having considered the arguments of the parties, the
11 Chamber now gives its ruling. In reaching its oral decision of
12 12th of November that Dusan Zurovac be led live, the Chamber considered
13 the successive and substantial additions made to the statement proposed
14 for admission as well as the fact that a large portion of the witness's
15 statement covered matters irrelevant to this case. The Chamber is of the
16 view that the arguments put forth by the accused as a basis for
17 reconsideration do not alleviate the Chamber's initial concerns in
18 relation to the witness's evidence being presented pursuant to
19 Rule 92 ter and which led to the Chamber to decide that he be called
20 viva voce.
21 While the Chamber appreciates that witnesses may be
22 inconvenienced by having to travel back to the Tribunal a second time,
23 this is unfortunately a reality of trial proceedings but not one which
24 justifies not hearing a witness live when the Chamber decided that should
25 be the case. The Chamber therefore decides that it will not reconsider
Page 30241
1 its decision that Dusan Zurovac be led live.
2 There's one further issue I'd like to discuss before we continue.
3 Mr. Karadzic, on the 12th of November, 2012, you filed a motion for image
4 distortion for Witness Miladin Trifunovic whose KW number is 515. In
5 paragraph 4 of that motion, the accused states, and I quote:
6 "Dr. Karadzic apologises for the late notice of this requested
7 measure, as Mr. Trifunovic did not raise this issue until he arrived in
8 The Hague."
9 However, the Chamber has been informed by VWS that upon his
10 arrival in The Hague the witness was surprised that protective measures
11 had not been requested, as he had specifically asked for such measures
12 when he met with a member of the Defence team in early to mid-October.
13 So, Mr. Robinson, whether you can provide an explanation on this.
14 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. It's true that witnesses and
15 our investigators do discuss the possibility of protective measures when
16 they're first contacted. Often much of that took place before the trial
17 started and before the Trial Chamber has denied the protective measures
18 for other witnesses who have similar circumstances. And so we have our
19 Case Manager contacting each witness when we first try to schedule their
20 travel to The Hague and to ask them whether or not they need protective
21 measures so that we could file a motion if they do. And when our
22 Case Manager asked Mr. Trifunovic that, he indicated that he didn't need
23 protective measures so we didn't file a motion for him. And then when he
24 came to The Hague and -- he was disappointed that he didn't have any
25 protective measures. And so we finally discussed it with him and he was
Page 30242
1 willing to nevertheless testify so long as he could at least have image
2 distortion since he was travelling to areas where he felt he could have
3 problems. And so that's why you didn't receive the motion until this
4 week.
5 JUDGE KWON: Why was he disappointed after having said that he
6 would not need protective measures?
7 MR. ROBINSON: Frankly, I don't know, Mr. President. I think
8 maybe there was a misunderstanding between him and the Case Manager
9 because he seemed to think that he would have protective measures, but in
10 fact we were informed by the Case Manager, who was talking to witness
11 after witness and has a very strict protocol as to how he's performing
12 those duties, that he hadn't requested any. So I can only think that
13 there was some kind of miscommunication or misunderstanding between them.
14 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
15 In any event, the Chamber finds it unacceptable that inaccurate
16 representation of the position of witnesses in relation to protective
17 measures find their way into motions before the Chamber. So in the
18 future, the Chamber expect the accused to ensure adequate communication
19 within its team and to ensure that the appropriate attention is given to
20 request -- for protective measures. Witnesses simply cannot be left in
21 the dark until their arrival in The Hague, expecting to be granted
22 protective measures when they have not even been requested. Therefore,
23 it is for the Defence team to adequately inform and advise its witnesses
24 in a timely manner about the request it has or will make in relation to
25 protective measures.
Page 30243
1 Having said that, the Chamber will issue a written decision
2 shortly on that motion.
3 Unless there's any other matters, we'll bring in the next
4 witness.
5 MS. WEST: Mr. President, I would just only suggest that this
6 witness have an 90(E) warning, please.
7 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
8 [The witness entered court]
9 JUDGE KWON: Good afternoon, sir.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon.
11 JUDGE KWON: Would you take the solemn declaration, please.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
13 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
14 WITNESS: DUSAN ZUROVAC
15 [Witness answered through interpreter]
16 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Please make yourself comfortable.
17 Mr. Zurovac, before you start giving evidence, I would like to
18 draw your attention to a particular rule here at the Tribunal. Under
19 this rule, Rule 90(E), you may object to answering a question from the
20 Prosecution, the accused, or from the Judges if you believe that your
21 answer will incriminate you. When I say "incriminate," I mean that
22 something you say may amount to an admission of your guilt or could
23 provide evidence that you have committed an offence. However, even if
24 you think your answer will incriminate you and you do not wish to answer
25 the question, the Tribunal has the discretion to oblige you to answer the
Page 30244
1 question. But in such a case, the Tribunal will make sure that your
2 testimony compelled in such a way shall not be used as evidence in other
3 case against you for any offence other than false testimony.
4 Do you understand what I have said to you, sir?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
6 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
7 Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good day, Your Excellency. Good
9 day to everyone.
10 Examination by Mr. Karadzic:
11 Q. [Interpretation] Good day, Mr. Zurovac.
12 A. Good day.
13 Q. Unfortunately, I'll have to spend a little more time on the
14 examination-in-chief because you will be led viva voce, but I assume that
15 no one has anything against you being provided with your statement.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't know what the exact
17 procedure is.
18 JUDGE KWON: I think you should know how to conduct your
19 examination-in-chief with the advice of Mr. Robinson and other legal
20 associates. Please proceed.
21 MR. ROBINSON: Is there any problem, Mr. President, with him
22 having his statement? A witness can have a prior statement to assist
23 them whether or not it's admitted under 92 ter.
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE KWON: Do you have any observation, Mr. Tieger -- or
Page 30245
1 Ms. West, I'm sorry.
2 MS. WEST: I don't. I have no objection to that.
3 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
4 Yes.
5 MR. TIEGER: Mr. President, I would have one observation and that
6 is I believe when that's happened in other Chambers, it's -- the witness
7 has been asked to advise the parties if and when he is referring to the
8 statement so that the record is clear.
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes, but we can observe whether the witness consults
10 his statement or not and then we can monitor it.
11 Let it be done. We'll print out the -- do we have B/C/S version?
12 We'll print out the B/C/S version and provide it to the witness.
13 In the meantime, please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
15 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Could you tell us your name.
17 A. My name is Dusan Zurovac.
18 Q. I'm waiting for the interpretation to be completed. I would like
19 to ask you to do the same.
20 Can you tell us where and when you were born?
21 A. I was born on the 19th of November, 1941, in Nevesinje, in
22 Herzegovina.
23 Q. Thank you. What are you by profession?
24 A. I'm a professor of literature.
25 Q. Is that what you are by profession? Did you work in your
Page 30246
1 profession?
2 A. Yes, I did.
3 Q. Thank you. Where did you live?
4 A. I lived in Sarajevo and in Mostar.
5 Q. Thank you. Where did you live in Sarajevo?
6 A. I lived in Novo Sarajevo in Zagorska Street number 81.
7 Q. Thank you. Is that your privately owned house or is it a
8 collective residence?
9 A. It's my privately owned house.
10 Q. Thank you. Where were you when the war broke out?
11 A. I was in Mostar.
12 Q. Thank you. When did you return to Sarajevo?
13 A. I returned there three months later, about three and a half
14 months later.
15 Q. Thank you. Did you at any point in time join the Army of
16 Republika Srpska?
17 A. Yes, I did.
18 Q. Where did you report to the army and could you tell us for what
19 reasons you did this?
20 A. I reported to the VRS in my neighbourhood, my settlement. It was
21 an exclusively Serbian settlement. I reported there because I didn't
22 want the same thing to happen to me that happened to me in Mostar at the
23 beginning of May.
24 Q. What do you have in mind? What happened to you in Mostar at the
25 beginning of May?
Page 30247
1 A. On the 5th of May, 1992, I was imprisoned and I was taken to the
2 central prison in Mostar. On the 18th August I was taken to Stolac and I
3 experienced things that are difficult to understand. It's hard to
4 understand how one man can do such things to another man.
5 Q. Thank you. Which unit did you join? Where was that unit
6 deployed?
7 A. The 4th Company of the 2nd Battalion deployed in Ozrenska Street.
8 Q. Thank you. Could you tell the Chamber where the 4th Company had
9 its area of responsibility?
10 A. Its area of responsibility was from Pandurevica Kuca and up until
11 the crossroads at Milinkladska Street.
12 Q. Thank you. How far is Ozrenska Street from Zagorska Street, or
13 rather, your house?
14 A. Well, my house is at the corner where Zagorska Street joins
15 Ozrenska Street, to the left, on the left-hand side.
16 Q. Thank you. Were you assigned some command responsibilities; and
17 if so, on what basis?
18 A. Not initially, I wasn't assigned any command duties, I was an
19 ordinary private. Later, when the commander of the 4th Company was
20 killed, I became the commander of the 4th Company.
21 Q. Thank you. Did you have a rank of any kind?
22 A. Yes, I did. I was a lieutenant-colonel at the time.
23 THE INTERPRETER: A second lieutenant, correction.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Thank you. Where did you obtain that rank?
Page 30248
1 A. In the VRS, the Army of Republika Srpska.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we see 1D6099.
3 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Are you familiar with this map and have you marked it?
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could it be scrolled up a bit.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I'm familiar with this map and
7 I marked this triangle that you can see in the corner.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we scroll up a bit.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. What does this triangle represent? Is it in blue?
11 A. Yes, in blue. That is the area that was under the control of the
12 4th Company.
13 Q. Could you tell us what this represents?
14 A. On the whole, this line is the line of demarcation. That's where
15 the trenches were located and the bunkers on both sides. The enemy was
16 10, 15, or 20 metres away from us.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, is it necessary
19 to sign the map or can it be admitted as it is?
20 JUDGE KWON: No, he didn't sign -- mark it -- anything on this
21 map in the courtroom, but I need some clarification.
22 Sir, Mr. Zurovac, can you read English?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I can't.
24 JUDGE KWON: Who wrote the annotation on this map, Mr. Karadzic?
25 I see "zone of responsibility of D. Zurovac" and further up I see the
Page 30249
1 comment like "no line of sight" and there's "1.250 metres." Who put
2 those markings -- notations?
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We received information from the
4 witness and then we made these notes --
5 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic --
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- he also showed where the line
7 should be traced.
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic --
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- the blue line is his.
10 JUDGE KWON: -- you asked only about the blue markings and then
11 the witness said he does not understand or read English. In order for us
12 to admit this as it is, you have to put questions about this comment as
13 well. Yes.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
15 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Can you tell us how far your area of responsibility is from the
17 area marked as number 10 or 18?
18 A. The distance is about a kilometre and a half from number 10 at
19 least, and from number 4, the distance would be about 900 metres, I
20 believe, from the firing position, the distance from the firing position
21 that was under the control of the 4th Company.
22 Q. Just a moment, please. Were you informed about an incident that
23 took place on the 3rd of September, 1993, in Ivana Krndelja Street?
24 A. Yes, I was.
25 Q. Could you tell us how the Ivana Krndelja Street has been marked
Page 30250
1 here?
2 A. The Ivana Krndelja Street leaves from -- goes from the bridge
3 over Miljacka up to this hill, there's a vertical line where -- from
4 where incident 4 occurred over the Miljacka river to Hrasno.
5 Q. And how far is it from your positions to the Ivana Krndelja
6 crossroads and the street that goes from the east to the west?
7 A. About 900 metres.
8 Q. Thank you. Is there a clear line of sight here?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Between your position and the location marked as number 4; isn't
11 that correct?
12 A. That's correct.
13 Q. Thank you. What, in fact, obstructs this line of sight?
14 A. Well, the lie of the land, the hill is such that you can't see
15 anything from the positions of the 4th Company. You can't see the
16 location where incident 4 occurred. You can see where Tranzit is located
17 here. It was only possible to see this incident, the location of this
18 incident, if you were on the hill behind us. In such a case the distance
19 would be over a kilometre and a half.
20 What is obstructing the line of sight? Well, the hills are
21 obstructing the line of sight. It's a hilly area. We were in some sort
22 of a valley, so there were three or four hills that were obstructing the
23 line of sight. They made it impossible to see the Ivana Krndelja Street.
24 So sometimes the enemy brought through -- brought in manpower and
25 equipment through the Tranzit. We weren't aware of the fact. You can
Page 30251
1 only hear certain sounds that were produced and so on and so forth. You
2 couldn't see anything. I think this thesis is one that doesn't hold
3 water because incident 4 could only have been seen from 400 metres behind
4 our positions, from Gojino hill or Gradon [phoen] hill.
5 Q. Are those hills in the area of responsibility of the Serbian
6 army?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. In such a case, what would the distance be between those points
9 from which you have visibility and location number 4?
10 A. From those points, from Gojino Brdo, the distance would be about
11 2 kilometres and from Seratlino [phoen] Brdo the distance would be about
12 a kilometre and a half.
13 Q. Thank you. Tell us, please, whether you were informed about the
14 incident that happened on the 22nd of July, 1994, in the
15 Miljenko Cvitkovic Street?
16 A. Yes, although I was not the company commander at the time, I had
17 a work obligation at the time. However, there is a lot of illogical
18 things involved in that. It was stated that the boy was standing in
19 front of a shop window. We were behind his back some kilometre and a
20 half away from him and the boy allegedly was hit in the stomach. This
21 doesn't make sense. Let's not even talk about ranges and other things
22 that we will discuss later, whether we could do it or not. There is no
23 either theoretical or practical possibility for us to have done that.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we call up another document but
Page 30252
1 before that we need the map still. Then I will call up other documents.
2 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
3 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, concerning this map we would like
4 to tender it and also I would like to ask that it be added to our 65 ter
5 list. It wasn't on our list because it wasn't in existence at the time
6 we submitted our list.
7 JUDGE KWON: Ms. West.
8 MS. WEST: Mr. President, I heard evidence regarding number 10
9 and number 4. I heard 1500 kilometres -- excuse me, metres and
10 900 metres, but this map has 1.250 metres on it and an extra dot, so if
11 we can have some clarification about that.
12 JUDGE KWON: What did you refer to as extra dots?
13 MS. WEST: I don't think he said anything about 18.
14 JUDGE KWON: Was it not on the map originally?
15 MS. WEST: It may have been, Your Honour, but if this is
16 admitted, it's not going to make any sense otherwise unless he speaks
17 about it.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I explain?
19 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We did not show the witness any
21 documents concerning the location 18. It's a Prosecutor's map and I
22 don't think that this witness knows anything about that incident.
23 MS. WEST: And, Mr. President, I can accept that and perhaps
24 we'll just get rid of that number, but it also regards the 1.250 metres.
25 Unless I'm mistaken, I didn't hear any evidence regarding that.
Page 30253
1 JUDGE KWON: With that point, I agree with.
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Mr. Zurovac, what's the significance of 1.250 metres on the map?
4 A. It's a distance, the distance from our firing positions to
5 incident 10, which is marked on the map. I said about 1500 metres, I
6 said that that was the distance, and that incident number 10 could have
7 been seen only from the hills behind our backs.
8 Q. In that case, that would be even further than your line of
9 defence?
10 A. About 300 metres. Gojino Brdo is some 350 metres from our
11 positions and Seratino [phoen] Brdo was about 300 metres from our
12 positions.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can the map be admitted? If the
14 witness needs to sign it, I will ask him to sign it.
15 JUDGE KWON: It's okay. You don't have to sign it.
16 We'll admit this. Shall we give the number.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, document 1D6099 receives number
18 D2427.
19 JUDGE KWON: And I just note that the base map is the one that
20 was admitted as P2192, but I note that probably Defence team changed the
21 colour of number 18 from green to yellow, even the legend. I find it
22 amazing.
23 Yes, let's continue.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] On the screen I can see number 18
25 in green --
Page 30254
1 JUDGE KWON: [Previous translation continues]...
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- both in the captions and when it
3 comes to the figure. They're all green.
4 JUDGE KWON: Yellowish-green. Yes, let's continue.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
6 And now can we see a photo, this is 65 ter 24026. 24026 pursuant
7 to Rule 65 ter.
8 Thank you.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Mr. Zurovac, do you recognise this location?
11 A. No, I've never seen this location. I recognise the place, but I
12 could not see it because of the obstructions --
13 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not understand the
14 witness's answer.
15 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Zurovac, could you repeat your answer so that
16 the interpreters can interpret it.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know this area very well because
18 I lived here for almost 30 years; however, the obstructions that are in
19 the Ivana Krndelja Street, I never saw them before, not only me but also
20 none of my soldiers. I can vouch for that with my own life.
21 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Could you look at the photo and point to your positions were.
23 A. Our positions are in the depth of the photo, about 900 metres
24 from here, but the configuration of the terrain was such that the terrain
25 was sloping. The area is known as Hrasno Brdo or Hrasno hill. It's a
Page 30255
1 hilly terrain, hence the name.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can the witness be assisted in
3 marking Ozrenska Street.
4 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Are the positions visible in this photo, Mr. Zurovac?
6 A. No, they're not.
7 Q. Can you draw arrows pointing from the skyline towards the ground
8 to show where your positions were?
9 A. That would be a problem because as far as I can see, the photo
10 was taken from a position which is somewhere on the road. You can see in
11 the photo that this was not taken from the depth of the terrain where our
12 positions were. This is very clear.
13 Q. Thank you. Then I won't ask you to mark.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this photo be admitted into
15 evidence, please.
16 MR. ROBINSON: Also, Mr. President, we would like to request that
17 this be added to our 65 ter list, as we didn't contemplate using it until
18 recently.
19 JUDGE KWON: And probably the Prosecution may be aware of the
20 provenance of this document, but in the future I would like the accused
21 to introduce where it's from. I can see here it's from Galic trial.
22 Yes, Ms. West.
23 MS. WEST: I don't have any objection to that.
24 JUDGE KWON: Well, the request is granted and we will admit this
25 into evidence as Exhibit D2428.
Page 30256
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Prosecution exhibit?
2 JUDGE KWON: My correction. I should have said D2428.
3 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Before we move the photo from the screen, Mr. Zurovac, the road
5 that you see in the photo, was it used by the BH army?
6 A. At the beginning of my testimony I said that the BiH army used
7 this road, but we could not control transit along that road. That's the
8 route of the former railway line. It was a bit below us. There was no
9 visibility. There was no line of visibility from us to there. We could
10 not control that road. They used it to transport manpower and equipment.
11 This street was very busy when it comes to that.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to call up
14 65 ter 24024.
15 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Robinson, if the accused is going to use many
16 documents which were not listed as -- on the 65 ter list, why don't you
17 deal with in lump sum all together so that we can deal with it more
18 conveniently.
19 MR. ROBINSON: It would be better to do that at the end, perhaps,
20 because I'm not exactly sure how many of these we're going to get to.
21 We're trying to also be conscious of not using too much time. Unless you
22 would like me to make a general request that would apply to any document
23 that he offers during the course of this examination that's not on our
24 list.
25 JUDGE KWON: The Prosecution is informed of those documents?
Page 30257
1 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, they have been included on our Rule 92 ter
2 package, so we are -- they have been informed of them and they have been
3 informed that they were not on our 65 ter list.
4 JUDGE KWON: In the future, the Chamber should have been informed
5 of similar documents -- of documents of similar nature. We haven't
6 received any.
7 MR. ROBINSON: I'm sorry, I'm not following, Mr. President. We
8 filed on the 9th of November our Rule 65 -- Rule 92 ter package which
9 includes the list of documents that were intended to be used with the
10 witness. Now what Dr. Karadzic intends is to select some of those, as
11 time permits, and offer them. So that's what we're working from is our
12 Rule 92 ter package of the 9th of November, and there's a column that
13 indicates which ones were on the 65 ter list and not.
14 JUDGE KWON: That's all due to various filings, I think. Yes, I
15 found it. Let's proceed.
16 But, Ms. West, do you have any objection in relation to specific
17 documents or you can tell us in general?
18 MS. WEST: Thank you, Mr. President. In general, at least the
19 documents I've seen so far, I'm aware of them. I do understand that
20 they're not on the 65 ter list, but they are documents that I've seen. I
21 don't want to make a general -- I don't want to take the general position
22 that the Prosecution does not object to a whole mass load of non-notified
23 65 ter documents, but in these particular cases these are documents of
24 which I've been aware.
25 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. On that basis, let's proceed.
Page 30258
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Mr. Zurovac, do you recognise this photo?
4 A. Of course I do. I recognise it.
5 Q. What does this photo depict? What's in the background?
6 A. This is Ivana Krndelja Street, its pavement, and in the
7 background is Hrasno hill, it's the top of Hrasno hill.
8 Q. Who controlled the summit of Hrasno hill?
9 A. That was our area of responsibility. Nobody lived there. There
10 was just an old lady there who had a mentally ill son. People had fled
11 from there so both of those hills, nobody resided there because our line
12 was some 250 or so metres from the tops of any of these hills.
13 Q. Thank you. Was there a line of visibility from the place where
14 this lady is standing and your trenches?
15 A. No, there was none.
16 Q. Thank you. What about Asimovo Brdo, where was that?
17 A. If you look at this photo you will see it on the left-hand side,
18 some 900 metres away. Asimovo Brdo is somewhat higher than both Gojino
19 and Seratino Brdo. It's much higher and would be to the left-hand side
20 of the photo as I am looking at it now.
21 Q. Who controlled Asimovo Brdo?
22 A. The enemy.
23 Q. Asimovo Brdo was dominant together with Gojino and the other hill
24 that you mentioned?
25 A. Yes, but it was at least 50 metres higher than the other two.
Page 30259
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this photo be admitted,
2 please --
3 MS. WEST: Mr. President, there have been several questions that
4 have been leading in this matter. I've said nothing. I understand the
5 issue of time, but I don't want Mr. Karadzic to get into the habit of it.
6 JUDGE KWON: I -- as usual practice, I let you go on until
7 objected to. Now you heard Ms. West's submission. Please bear in mind
8 not to lead the witness.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Before we move the exhibit from the screen, can you tell us where
11 the enemy trenches were, looking from this photo?
12 A. The enemy trenches were below our trenches towards the area where
13 this lady or this man is standing. In other words, enemy trenches would
14 be closer to us. Our trenches were a bit further away. They were some
15 15 or 20 metres behind their trenches.
16 Q. Looking at the horizon depicted in the photo, where were the Serb
17 trenches and where were the Muslim trenches?
18 A. Do you want me to draw a line? Towards the top of the photo you
19 see a white house and then you see a greenish house, and the top of the
20 hill is somewhere there among the houses. And our trenches were below
21 that greenish house. In the photo it would be on my right-hand side.
22 That's where our trenches were.
23 Q. Thank you.
24 JUDGE KWON: This photo will be admitted as Exhibit D2429.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
Page 30260
1 Could we see 65 ter 23968.
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Do you recognise this photograph and can you tell us what it
4 shows?
5 A. Yes. This is Ivana Krndelja Street. You can see to my left that
6 there are certain skyscrapers, it's Ivana Krndelja Street. All these
7 buildings here, the house that's being built - I don't know whose it is,
8 I don't even know whose house is to the right, the one that has been
9 destroyed. From this position you can't see the location of the incident
10 marked as incident number 4. That's quite simply not possible.
11 Q. Thank you. Was this photograph taken to the north of
12 Ozrenska Street or to the south? Where's Ozrenska Street in relation to
13 this photograph?
14 A. It's behind this house, behind these trees. It depends because
15 it's not a straight street. It's in a mountainous terrain and the street
16 winds between the houses that were built in the area. It's not to the
17 north -- well, in fact, it's more to the north. Yes, that's quite
18 certain.
19 Q. And your positions?
20 A. Well, our positions were here in the depth, in the depth. You
21 can't see where our positions are in the photograph.
22 Q. Thank you. So where was the photographer standing in relation to
23 your positions, was he closer to the Muslims or was he further away from
24 the Muslims in relation to your trenches in fact?
25 A. The photograph I was shown a while ago -- well, my impression is
Page 30261
1 that that was taken from Demino hill. They tried to find a good angle to
2 take the photograph, because I'm saying that from the positions of the
3 4th Company it wasn't possible to see the location of incident number 4.
4 That was, quite simply, impossible.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this be admitted into
7 evidence?
8 JUDGE KWON: Ms. West.
9 MS. WEST: No objection.
10 JUDGE KWON: Exhibit D2430.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we see 23967, please.
12 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Can you tell us whether you recognise this photograph? What can
14 we see in the photograph and where was the photograph taken from?
15 A. You can really see Ivana Krndelja Street in this photograph. It
16 was photographed from the right-hand side. This can be seen because of
17 the layout of the buildings and you can see that these buildings
18 obstructed the line of sight, as well as these residential buildings
19 here, they obstructed the line of sight to incident -- to the location of
20 incident number 4.
21 Q. Thank you. Which street is Ivana Krndelja Street, the one to the
22 left or the one to the right by these blocks?
23 A. The skyscraper to the left and the residential buildings are to
24 the right, so it's between the skyscrapers and the residential buildings.
25 That is the location of the Ivana Krndelja Street.
Page 30262
1 Q. Thank you. Can you tell where this was taken from, from the
2 ground or from where exactly, from what sort of position?
3 A. I don't know. It was certainly from some other position, not
4 from the position that was under the control of the 4th Company because
5 it would have been quite impossible to take this photograph from that
6 position. It was to the right, to the town, to Vraca, I mentioned
7 Demino Brdo, Demino hill, a minute ago. Perhaps this photograph was
8 taken from that hill, from Demino hill.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this photo please be admitted
11 into evidence.
12 JUDGE KWON: Who took these pictures, Mr. Karadzic, by the
13 Defence team?
14 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, these were taken by the Prosecution
15 and you see the 65 ter numbers are Prosecution 65 ter numbers.
16 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
17 They were also used in Galic case? Do you know that, Ms. West?
18 MS. WEST: Not at the moment, but I will have that answer for you
19 momentarily.
20 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Yes, this will be admitted as
21 Exhibit D2431.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
23 Could we now see 1D6099.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. I would like to ask you the following. Could you tell us whether
Page 30263
1 from your positions in Ozrenska Street, was it possible to use automatic
2 rifles and single shots in order to hit the location marked as number 10
3 with precision?
4 A. It would have been impossible to do that. You know that the
5 enemy lines were in front of us and if anyone appeared on a roof and
6 opened fire, for example, on a woman with a child, well, that would have
7 been quite mad. It's a mad idea, a mad assumption.
8 But I'd like to say something else. If you have a look at the
9 previous photograph, if you have a look at the angle or the point from
10 which the photograph was taken, you can see that -- you can see certain
11 things to the right. If you have a look at the location of incident
12 number 4, you can see that the 4th Company is to the left. That's where
13 our area of responsibility is. Why would it be impossible to hit that
14 area? Well, because first of all it's a great distance and an automatic
15 weapon isn't intended to hit targets at such distance. It is possible,
16 but you can't really target such a location. You can't use an automatic
17 weapon because from our positions it was not possible to see the location
18 of incident number 4. That's the first thing. And secondly - and this
19 is incredibly important - do you think people would -- people who were in
20 trenches, who were spending their lives in trenches, do you think they
21 would have the idea of leaving the trenches, climbing up on some sort of
22 hills, and opening fire on some women? Well, that's quite crazy.
23 Q. Why would that be crazy?
24 A. Well, any honourable man, any honourable combatant, any
25 honourable Serbian combatant wouldn't allow such things. All of these
Page 30264
1 combatants were parents, they had their children, they had their own
2 families. So imagine someone opening fire on a woman and a child, how
3 could such a person know that that woman and that child were Muslims.
4 I'd like someone to explain that to me.
5 Q. Thank you. Is there also the issue of that person's security if
6 that person climbed up onto a roof?
7 A. Absolutely not. That would have meant certain death.
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
9 MS. WEST: Mr. President, I think we're gearing towards that
10 direction again.
11 JUDGE KWON: Do you follow, Mr. Karadzic?
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, but I'm in a hurry. I'm
13 trying to save some time.
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. We have dealt with the incidents. I wanted to ask you about the
16 strength of your company.
17 A. Well, that depended. Its strength depended on the conditions, on
18 the situation in the battle-field. There were 120 men in the company at
19 the most on the basis of the list. However, no more than 80 per cent of
20 them were covering the lines.
21 Q. Thank you. Where were these combatants from?
22 A. All these soldiers were on the whole from these private houses.
23 They were quite simply people who were defending their homes and their
24 families. In fact, the families had moved out because it wasn't possible
25 to live there. This might seem to be a sort of fabrication for people
Page 30265
1 who aren't familiar with the situation, but as for the living conditions
2 there, well, that is an entirely different story.
3 Q. Thank you. What was the age of the men in your unit?
4 A. Well, it wasn't favourable and this does demonstrate the fact
5 that people were, in fact, defending their homes, their families. There
6 were quite a few people who, in fact, had never served in the army, so
7 you can't really speak about an elite elected unit. They were there and
8 they had to decide whether to defend themselves or not, whether to live
9 or not. They were just defending their territory, nothing else.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we see 1D20359, 1D20359.
11 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. While waiting for that to come up, where was the enemy facing
13 you?
14 A. At the other end of the line of confrontation. We had a flank
15 line of confrontation. There was the 101st Mountain Unit and then we
16 also had the 102nd Mountain Unit. They were far stronger than we were.
17 The ratio wasn't 10:1, it was 20:1.
18 Q. Thank you. Are you familiar with this document and did you sign
19 it?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Did you ever submit reports to anyone and how frequently?
22 A. Well, on the whole you submit reports to the battalion commander
23 and this is done twice during the day, about 10.00 in the morning and in
24 the evening, unless there's an extraordinary situation and it's
25 impossible for someone to find time to write anything.
Page 30266
1 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us anything about the contents of this
2 document? What is the gist of the document? How is the unit described?
3 A. Well, this document shows that I tried to report to the superior
4 command on the situation in the unit and to report on their age,
5 structure, on the type of men in the unit, because you should bear in
6 mind that these people never had any rest. They didn't leave to have
7 rest. So I informed them about the psychological situation, how well the
8 unit was equipped, and all other negative aspects that involved in the
9 war. This was in 1992. In December we were waiting an attack that was
10 to take place two days later on Gojino Brdo, Gojino hill, and we
11 sustained quite significant casualties there. It was in December 1993.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this document please be
14 admitted into evidence.
15 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
16 Shall we give the number.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D20359 receives number D2432,
18 Your Honours.
19 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
21 Could we have a look at 23066 -- 1D23060. 1D23060.
22 JUDGE KWON: It's noted as one of the associated exhibits. Let
23 us check. I'm told it's not released.
24 MR. ROBINSON: I think Dr. Karadzic may have read the number
25 wrong. It's 1D20360.
Page 30267
1 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Robinson. It's coming.
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Could you tell us something about this document.
4 A. This is a report again, a daily report. To tell you the truth, I
5 can't read this, the letters are very small. Could we zoom in a bit so
6 that I can see what it's about?
7 There's just one thing I would like to clarify here. If the men
8 were waiting at the firing position -- well, often we had to ask for
9 assistance because the combatants at the positions were waiting for
10 orders from above. If they did that all the time, they wouldn't survive,
11 because the situation was such that each and every combatant had to take
12 action in order to save his life. So this is a daily report to the
13 battalion command and it shows what the situation was on that day,
14 although I can't see the date at the top of the document. But there's no
15 doubt about the fact that I signed it. It was the 1st of January, new
16 year, in fact.
17 Q. Thank you. And does it say -- well, that was for yesterday, but
18 does it say that today the enemy hasn't opened fire nor have you and you
19 don't have water?
20 A. We don't have water, we don't have electricity, we have nothing.
21 The conditions can't be described. The people who are listening to this
22 now can't even understand what the situation was like. It's impossible
23 to understand what people are prepared to do in order to defend their
24 honour, to defend their lives, and to defend their homes, and so on and
25 so forth, to defend their icons and their religion.
Page 30268
1 Q. Thank you.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this be admitted, please.
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Exhibit D2433.
4 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, during the course of the
5 examination we would actually like to tender a number of reports similar
6 to this that has been shown to the witness in the proofing process that
7 describe the daily life on the line where he was working and are authored
8 by him. And I was wondering whether or not the Chamber would allow
9 Dr. Karadzic to simply elicit from the witness that he has had the
10 opportunity to review the specified documents which are in the statement
11 and that they appear to be reports authored by him which describe the
12 situation at his position during the war. And if that would be
13 sufficient, we could save a lot of time.
14 MS. WEST: Mr. President, may I be heard?
15 JUDGE KWON: Of course, yes, Ms. West.
16 MS. WEST: Thank you, Mr. President. I would object to this
17 procedure. It was something that I think we discussed even with a
18 witness that I took during the last portion of the Prosecution case in
19 chief. We did it through a 92 ter process, where a lot more information
20 was elicited about a list of documents that she had put together. It was
21 at that point that Mr. Robinson objected and I make the same objection
22 here.
23 JUDGE KWON: Further -- if my memory serves correct, it's not
24 consistent with the Chamber's past practice. If they're relevant, put
25 them to the witness; otherwise, there's no need for those documents -- I
Page 30269
1 will consult my colleagues.
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes, the Chamber is of the view that if Mr. Karadzic
4 wants to tender those documents, he needs to put those documents to the
5 witness.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Has this been admitted?
7 Yes.
8 I'd like to call up 1D20361. 1D20361.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Mr. Zurovac, can you tell us briefly, is this your document?
11 When was it drafted and what does it represent in a nutshell?
12 A. Believe me, I can't see much. In any case, it was around
13 Christmas 1993. It's not very visible. It says here yesterday around
14 12.00, or rather, 12.20, the enemy --
15 THE INTERPRETER: It is impossible to interpret because the
16 witness is reading too fast and mumbling.
17 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Zurovac, the interpreters are not able to keep
18 up with your speed, so could you slow down when reading out something.
19 So could you repeat your answer, please.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a report, a daily report,
21 sent to the battalion command which was drafted on the 7th of January,
22 1993, on Orthodox Christmas. One can see from this report that on
23 Orthodox Christmas, the enemy launched an attack on our positions from
24 the line on the flank, from Asimovo Brdo, which was the biggest threat
25 for us in any case. In this report I mention some of the shortcomings
Page 30270
1 and shortages. There were a lot of such things, both in our lives as
2 well as in war time, especially in war time.
3 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. It says here: "Combined artillery and infantry attack." What is
5 that?
6 A. First there is artillery support to move us from our trenches,
7 and after that the infantry starts using grenades and infantry weapons in
8 order to move our line in their favour. I suppose that they counted with
9 the fact that it was a holiday, that the men had gone home to celebrate,
10 and they thought that our strength was diminished and that's why they
11 attacked us, I suppose.
12 Q. Thank you. You say here that there was indiscriminate shelling.
13 What kinds of shells were used against you?
14 A. Interestingly enough, when it comes to shelling in this specific
15 case and in general, that company was like a gateway for all those who
16 wanted to break through our firing positions, to break us up, to open
17 Sarajevo, but it's not a good word because Sarajevo was enclosed. That's
18 why I'm not using the word "to open" Sarajevo. However, they wanted to
19 break us up and to move us further in the depth of our positions and that
20 would have given them the control of entire Ozrenska Street. That was
21 the main goal. It is very important for those who know the situation in
22 the case that they had broken up our lines, they would have come behind
23 our lines and they would have captured the entire unit.
24 Q. Can we look at the last sentence to see what that is about.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Scroll up a little, please.
Page 30271
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, scroll up.
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Could you please read this out aloud.
4 A. Of course I can.
5 "How do we regulate the men's rest? I'm afraid that exhaustion
6 and tiredness will take their toll."
7 Let me explain, those people were on the front line from the
8 first day to the last day without any breaks. People who had a bath only
9 exceptionally, perhaps once in a month or even in two months. The
10 conditions of life were such that a normal mind cannot grasp that, as
11 I've already told you.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted? I'm looking
14 at the time. I'm in your hands about the break.
15 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. This will be admitted as next exhibit,
16 i.e., Exhibit D2434, and we'll break for 25 minutes and resume at
17 13 past 4.00.
18 --- Recess taken at 3.47 p.m.
19 --- On resuming at 4.15 p.m.
20 MS. WEST: Mr. President, if I can interrupt. Just one quick
21 administrative matter. There were two photos that were used during the
22 direct and you had asked the provenance of them. Both were used in the
23 Galic case, that's D2428 and D2429. In the first one, 28, that's the
24 photo we saw that vantage point was the street and we saw a bunch of
25 hash -- or lines on it and that was used in the Galic case with the
Page 30272
1 victim of the sniping incident, Nafa Taric, and she was drawing the
2 barricades. As for D2429, again that was a photo actually of Nafa Taric
3 of the location of the incident itself.
4 JUDGE KWON: How about 2430 and 2431?
5 MS. WEST: I do not believe those were used in the Galic case.
6 JUDGE KWON: But they are from the Prosecution. Thank you.
7 Yes, Mr. Karadzic, please continue.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I would like to call up
9 1D20346.
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Mr. Zurovac, please, in a nutshell, tell us what is this document
12 about?
13 A. I can't see the document well, I can't read it, because the
14 letters are too small.
15 I can answer your question. I know what this document is about.
16 It speaks about very bad conditions in the unit. In addition to the age,
17 structure, in addition to absenteeism from the defence line, there were
18 other problems in the unit. People leave without permission and I
19 informed the commander that the situation in the unit is alarming. This
20 is a daily report for the 31st of August, 1993.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we zoom in on the bottom of the
22 document.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Let me take a look, please.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Who cosigned the report?
Page 30273
1 A. It was Ljubo Bozic who was actually the driver of the unit's
2 lorry.
3 Q. Thank you.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted?
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D20346 receives number D2435,
7 Your Honours.
8 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to call up 1D20351.
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Mr. Zurovac, what does this document contain? It was issued on
12 the 12th December 1993.
13 A. Can this be zoomed in? I'll try to read it. This was -- this is
14 the situation as I found it. I can say that we never provoked the enemy
15 during a cease-fire. We were never in a situation to provoke them
16 because the enemy was much more powerful and it actually suited us when
17 there was a cease-fire, when there was no shooting, because we knew that
18 the enemy was much stronger than us.
19 Q. Thank you. What about the UNPROFOR visit that is mentioned here,
20 can you tell us how often UNPROFOR visited you, whether they found it
21 difficult or easy?
22 A. UNPROFOR came very often to our line because it was one of the
23 most difficult lines on the Sarajevo front line. I suppose that an
24 agreement would be reached not to open fire. I don't know how objective
25 their reports were. I hope that they were. They would come and they
Page 30274
1 would see the same things that I mentioned in my daily reports. That
2 would be that.
3 Q. Thank you.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted?
5 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Zurovac, here you say that soldiers were forced
6 to fire back. Could you explain to us how or why were those soldiers
7 forced to fire back in response to the provocation from the Muslim side?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this is self-evident.
9 If they opened artillery fire in support of a future infantry attack,
10 people who were in trenches would respond. To avoid a situation where
11 they would be captured alive they had to return fire in order to save
12 their lives because the enemy was only 15 or 20 metres away from them.
13 JUDGE KWON: Yes. My question is this: You referred to enemy
14 fire as provocation. What would have happened if you had not fired back?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, in that case we would
16 either have to withdraw or we would have all been killed.
17 JUDGE KWON: That would not have been provocation. What did you
18 mean here by "provocation"?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Provocation, those were short
20 bursts of fire on our positions along the entire separation line.
21 Sometimes those provocations ended without any further, more complex
22 actions. That would be provocation. That was done to disturb peace in
23 the unit. People could not feel safe and at ease. All means were used
24 in order to put us in an unfavourable position. That's how things are
25 done in war time. I would call this a type of special warfare.
Page 30275
1 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
2 This will be admitted as Exhibit D2436.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
4 I have to correct the transcript. The witness said that that
5 fire could be preparation for an imminent attack, not a future attack as
6 an attack sometime in the future. The witness used the word "imminent,"
7 not "future," and that's why there was response to the fire. A future
8 attack can happen any time.
9 JUDGE KWON: Do you confirm that you used the word "imminent,"
10 Mr. Zurovac?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely. That was some sort of
12 announcement. The enemy could have given up on that. However, it could
13 have been an introduction into an attack or aggression against our line.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I would like to call up
15 1D20354. Can this be zoomed in for the benefit of the witness.
16 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. This is a similar report. Can you explain its meaning,
18 especially here where you say that provocations were stepped up during
19 the night along the entire line of defence. "At 3.00 we had to respond
20 and shut the enemy down."
21 A. We suffered most problems from the 101st Mountain Brigade which
22 was on our right-hand side flank. If we were provoked by the unit that
23 was in front of us towards the Ivana Krndelja Street, the unit on our
24 flank opened mortar fire and fire from all other types of weapons. We
25 suffered major losses as a result of that. In my company I lost 54 men,
Page 30276
1 not even including those men that had come to assist us and civilians.
2 It was a killing field, a true execution site.
3 Maybe I should continue. We didn't have electricity, we didn't
4 have water. To be even more specific, sometimes we did not even receive
5 food for a fortnight. It was very risky for anybody to come to us, to
6 our unit, because on two occasions the drivers that were bringing us food
7 were killed in their vehicles.
8 Q. Thank you. Here we can see that you had some people who had
9 defected. How often did that happen? What was their ethnic affiliation?
10 A. It happened very often. They were Serbs. They would take
11 opportunities when they were in trenches together. They usually paid
12 those who were with them. They would put a sign on their chest on which
13 it says: Don't shoot, I'm a Serb. There were a lot of such instances,
14 especially when Croats and Muslims started fighting. On that day as many
15 as 24 men crossed over to our side.
16 Q. It says here that they were Serbs. Were they Serbs or mostly
17 Serbs?
18 A. Serbs. When I say 24 men, I mean when the Muslims and Croats
19 started fighting, those were mostly Croats who defected on that day. The
20 rest of them were exclusively Serbs. Let me explain. They had been
21 members of the BH army before that.
22 Q. What's Corkovic's name, in fact, is he a Serb?
23 A. Let me just have a look. Where is that name?
24 Q. Second line, second paragraph.
25 A. Corkovic, Serb, and the other person who was a policeman was sent
Page 30277
1 the psychiatric hospital. People fought in such situations. They'd lose
2 it, they'd spatially and temporally lost. People would simply lose it.
3 They wouldn't know where they were, they wouldn't realise that they were
4 in danger. So I don't know what this person's ethnicity is. I stated
5 that he was allegedly a policeman here, Hibor [phoen] Corkovic, but he
6 was sent to Sokolac to the mental ward for treatment.
7 Q. Thank you. And Figuric, that is a Croatian surname. Was this
8 person a Croat?
9 A. That's quite possible. I can't remember exactly because a lot of
10 years have passed since then --
11 MS. WEST: Mr. President, I don't think this is of huge
12 consequence, but I just again want to remind Mr. Karadzic of the form of
13 his questions.
14 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
15 Let's continue.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could this be admitted
17 into evidence?
18 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Shall we give the number.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D20354 receives number D2437,
20 Your Honours.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we now see
22 1D20352.
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Could you please have a look at this document. What does it say
25 in the first line? I'll read it out. It says:
Page 30278
1 "On the basis of observations, the enemy is massing forces in
2 Zagorska Street ..."
3 Is that your street?
4 A. Yes, it is. I have to clarify this. When I mentioned the byroad
5 a while ago, we don't actually see it. At the foot of Zagorska Street,
6 it was possible for them to bring in lorries to transport two batteries,
7 for example, that we couldn't even see.
8 Q. You didn't open fire on them, did you?
9 A. No, we didn't --
10 Q. Thank you.
11 MS. WEST: Mr. President, I think it's -- I don't know if he
12 doesn't understand or he's not listening --
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'll rephrase it.
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Did you fire on them when they brought in manpower and equipment
16 to that area?
17 A. No, because we couldn't see anything and we couldn't just open
18 fire blindly for numerous reasons. First of all, we couldn't see the
19 enemy; and secondly, we would be using a lot of ammunition and this
20 doesn't make sense.
21 Q. With regard to these attacks and provocations, with regard to the
22 fire that was opened on your area of responsibility in Ozrenska Street,
23 what was your opinion of this, what was your attitude toward this?
24 A. Well, as I said a while ago, I said what was at stake. It was
25 quite simply a matter of clearing that area of Serbs in Sarajevo. They
Page 30279
1 were to be driven out towards Lukavica and later this was, in fact, done
2 in accordance with the Dayton Agreement. These people were, quite
3 simply, driven away and Sarajevo now is what it is.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted?
6 JUDGE KWON: Did we not admit this? This is a different one.
7 Yes.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D20352 receives number D2438,
9 Your Honours.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we now see
11 1D20356. Could we zoom in.
12 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Have a look at the first two sentences. Could you please tell us
14 something about them.
15 A. "Yesterday at 1145 hours the enemy improvised an attack on our
16 lines or on the lines of the 2nd and 3rd Platoon. The attack lasted for
17 20 minutes. We were forced to return fire. There were no consequences
18 for our combatants. Yesterday we visited the lines ..." and so on and so
19 forth.
20 So this is a quite usual war of attrition. There are such
21 customary provocations. In the course of the day and in the course of
22 the night, a unit is provoked. As I said a while ago, it's a special
23 type of war, you try to exhaust the combatants. If the combatants can
24 have a rest and sleep -- if they can't sleep and rest, well, the enemy is
25 constantly opening fire because they're rested, more rested than we are,
Page 30280
1 and this is, in fact, why they engage in such provocations, in order to
2 incapacitate the other side, the unit, my unit, in fact, if I can put it
3 this way.
4 Q. And -- thank you.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this be admitted into
6 evidence?
7 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D20356 receives number D2439,
9 Your Honours.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we see 1D20362, please.
11 MS. WEST: Mr. President, if I can just ask when the document is
12 brought up if I can at least briefly see the English. I'm familiar with
13 these documents, but I just want to see it for a short time.
14 JUDGE KWON: Is it not possible to follow in English with your
15 personal computer?
16 MS. WEST: I was only seeing the B/C/S for the last few
17 documents --
18 JUDGE KWON: That's probably --
19 MS. WEST: Oh -- yes, I could do that.
20 JUDGE KWON: Because the witness said he was not able to see the
21 small fonts.
22 MS. WEST: And I understand, and I realise why you're doing it --
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
24 MS. WEST: -- but if we could just -- and I can manage it. Thank
25 you.
Page 30281
1 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
2 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters would also appreciate it if we
3 could see the English on the screen as it is difficult to follow when the
4 witnesses read at such speed.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
6 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Could you please tell us something about the first sentence and
8 what does it mean, in fact?
9 A. "For several days, from 1400 to 1500 hours, the enemy has been
10 shelling our positions with 82-millimetre and 120-millimetre mortars.
11 About a dozen shells fell yesterday of an unknown calibre. There were no
12 casualties. Material damage was huge ..."
13 Well, what I have to say is in the course of the war, shells that
14 aren't customary did appear and professional soldiers and officers didn't
15 know where they had been made, where they had come from. In such cases,
16 you have artillery preparations which is followed by an infantry attack,
17 et cetera. So if you have a look at the document, the one from yesterday
18 and all these reports, you can see that attempts are constantly being
19 made to move our positions behind the Mojmilo hill, towards Lukavica --
20 or, in other words, attempts are being made to drive people away from our
21 territory, our houses, our ancestral land.
22 Q. Why is the material damage huge?
23 A. Well, one of their batteries was behind the railway station and
24 sometimes heavy artillery would completely destroy a privately owned
25 house. It would raze the house to the ground. These weren't isolated
Page 30282
1 events. There's probably a document about this and photographs that show
2 that this happened. An entire house might be destroyed by artillery fire
3 and not only one house. For example, if they thought that our people
4 were in those houses, the houses would be covered by fire and only the
5 foundations, the concrete foundations, of those houses would remain.
6 Q. Thank you.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this be admitted into
8 evidence?
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D20362 receives number D2440,
11 Your Honours.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we now see
13 1D20367.
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Could you please have a look at the first and last sentences.
16 A. "Recently, enemy snipers have been particularly active, beginning
17 to shoot at around 0700 hours and going on throughout the day."
18 That's a fact.
19 "Yesterday in Gojino Brdo, Mihajlo Brbonjic was lightly wounded,
20 but was sent back to his position having been treated at the clinic.
21 "This morning the enemy sniper was active again. Troop movements
22 have been reduced to a minimum."
23 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat the last
24 sentence.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It might be useful to point out
Page 30283
1 that the snipers opened fire from the skyscrapers at Pero Kosoric Street.
2 They were at the level of our lines so they could cover our lines. They
3 could completely cover our lines. Whenever someone appeared -- well, the
4 troops would joke, they'd put someone's cap on a pole, raise it, and then
5 they would open fire. Fabrika -- the factory Zrak remained in Sarajevo,
6 they produced sights there, so they had a lot of snipers. They had these
7 snipers, that's one thing. And secondly, all those who were involved in
8 shooting before the war as a sport were engaged as snipers. So not only
9 in our units but in all units snipers inflicted quite a lot of harm.
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. I fear that in line 10 something missed. The witness said that
12 there were men who had been -- who practiced shooting as a sport before
13 the war and they were engaged by the enemy. Is that what you said,
14 Mr. Zurovac?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Thank you. Could you just say whether there were any civilian
17 casualties as a result of this sniper activity?
18 A. Yes, of course. In Ozrenska Street, as I said, a hundred men
19 from my company were killed. They're men who came to assist us, men from
20 my unit as well. In the area under our control, over 20 civilians were
21 killed. There were seven or eight women who were killed. What did the
22 snipers do? Well, it's very sad, but they targeted everything. In the
23 area of Vraca they killed a cow. So they would fire on anything.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this be admitted into
Page 30284
1 evidence?
2 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D20367 becomes Exhibit D2441,
4 Your Honours.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
6 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Mr. Zurovac, which unit was facing you, which Muslim unit was
8 facing you?
9 A. I've already said that there was the 101st Mountain Brigade on
10 our flank and below us there was the 102nd Motorised and Infantry and
11 Mountain Brigade. The 101st and the 102nd Brigade. One was facing us
12 and the other was on our flank.
13 Q. Thank you. What sort of weapons did your enemies have? As far
14 as you know, what sort of fire did you come under?
15 A. Well, at the beginning until I appeared there, I think that we
16 had better weapons, but soon, once I had arrived, they had all types of
17 weapons. And later when I left, I think that their weapons were even
18 better than ours. So they had all types of weapons that are used in a
19 war.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If I could have some understanding
22 for this document. Could it be admitted into evidence. I would just
23 like the witness to see 1D02681, 1D02681.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. In that area of responsibility, was there a change in units?
Page 30285
1 Were there any changes apart from the names of the units or did they
2 remain as they were throughout the war-time period?
3 A. They remained as they were. As far as I know, our units remained
4 as they were. The beginning -- perhaps there was some changes, but
5 nothing much. Perhaps the unit would be given a different code, the men
6 remained where they were from 1992 up until the end of the war.
7 Q. Thank you. Please have a look at this order from the
8 101st Brigade and tell us what sort of artillery they had and where did
9 the commander of the 101st Brigade deploy these weapons, and does this
10 tally with the information you had at the time?
11 A. Could this please be enlarged because it's really not very
12 legible. If we could enlarge it, that would be good because I can't read
13 it at all.
14 I see that 120-millimetre weapons are mentioned, 105-millimetres,
15 82-millimetres, and so on and so forth. We knew about that. Well, how
16 did we know about that? Because of the action they took. From
17 August 1993 until the end of the war they had superior fire-power, not
18 only superior manpower. Here you can see that they had all types of
19 weapons and we know this for two reasons. We know this because when they
20 would open fire on us, we knew what they were using. Soldiers know what
21 is being used to open fire, and there were quite a few Serbs who defected
22 from their units. They came over to our side. And these people provided
23 us with information on the weapons that they had and on the lines that
24 they were holding.
25 Q. Thank you. Could I now ask you to have a look at the part that
Page 30286
1 says "VP" and tell us what that means. Do you know anything about these
2 locations that were facing your line, the line of confrontation?
3 A. Yes, of course I know these locations. You should bear in mind
4 the following. A minute ago, I said that Asim hill and Milina Kosa --
5 when you go towards Milinkladska Street, well, in that area they can
6 dominate our positions. This is important to bear in mind. And
7 secondly, as you are probably aware, they often opened fire from all
8 buildings, all roofs. You can see this in the documents. In a letter
9 from General Morillon, Izetbegovic and his artillery located at the
10 hospital in Kosevo -- he is warned about that and they opened fire from
11 all those locations. And they would put a lot of mortars on lorries so
12 these mortars would be mobile. And they would fire a few shells for --
13 and then they would change their location. So in such cases there was
14 nothing we could do. We didn't have such possibilities.
15 As I said a while ago, the byroad below Hrasno -- no units from
16 our company could control that byroad. Anything could happen there and
17 we wouldn't be aware of it because we couldn't observe anything.
18 Q. Thank you. Unless it's a leading question, I hope I can put
19 this. Do you know these who have 82 mortars, three of them, were they
20 positioned in an inhabited area?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Thank you. The second firing position in the annex?
23 A. Yes, the same thing applies. You see, normally people are
24 mistaken in what they believe these fire -- firing positions to be or
25 targets because normally they would target inhabited areas, hospitals,
Page 30287
1 et cetera. From the military point of view, they were legitimate
2 military targets. However, then the question would arise of them having
3 shelled an inhabited area. Those who were on the spot were able to see
4 that this wasn't true because with very few exceptions, Sarajevo was the
5 say it was, bearing in mind the separation lines that didn't see that
6 much fighting. After all, Mr. Ghali said himself when he visited
7 Sarajevo that there were places that had seen far worse fighting than was
8 the case there.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] With some flexibility toward the
11 Defence, can this document be admitted into evidence?
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
13 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D02681 becomes Exhibit D2442,
14 Your Honours.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you for that. Thank you to
16 Mr. Zurovac.
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. One other question. Mr. Zurovac, you're a writer, aren't you?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I am done with the witness.
22 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
23 Yes, Ms. West.
24 MS. WEST: Mr. President, could I just have a moment, please.
25 May I ask for the assistance of the usher, please.
Page 30288
1 Cross-examination by Ms. West:
2 Q. Good afternoon, sir.
3 A. Good afternoon.
4 Q. I just want to take up on one of the documents that Mr. Karadzic
5 showed you.
6 MS. WEST: May we have D2434, please.
7 Q. This is one of your documents from January 7th, 1994. And in his
8 question to you at page 33, line 21, today, he said:
9 "You say here there was indiscriminate shelling ..."
10 And you went on to answer that question affirmatively. Can you
11 tell us, looking at this document, to what part of it you referred when
12 you spoke about "indiscriminate shelling"?
13 A. Let me just see, let me find that. Can you point me to the
14 paragraph where I said that?
15 Q. No, that's my question for you. I want you to point me to the
16 paragraph where it talks about indiscriminate shelling.
17 A. I don't understand you. You want me to ask you where
18 indiscriminate shelling took place? Is that your question?
19 Q. No, let's try this again. When Mr. Karadzic showed you this
20 document he said that this document suggests that there was
21 indiscriminate shelling of your positions or of -- out of the city onto
22 Bosnian Serb areas. Show me in this document where it says there was
23 indiscriminate shelling.
24 A. I don't see that place here.
25 Q. Let's move on. You spoke earlier today --
Page 30289
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I draw the attention of
2 everybody in the courtroom to line 5, which starts with the words "around
3 1400 hours the enemy shelled our positions randomly or indiscriminately
4 and at irregular intervals ..."
5 I don't know whether this has been interpreted or not, but here
6 in the Serbian it says clearly --
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "At around 1400 hours the enemy
8 shelled our positions randomly and at irregular intervals. About 10
9 times 82-millimetre shells fell ..."
10 That's correct. Your question was what?
11 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, I find it inappropriate for you to
12 intervene for that reason. You can take up that issue in your
13 re-examination.
14 But, Ms. West, would you like to take up from there?
15 MS. WEST: I will.
16 Q. In this sentence:
17 "The enemy shelled our positions randomly ..."
18 When you say "our positions," you mean your military positions,
19 do you not?
20 A. Shells can fall short or overreach. So this is random shelling.
21 Q. Of your positions, so the "positions" means military positions,
22 does it not?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Okay. Earlier today you spoke about -- at transcript page 34 you
25 said that the enemy:
Page 30290
1 "... wanted to break through our firing positions, to break us
2 up, open Sarajevo, but it's not a good word because Sarajevo was
3 enclosed. That's why I'm not using the word 'open' ..."
4 Can you tell us now exactly what do you mean? Is it your
5 position that Sarajevo was encircled?
6 A. That was not my position. Sarajevo is closed from the inside.
7 In Sarajevo there were criminals who became high-ranking officers in the
8 enemy army overnight. There is a sea of documentation about women who
9 asked the mayor who was in Dobrinja when Sarajevo would be open and he
10 said Sarajevo would be open when the last German mark leaves the pockets
11 of the poor people and ends up in the hands of the criminals. If we are
12 talking about the encirclements, we can talk about three different
13 circles around Sarajevo.
14 THE INTERPRETER: The witness should be kindly asked to speak
15 slower. It is impossible to interpret every word.
16 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Zurovac, in order for the Chamber and the public
17 to understand what you are saying through interpreters, please slow down
18 when you speak. Please speak slowly. Thank you.
19 Yes, Ms. West.
20 MS. WEST: Thank you, Mr. President.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
22 MS. WEST:
23 Q. Sir, we've heard from several witnesses already and there are
24 more to come who indicate that there was an SRK policy of containment of
25 Sarajevo. Do you agree with that?
Page 30291
1 A. No.
2 Q. And it was the objective of the 2nd Battalion to keep the city
3 under siege, was it not?
4 A. No.
5 Q. The Court will hear some evidence from another Defence witness
6 that that was exactly the case, that the 2nd Battalion was purposely put
7 there to keep the city under siege. Your disagreement with this notion,
8 can you tell us the basis for that?
9 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President. I think when putting
10 that proposition to the witness and for the parties, we should at least
11 hear who is being referred to, if necessary in private session.
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. West, would you like to respond?
13 MS. WEST: Out of an abundance of caution, let's go into private
14 session.
15 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
16 [Private session]
17 (redacted)
18 (redacted)
19 (redacted)
20 (redacted)
21 (redacted)
22 (redacted)
23 (redacted)
24 (redacted)
25 (redacted)
Page 30292
1 (redacted)
2 (redacted)
3 (redacted)
4 (redacted)
5 (redacted)
6 (redacted)
7 (redacted)
8 [Open session]
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. West, please continue.
10 MS. WEST: Thank you, Mr. President.
11 Q. Sir, who is Milan Hrvacevic?
12 A. Milan Hrvacevic was an assistant battalion commander. I can
13 explain why Milan Hrvacevic spoke the way he did. Milan Hrvacevic --
14 Q. No, thank you. Let me ask you this: He was the deputy commander
15 of the 2nd Battalion, correct? Your battalion.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I was not allowed to interrupt
17 Prosecution witnesses.
18 JUDGE KWON: No, he didn't answer the question put by Ms. West so
19 she was directing to answer her question, but let us see. Let's
20 continue.
21 We'll allow the witness to answer any questions and we'll not
22 stop the witness. Let's continue.
23 MS. WEST:
24 Q. Sir, he was the deputy commander of your battalion; correct ?
25 A. Yes.
Page 30293
1 Q. And as you've already indicated, you understand that he said that
2 the 2nd Battalion was there to keep the city under siege. So my question
3 for you is: Since Mr. Hrvacevic was higher up in command than you, do
4 you think he might have had more information than you to make such a
5 statement in 1996?
6 A. When was this statement provided and under what conditions?
7 Maybe that would be interesting. It is well-known that Milan Hrvacevic
8 went there to interpret at UNPROFOR. He was captured. He was beaten up.
9 He was tried, and subsequently it turned out that all those statements
10 were not valid, they were all refuted.
11 Q. So, sir, that didn't answer my question. But would he -- let's
12 try it again. Would he have been in a position to have more information
13 than you, such that he would have made this statement in 1996?
14 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President, may we know to whom this
15 statement was made, was it made to the OTP or to the Bosnian authorities?
16 MS. WEST: Yes, fair enough. It was an OTP statement in 1996.
17 Q. Sir?
18 JUDGE KWON: Yes, now the English translation has been completed.
19 Could you repeat your question, Ms. West.
20 MS. WEST:
21 Q. Would Milan Hrvacevic have been in a position to have more
22 information than you such that he would have made this statement in 1996?
23 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, I think that's calling for
24 speculation as to what motivation he might have had to make that
25 statement. If she wants to ask him what was his position and what was
Page 30294
1 the witness's position, then that's one thing; but to speculate as to why
2 he would have made that statement, we don't think that the witness is
3 capable of giving an answer to that question that's helpful to the
4 Chamber.
5 JUDGE KWON: Can we move on, Ms. West?
6 MS. WEST: Yes, we can. Thank you.
7 Q. Sir, you spoke today about several documents and in a few of them
8 we saw that you employed the term "provocation" when describing ABiH fire
9 coming out of the city. And the Honourable Judge Kwon asked you
10 specifically what you meant by that term. And one of the things you said
11 in response is:
12 "It could have been an introduction into an attack or aggression
13 against our line."
14 Sir, would you agree with me that the term "provocation," was, in
15 fact, an effort to break the siege -- or what you term "provocation" to
16 be was, in fact, an effort to break the siege?
17 A. Absolutely, I stand behind my words.
18 Q. So just to be clear, when you say they were provoking the SRK,
19 you believe that they were trying to break the siege?
20 A. Not only do I believe that; that's correct.
21 Q. And do you think they were justified in trying to break the
22 siege?
23 A. I suppose it was justified from the point of view of an intention
24 to take the entire state of Bosnia-Herzegovina, to place it under
25 control, and to create a state that would suit the policy of
Page 30295
1 Alija Izetbegovic.
2 Q. Well, we'll get to that shortly. But tell us, do you think that
3 one of the reasons they were trying to break the siege was lack of food
4 and supplies that they had within the city?
5 A. I don't think so. You know only too well that Sarajevo had a
6 tunnel under the airport and that through that tunnel they transported
7 not only food and footwear and clothes, but even weapons.
8 MS. WEST: May we have 65 ter 24069A, please.
9 Q. This is a report from the UNHCR office, the Special Envoy for the
10 former Yugoslavia. It's the entire report -- it's a compilation of
11 reports, but we are going to look at specifically one that's dated
12 June 1993. This is a period of time when you were there. And on the
13 right-hand corner, "One year of air-lift" -- and I believe there should
14 be B/C/S, but I'll go slowly through this. "One year of the air-lift" on
15 the right-hand side, it talks about:
16 "... Sarajevo air-lift celebrating its 4.000th flight to the
17 besieged capital, having flown 44 million kilos of humanitarian relief
18 items. The air-lift started on July 3rd, 1992, and some 20 nations have
19 contributed ..."
20 It goes on in the middle of the paragraph.
21 "After over one year of siege, Sarajevo survives thanks to the
22 resilience of the population and the aid ..."
23 And then the next paragraph, there's a comment from the
24 High Commissioner, and she said:
25 "... 'condemns the actions of those who are blocking the delivery
Page 30296
1 of food, medicine, fuel, water, power, gas, and other humanitarian
2 assistance in a cowardly attempt to starve and kill innocent civilians.'"
3 Now, sir, do you not agree with me that one of the reasons the
4 ABiH would want to break the siege is because they were lacking in all
5 these things that she just mentioned, food, medicine, fuel?
6 A. I don't agree with you, not fully. In Sarajevo people who were
7 starving were Serbs, Muslims, and Croats. It was a state of war. You
8 cannot look at things so narrow mindedly. If Sarajevo was the biggest
9 camp in Europe, it would be a camp for the Serbs. I don't agree with
10 this because we were never in a situation to stop a humanitarian convoy
11 or do any such thing.
12 MS. WEST: Mr. President, I would tender this document.
13 MR. ROBINSON: Objection, Mr. President. The witness hasn't
14 confirmed anything about the document and it's not directly contradictory
15 to his testimony in the sense that it's not something he would be
16 expected to have known about in those terms.
17 MS. WEST: Mr. President, it was June 1993. This man had already
18 been there for almost a year and on -- right on the outskirts of this
19 sieged area. Although he's suggesting that other people were suffering
20 as well, it directly goes to impeachment of him.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber agrees that this document is related to
23 the credibility of the witness, so for that reason, only for that reason,
24 we'll admit this. So we'll admit this to the extent it relates to the --
25 relates to this witness's -- relates to the impeachment of this witness's
Page 30297
1 evidence.
2 Yes, Mr. Robinson.
3 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. Would that be limited to the
4 paragraph?
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
6 MR. ROBINSON: Thank you.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Document 24069A receives number P5988,
8 Your Honours.
9 [Prosecution counsel confer]
10 MS. WEST:
11 Q. Sir, let me put a theory to you and then I'm going to ask you a
12 question about it. It has been your suggestion and generally the Defence
13 case that the ABiH attacks or provocations, as you put it, were offensive
14 in nature and that the SRK only responded. Yet, by virtue of the siege,
15 the entire event was offensive in nature on the part of the SRK because
16 it was the encircling party. To keep the city under siege and perhaps
17 even to split the city required offensive measures by the SRK. And by
18 "offensive," I mean aggression and I mean what you term as "provocation."
19 And in this case, the ABiH was trying to deblock the city to get the city
20 open. Do you disagree with my position?
21 A. I don't disagree -- I don't agree with it. How can a person be
22 an aggressor against his own country, against his own house? This is
23 what I'm wondering. Is that possible? Can 15.000 people hold a siege
24 around the 60.000 men in the 1st Sarajevo Corps? These are my counter
25 questions in response to your question.
Page 30298
1 Q. So, sir, I can understand -- I gather what your position is, but
2 I would ask you to not ask any questions and just try to respond so we
3 can get through this.
4 MS. WEST: May I have 65 ter 240 --
5 JUDGE KWON: Ms. West, I note the time. It's time to take a
6 break. We'll break for 25 minutes. And I see that the -- whether the
7 nature of the attack, offensive or defensive, was raised by the Defence
8 in the first place, but I was wondering whether we are not gearing
9 towards the realm of jus ad bellum. So please bear that in mind.
10 We'll take a break and resume at quarter to 6.00.
11 --- Recess taken at 5.19 p.m.
12 --- On resuming at 5.46 p.m.
13 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. West, please continue.
14 MS. WEST: Thank you.
15 May we have 65 ter 24078, please.
16 Q. Sir, this is a document dated December 16th, 1993, and under the
17 first paragraph -- can you see this?
18 A. I can't read anything.
19 Q. Okay. I can agree it doesn't look great, but I will go slowly
20 through it. Paragraph 1 says:
21 "The enemy did not give up from their offensive intentions to
22 unblock Sarajevo and link the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Corps of the so-called
23 ABiH on the line ..." and it names some places "aiming to split our
24 forces and bring them into an unfavourable operational position."
25 MS. WEST: If we can go to page 4 in the English, page 3 in the
Page 30299
1 B/C/S.
2 Q. Under "the commander's decision" it says:
3 "I decided to perform an active defence with the Corps' main
4 forces ..."
5 Let's just stop there for a moment. Sir, can you tell us what
6 active defence means?
7 A. That means that the units were in a state of readiness.
8 Q. Doesn't that just mean -- isn't that just another term for
9 offence, active defence is the same as offence?
10 A. No. The idea of defence doesn't contain with -- doesn't contain
11 the idea of offence, of offensive action.
12 Q. All right. Well, let's go down. It says --
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have to comment on the
14 transcript. It says that defence excludes the idea. It doesn't say it
15 does not contain.
16 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: There is no difference.
17 JUDGE KWON: I don't see much difference and the interpreters
18 noted that there's no difference.
19 MS. WEST: Should I continue?
20 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please.
21 MS. WEST:
22 Q. If we continue on, at the end of this paragraph it talks about
23 the goals and it says:
24 "... the main goal to:
25 "Prevent the Muslim forces from unblocking their part of the town
Page 30300
1 and the occupation of the special purpose industrial objects ..."
2 Sir, do you agree with me that what the Muslims were trying to
3 do, the ABiH forces, was trying to break the siege?
4 A. Yes.
5 MS. WEST: If we can go to in English page 5. It's page 3 of the
6 B/C/S. I think we're there on the B/C/S.
7 Q. Under (b), this still regards goals, it says:
8 "In the area of Sarajevo take control over ..." and it lists a
9 number of places "and later on, upon the arrival of fresh forces, take
10 control over Mojmilo, by executing operational activities from Hrasnica
11 cut the communication towards Igman and Central Bosnia to Muslims from
12 Sarajevo; link the operational formation of the Corps in the
13 Lukavica - Ilidza axis and establish conditions for the division of
14 Sarajevo in two parts."
15 Sir, would you agree with me that splitting Sarajevo into two
16 would constitute an offensive act by the SRK?
17 A. Well, to a certain extent, yes. But I would like to know when
18 this order was issued. I would like to know what the date of the order
19 is.
20 MS. WEST: Your Honour, I would tender this document dated
21 December 16th, 1993.
22 MR. ROBINSON: No objection.
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes, this will be admitted.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Document 24078 receives number P5989,
25 Your Honours.
Page 30301
1 MS. WEST: May we have P05980. This is a document the
2 Trial Chamber saw very recently.
3 Q. This is dated April of 1994. Thank you. And under "tasks" it
4 says Muslim forces -- under 2.
5 "Muslim forces are creating conditions for unblocking Sarajevo
6 and launching attacks along other axes and lines of contact with our
7 units."
8 If we go to number 8, which is the next page of the English, it
9 says:
10 "Fortify positions around Sarajevo by erecting wire and concrete
11 barriers which would in turn strengthen the belief that they are really
12 blocked ('in a camp')."
13 Now, sir, by April of 1994 you had been there already for some
14 time, at least November of 1992. Had you seen any wire or concrete
15 barriers around the city like described in this document?
16 A. No, no, I really hadn't.
17 Q. Now, today at page 47 you were talking about weapons and you were
18 making a comparison between the weapons the SRK had and the ABiH had, and
19 you said: At the beginning until I appeared there I think we had better
20 weapons but soon they had all types of weapons. And then you looked at a
21 document that was dated June 13th, 1995, it was an ABiH document, and you
22 made some comments on it. I'd like to talk a little bit more about the
23 comparison of weapons.
24 MS. WEST: And the first thing I'd like to look at is
25 65 ter 07737. It's a map -- and, Mr. President, I know the witness is
Page 30302
1 having difficulties seeing this. I wonder if the usher could actually
2 give him the map itself. It might be easier.
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
4 MS. WEST: Again, this is -- it's map 30 in the Sarajevo map
5 book.
6 Q. Sir, this is the map that you have on the screen in front of you.
7 And you can -- can you tell us what the title of this map is? What does
8 it say in the middle?
9 A. Commander's decision with regard to the attack Lukavica 95 --
10 well, we had a work obligation at the time, I have to point this out, so
11 I'm not familiar with this at all.
12 Q. But that's fine.
13 A. I can't say anything about it.
14 Q. That's fine. But I want to talk about 1995 in regards to weapons
15 because during your direct you already spoke about the month of June 1995
16 and regarding weapons. I want to look at the little white box in the
17 bottom of this map and you can turn the page of your book and you will
18 see it bigger.
19 A. Unfortunately, I can't read anything here.
20 Q. If you turn the page of that map book, you will see it in very
21 large print. There you go. So this is an SRK balance of forces in 1995,
22 and on the left-hand side we see SRK forces and their equipment and on
23 the right-hand side we see ABiH forces and their equipment. And if you
24 look through this you'll see that the SRK had four tanks, ABiH had two;
25 SRK had four 155 howitzers, ABiH had one; SRK eight 122 howitzers, ABiH
Page 30303
1 five. And as you go through it, you'll then see SRK had 14, 105
2 howitzers, ABiH two. And then we'll go down to mortars, they had 36 to
3 18, 120-millimetre mortars, ABiH had 12; SRK had 40, 82-millimetre
4 mortars, ABiH had 16.
5 Sir, contrary to your position earlier today, would you agree
6 with me by the SRK's estimation, it had far more weapons than the ABiH
7 did in 1995?
8 A. No, I was speaking about infantry weapons.
9 Q. So your limit your earlier testimony to infantry weapons and not
10 these types of weapons?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Let me ask you this: As regards 120-millimetre mortars, did your
13 battalion have 120-millimetre mortars while you were there?
14 A. I don't know about the battalion, but I do know that my company
15 did not have any such mortars.
16 Q. What about 82-millimetre mortars, did your battalion have those?
17 A. Probably.
18 Q. What about multiple-rocket launchers, did the battalion have
19 those?
20 A. I don't know.
21 MS. WEST: May we have -- may I tender this, Your Honour?
22 MR. ROBINSON: Well, the witness hasn't confirmed anything from
23 that, Mr. President.
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE KWON: Because it's related to his evidence he gave in
Page 30304
1 examination-in-chief and also credibility, we'll admit this. We'll give
2 the number.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Document 07737 becomes Exhibit P5990,
4 Your Honours.
5 MS. WEST: May we have P5984, please.
6 JUDGE KWON: Does the 65 ter number 7737 also include the zoomed
7 legend? If it does not, let's include it as well.
8 MS. WEST: Thank you very much.
9 Q. Now, we're going to look at a document from June of 1993. This
10 regards your 2nd Battalion and your company, and this is a period of time
11 when you were in the company; correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And is this an accurate representation of what -- the status of
14 ammunition in your company at the time?
15 A. I can't remember. I can't remember now whether this is correct,
16 whether this was actually the status, but I assume that to be the case,
17 although this was signed by the commander who preceded me. He was
18 killed. But I assume that this was the situation. I was present there
19 at the time but in the capacity of a private.
20 Q. And number 7 and 8, grenades 60-millimetre and 82-millimetre,
21 those refer to mortar shells; correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 MS. WEST: P5983, please.
24 Q. Now, this moves into October of that same year, so a little bit
25 later. It's a list of weapons in your company, and again it's signed by
Page 30305
1 the previous commander to you. But do you have any reason to believe
2 that this is not accurate?
3 A. It's not accurate because it was signed by a driver of the lorry.
4 I have to clarify certain things here. Since a mortar detachment was
5 formed earlier on far from our rear, then when we believed there might be
6 an attack, we would report to the battalion command and they would send
7 us two or three mortars. Because if you know what a mortar is and what
8 mortar fire is, well, if you have 50 metres between the lines, then you
9 can't use the weapon because the shell might hit the person who fired it.
10 Q. That's exactly right and the Trial Chamber has heard evidence on
11 that.
12 MS. WEST: Let's move to P5985, please.
13 Q. This is actually a document signed by you and it's December of
14 1993.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And as regards these -- this ammunition you wrote:
17 "We have none of the above-mentioned ammunition. I request that
18 you deliver this ammunition to me."
19 And included in this are 60-millimetre mortar shells and
20 82-millimetre mortar shells. So you agree by December 1993 you had been
21 using those type of mortar shells, had you not?
22 A. I apologise, was this 1993 or 1995. It's not very legible. If
23 it's 1993, I'll go back to what I was saying. If it's December 1993, we
24 were expecting an attack that took place in December, in fact, and we
25 asked the battalion command to supply us, to provide us, with two mortars
Page 30306
1 and with ammunition that we did not have in the warehouse.
2 Q. Okay. But just two months earlier there is a list of weapons for
3 the company in which it was listed 60-millimetre and 82-millimetre
4 mortars, suggesting that you did have those types of mortars two months
5 earlier; and then six months earlier it was the same indication. So are
6 you suggesting now that prior to December of 1993 you did not have
7 mortars?
8 A. No, I'm not trying to say that. I don't know what the situation
9 was before I came to the unit and before I became company commander.
10 Every company had mortars, but when the mortar platoon was established in
11 the rear on a hill -- well, this isn't the front lines for good reasons
12 because that would be in the vicinity of the enemy. So when that mortar
13 platoon was established on Poljino [phoen] hill, when we had information
14 according to which an attack might be launched, we report to the
15 battalion command. The battalion command would take two or three mortars
16 and they were given to us as assistance in such cases. In December, a
17 few days after that event, there was an intense attack on Gojino hill.
18 We lost some of our positions and we sustained quite significant
19 casualties. This was on Gojino hill.
20 Q. Tell us what type of targets you would use 60- and 82-millimetre
21 mortars for?
22 A. We could only fire on the flank. We couldn't fire in front of
23 us. It was on the flank where the enemy was located and where our unit
24 was located. That was behind Asimovo hill. There used to be a prison
25 there and their units were deployed there and they threatened us from the
Page 30307
1 flank. So we could only fire on the flank with these shells. In front
2 of our line, it would have been interesting if someone had been harmed by
3 mortars.
4 THE INTERPRETER: The witness is kindly asked to repeat the last
5 sentence, which was not clear.
6 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Zurovac, could you kindly repeat the last
7 sentence.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said it would be interesting if
9 we could determine the situation at the front line. As far as I know,
10 there were no casualties towards Dolac Malta, that's the front line, no
11 one died as a result of mortar shells. This is at least the information
12 that I had.
13 MS. WEST:
14 Q. Sir, as I understand your testimony, you only used the mortars to
15 fire behind you and not in front of you; is that right?
16 A. What do you mean behind us? You're not right. I'm talking about
17 our flank. I don't know how your people are interpreting. I'm talking
18 about our flank. The deployment of the company towards Mol [phoen].
19 There is a flank, that's what I mentioned a little while ago where there
20 was the 1st Mountain Company and the area which was our forward position
21 towards Malta.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Transcript. Transcript, two
23 interventions. First of all, on line 4, page 69, the witness said: Such
24 weapons are not kept on the forward line. Second of all, here the flank
25 is being interpreted as "behind" instead of "beside." The witness never
Page 30308
1 said "behind," it should have been interpreted as "beside," instead it
2 was interpreted as a "flank."
3 JUDGE KWON: Apart from that issue of flank, could you repeat
4 your intervention with respect to page 69.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I said that the witness stated that
6 when that battery or that group was established, the mortars were moved
7 behind the lines because such weapons are not kept on the forward line.
8 And this was not recorded when the witness stated that.
9 JUDGE KWON: The transcript says -- reflects that -- as
10 witness -- witness as having said:
11 "But when the mortar platoon was established in the rear on a
12 hill -- well, this isn't the front line for good reasons because that
13 would be in the vicinity of the enemy."
14 I think that reflects what you suggested, Mr. Karadzic. Shall we
15 continue?
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, but it would be really good if
17 the interpretation was accurate.
18 JUDGE KWON: Yeah, it's with that speed interpreters are having
19 very hard time -- to keep up with us.
20 Yes, let's continue, Ms. West.
21 MS. WEST: Thank you, Mr. President.
22 Q. And so that I clearly understand, it's your testimony that you
23 never used mortars to fire in depth into the city of Sarajevo; is that
24 correct?
25 A. Yes, that's correct.
Page 30309
1 Q. Okay. Now today at the beginning of your testimony you spoke
2 about a number of -- or at least two of the sniping scheduled incidents
3 and you were giving us some ranges. Now, just so that we are absolutely
4 clear, your company covered part of Ozrenska Street; correct?
5 A. Correct.
6 Q. And is it not true that there were at least 12 snipers in the
7 2nd Battalion?
8 A. I wouldn't know that, I really wouldn't.
9 Q. Were there any in your company?
10 A. No.
11 MS. WEST: May we have 65 ter 24077, please.
12 Q. This is a document, part of which is handwritten, and it's from
13 January 1994, signed by you. Now the part that we see is handwritten, do
14 you recognise that handwriting?
15 A. I do.
16 Q. Whose handwriting is that?
17 A. This is the handwriting of a foot soldier, but it's neither here
18 nor there. You can ask me questions.
19 Q. Okay. This appears to be a listing put together of fugitive
20 soldiers or soldiers who deserted. I'd like to go to number 25 in the
21 list, and under number 25 we have Rajko Ciro - excuse my
22 pronunciation - and it says here "AP," the registration number, and then
23 "sniper." Under that "automatic M56 sniper" and then there's a word in
24 your language. Tell me what this represents. What does that information
25 represent to you?
Page 30310
1 A. This list was compiled of those men who had left the unit with
2 weapons. This person, Ciro Rajko, who unfortunately got killed, he left.
3 For a while he was an assistant company commander. He left and he took
4 this sniper rifle with him. I don't know how he had gotten by it. The
5 weapons had been obtained much before I joined. While I was there, I'm
6 sure that we did not have a single sniper rifle in the unit.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have to intervene on the
8 transcript once again. A very important word is missing from the
9 transcript. The witness said: This is a list of the men who had left
10 the unit with weapons and they were being searched for the weapons that
11 they had taken with them. That's why they were being searched, and this
12 was not recorded.
13 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Zurovac, do you confirm that?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. This is actually a list of
15 the weapons who had been taken by people. One went to Nevesinje and the
16 other to Visegrad, and this is a list of weaponry that had been taken by
17 the people who left the unit and we were looking for those weapons. And
18 those people had been issued with those weapons in 1992. We were looking
19 for them and this is a list of the weapons and the people that we were
20 looking for.
21 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
22 Judge Lattanzi also confirms that it was so translated into -- in
23 French. Let's continue.
24 MS. WEST:
25 Q. This document is dated December 1994. So by this time you had
Page 30311
1 been in this company for well over a year; is that right?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And you said that this particular person left the unit with a
4 sniper rifle but that was -- you don't know how he -- I don't know how he
5 got it, is that correct, even though you'd been there for already over a
6 year?
7 A. Yes. You have to bear in mind that I did not come when those
8 people were being issued with the weapons. This list contains at least
9 90 per cent of the men who were no longer members of the unit. The
10 commander ordered us to compile a list of the weapons that had gone
11 missing and that were being looked for and this is the list. For some
12 weapons we knew where they were, we knew where some people were, but not
13 all of them. You can see that very well from the list.
14 THE INTERPRETER: The witness is being asked to slow down,
15 otherwise the interpreters cannot vouch for the accuracy of the
16 interpretation. Thank you.
17 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Zurovac, you are again requested to speak slow.
18 Thank you for --
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'll do my best.
20 MS. WEST:
21 Q. Sir, you speak about these people in the abstract, but this
22 particular person you actually said you knew. You said he got killed, he
23 left. For a while he was an assistant company commander. Do you deny --
24 are you telling us that he did not act as a sniper for your company?
25 A. I'm sure he was not. Ciro Rajko had never served the army. He
Page 30312
1 could not be a sniper. He left and went to Pale.
2 Q. Let's look at number 39. Do you recognise the person listed
3 under number 39?
4 A. When I joined the unit, that person was not there. He had gone
5 to Bijeljina.
6 Q. That --
7 A. Which means that he had taken the weapons that were issued to him
8 at the beginning of the war.
9 Q. But this, too, indicates that he took with him a sniper rifle;
10 right?
11 A. Please, I have just told you that he was issued with weapons at
12 the beginning of the war. I don't know what those weapons were. I am
13 just saying that when I was commander and even when Major Loncarevic was
14 commander, we did not have a single sniper rifle in the unit and I'm
15 stating that clear and loud once again.
16 MS. WEST: Go to number 83, please.
17 Q. Do you recognise this person's name?
18 A. I don't have that on the screen.
19 MS. WEST: It's the last page of the B/C/S.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
21 MS. WEST: Perhaps I can give the witness a hard copy of this.
22 Oh, I think we have it now.
23 Q. Do you recognise that name under number 83?
24 A. I do.
25 Q. And he too had a sniper rifle; correct?
Page 30313
1 A. I don't know. That person had left. He had moved out of Bosnia;
2 I don't know where. At the beginning of the war he was a company
3 commander.
4 JUDGE KWON: Ms. West, I'm afraid there are two sets of documents
5 in this number. Could we show page 4 of this document and whether --
6 check whether it is the same document or different one.
7 In the meantime, Mr. Zurovac, you confirm that this is your
8 signature?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
10 JUDGE KWON: Page 4 in B/C/S. And in English 5 or 6.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's that.
12 JUDGE KWON: Should be the next -- in English it says "Claimed
13 weapons," so could you take up from there, Ms. West.
14 MS. WEST: Thank you. I think if we could go to page 8 of the
15 English and if there is some -- we can later ensure that this is the
16 correct correlation.
17 Q. On 8 English for 83 we have Blagoje Savic and in the B/C/S we
18 just saw the same name and I said to you:
19 "He too had a sniper rifle, correct?"
20 And you said:
21 "I don't know that person had left, he moved out the of Bosnia; I
22 don't know where. At the beginning of the war he was company commander?"
23 But, sir, my question is: When he left, he left with a sniper
24 rifle. That's what this list represents; correct?
25 A. Well, I know.
Page 30314
1 Q. You know because you personally know? You personally know he
2 left with a sniper rifle?
3 A. Yes, yes. You have to bear in mind that it often happened that
4 people left weapons -- took weapons, sold it, or when they joined a less
5 dangerous unit -- this was a very risky unit and people defected. Why
6 don't we use the right term.
7 MS. WEST: If we can look at 89 and we'll just stay with the
8 B/C/S for now.
9 Q. 89, above your signature, we have a person named Gusic. Do you
10 see that? And he too has a sniper rifle. Do you recognise that name?
11 A. Of course I do. At the beginning of the war, Gusic was seriously
12 wounded and he left and he never reappeared. This is a list of claimed
13 weapons. What the unit had from the beginning of the war and even before
14 sniper squads had been set up with the battalion, I don't know. I don't
15 know how it was set up, whether it was set up at all, if we're talking
16 about a sniper squad. I don't know whether that was set up and how it
17 was set up.
18 Q. Sir, can you tell us why these people would have left your
19 company with sniper rifles if they themselves were not snipers?
20 A. Of course I can tell you. I've just told you that people
21 defected. At the beginning of the war those people were probably issued
22 with all those weapons and they took those weapons away. They smuggled.
23 They sold it on the black market. There was black market for everything.
24 Jerko Gusic was probably issued with a rifle. At the beginning of the
25 war he was seriously wounded and he left and went --
Page 30315
1 THE INTERPRETER: And the interpreter didn't hear where that
2 person went to.
3 MS. WEST:
4 Q. Sir, can you tell us where that person went to?
5 A. I believe that he went to Vojvodina. I'm not sure. I did not
6 find him in the unit when I joined it.
7 MS. WEST: Mr. President, I'd like to tender this document.
8 MR. ROBINSON: No objection.
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes, this will be admitted.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Document 24077 becomes Exhibit P5991,
11 Your Honours.
12 MS. WEST: May we have 65 ter 24076.
13 Q. And this is a lengthy document. It is actually the log-book for
14 the 4th Company.
15 MS. WEST: And, Mr. President, if I may give a hard copy to the
16 witness and a copy to the Defence because it's otherwise unwieldy to use.
17 JUDGE KWON: Any objection, Mr. Robinson?
18 MR. ROBINSON: No. We appreciate that.
19 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
20 MS. WEST: And for the record, I have marked pages in the copy
21 for the witness because those are the pages I'm going to go to.
22 Q. So take a moment, sir, and flip through this and tell me if you
23 recognise this. Sir, do you recognise this particular book or this type
24 of log-book?
25 A. No. I don't recognise this, at least I don't recognise the pages
Page 30316
1 that I have leafed through. I did not join the company at that time. I
2 was still imprisoned in Mostar.
3 Q. Okay. And I see that you're looking at the beginning of the
4 book, but as you go through it, it actually goes into the year 1994 and
5 that was a period of time when you were with the company; correct?
6 A. I still haven't reached that part. I'm at the month of
7 July 1992. You say that pages are enumerated. I can't see that.
8 Q. Well, let me just ask you a general question, then. Was it
9 customary for companies to keep a log-book?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Did your company keep a log-book?
12 A. No, why would it keep a log-book, given the fact that there were
13 daily reports. Every day two daily reports were sent. I find this
14 document suspicious. I don't see why a log-book would be kept on top of
15 the two daily reports every day.
16 Q. Okay. Let's go through some of the pages.
17 MS. WEST: I'd like to look at page 19 in the English and also
18 page 19 in the B/C/S.
19 Q. And for you, sir, I've put a little green tab on page 19 so you
20 could get to it more readily and I think you're on it now. This is
21 July --
22 A. Very well.
23 Q. July 1992. In the right-hand corner it says "4th Platoon" and
24 then "August 1992" on the right-hand side. And then it says Karlo Bauer
25 was issued with a sniper rifle. Do you recognise that name?
Page 30317
1 A. No.
2 Q. If we can go to page 34 --
3 A. No, no, no, really no -- this is a Croat judging by the first and
4 the last names, so no.
5 MS. WEST: Page 34, please, in both the B/C/S and the English.
6 Q. And up in the left-hand corner we see "4th Platoon." It had 400,
7 7.62-millimetre; 225, 7.9-millimetreS; and 30 for sniper rifle. This
8 appears to be in November 1992 when you came into the company. At that
9 time, were there any sniper rifles in the company?
10 A. I apologise, how many sniper rifles did you say there were?
11 Q. I'm reading what the English says. You can read the B/C/S. It
12 says "30 for sniper rifle." Now, I'm not suggesting that it means
13 30 sniper rifles. My question to you is: Were there any sniper rifles
14 in the company in November of 1992?
15 A. At the beginning of the war I don't know. "30 for," do you know
16 what this means? "30 for sniper rifles," not probably even a
17 well-equipped battalion has that, let alone a company with only a hundred
18 men.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we see what unit this is and I
20 can't see anywhere that it says "30 for sniper rifles." And also, what
21 is the provenance of this document? There is no ERN number on what we --
22 on the document that we see on the screen. We see it in the hard copy
23 but not on the screen.
24 JUDGE KWON: I expect to hear that in the coming questions. Let
25 us continue.
Page 30318
1 MS. WEST: Thank you.
2 If we can go to page 45 in both the B/C/S and the English.
3 JUDGE KWON: But just while we are on this page in B/C/S, shall
4 we ask the witness to read that fourth line.
5 MS. WEST: Yes, if we can go back to page 34.
6 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we are on that page in the B/C/S version.
7 MS. WEST:
8 Q. Witness, did you hear Judge Kwon's request?
9 A. The 1st Platoon?
10 Q. Mm-hmm --
11 JUDGE KWON: The --
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The 1st Platoon -- do you mean the
13 left-hand side of the page or the right-hand side of the page?
14 MS. WEST:
15 Q. Left side --
16 JUDGE KWON: Left, which start with "Sare" ...
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The 1st Platoon, I don't have that
18 here. Maybe it is not well --
19 JUDGE KWON: Do you see the monitor in front of you? Do you see
20 the fourth line which starts with probably "Sare"?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
22 JUDGE KWON: Could you read that line aloud so that we can hear
23 the interpretation.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "Sare SOK sniper" something, very
25 hard. I don't know what this SOKN means. It's very difficult to read
Page 30319
1 this and discern the meaning.
2 JUDGE KWON: Could you read the first line, then, please ?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "The 1st Platoon - 640 KM," is it,
4 "7.62" --
5 JUDGE KWON: Then, Mr. Zurovac, the fourth line should read "Sare
6 30 KM," doesn't it -- shouldn't it?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "Sare 30KM," yes, probably -- I
8 mean I -- this is not ...
9 JUDGE KWON: Very well. I'll leave it at that.
10 Let's continue.
11 MS. WEST: Thank you, Mr. President.
12 Our information is that this document came from the 4th Company
13 of the 2nd Battalion of this brigade; however, at this point I will not
14 ask to tender it where the witness himself has not indicated that it was
15 customary in his battalion to keep it. But I'd like to move on to
16 65 ter 12226, please.
17 Q. Now, sir, you joined the 4th Company in November of 1992;
18 correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And you left sometime in 1994; is that right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. When exactly, what month?
23 A. I left on the 10th of April or the 10th of March, 1994. I can't
24 remember exactly when, but I went to do work obligation.
25 Q. Now, we're looking at a listing from your company in September of
Page 30320
1 1993 and it's a listing of wounded soldiers.
2 MS. WEST: And if we can go -- we can see it both in the English
3 and in the B/C/S. We actually see -- may I have page 5 of the English,
4 please. And the listing in B/C/S is just the same names.
5 Q. We see your name on this. Were you wounded in September of 1993?
6 And that listing is --
7 A. I was. I was wounded.
8 Q. And also from the top we see number 3, a Karlo Bauer who was also
9 wounded and this is the same name of the person we just saw in the
10 log-book at page 19 who was issued --
11 A. I apologise --
12 Q. Hold on, please. This is the same name of the person we saw on
13 page 19 in the log-book who was issued a sniper rifle. Do you remember
14 him?
15 A. No. This name means nothing to me.
16 MS. WEST: I'd like to tender this document, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Document 12226 becomes Exhibit P5992,
19 Your Honours.
20 MS. WEST:
21 Q. Now, earlier today at page -- at transcript 57, when we were
22 talking about the siege and I asked you whether you thought the ABiH was
23 justified in breaking the siege and you said:
24 "I suppose it was justified from the point of view of an
25 intention to take the entire state of Bosnia-Herzegovina, to place it
Page 30321
1 under control and create a state that would suit the policy of
2 Alija Izetbegovic."
3 Do you remember saying that?
4 A. Yes, I do.
5 Q. And can you tell us what his policy was?
6 A. Establishing an Islamic state of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a
7 whole.
8 Q. Separate from that, do you believe that the ethnic groups should
9 not live together under one state and related to that?
10 MR. ROBINSON: Objection, Mr. President, this doesn't arise out
11 of the direct examination.
12 JUDGE KWON: Would you like to respond to that or will you move
13 on?
14 MS. WEST: I was trying to clarify something that he had brought
15 up in the cross, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE KWON: What -- what subject do you refer to, Ms. West?
17 MS. WEST: The policy of Alija Izetbegovic, but if Your Honour
18 prefers I will move on.
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 JUDGE KWON: Please continue, Ms. West.
21 MS. WEST:
22 Q. Sir, we were just speaking about that policy and you said it was
23 establishing an Islamic state of Bosnia-Herzegovina as a whole. And this
24 is something that you -- a subject matter you spoke of in your statement
25 as well. Now, sir, my question to you is this: During the direct
Page 30322
1 examination Mr. Karadzic briefly asked about your time prior to 1992, and
2 he mentioned that you were in a camp. Is that correct?
3 A. Correct.
4 Q. And --
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Which statement is the Prosecution
6 referring to again? Can we receive this?
7 JUDGE KWON: Probably in answer to your question.
8 Yes, Ms. West, you can clarify.
9 MS. WEST: Thank you. Well, it was -- well, I suppose it would
10 be the final of the four statements of this particular witness. I don't
11 know what the ID number is, but it's the witness's statement. But at
12 this point I was asking about his earlier testimony on direct in which he
13 stated that he was in a camp.
14 Q. And you said yes. And was that the Ljubuski camp?
15 A. No. I said it was a prison in Mostar, not a camp.
16 Q. Okay. My apologies. But was it at Ljubuski or in Ljubuski?
17 A. I don't know. I passed through Ljubuski, not only I but all the
18 prisoners when we were taken away for an exchange in Stolac.
19 Q. So it's your testimony that you just passed through Ljubuski; is
20 that right?
21 A. Well, there were some beatings behind some sort of a stadium
22 there, then they crammed us into buses, the same ones that they had used
23 to take us there; and we were taken for an exchange at Todorovic's near
24 Stolac.
25 Q. Now, in your earlier statement - and this can be of any one of
Page 30323
1 them - it's paragraph 9, you said:
2 "I was transferred from Mostar to Ljubuski and I suffered even
3 greater misery and beatings there. When they arrested me I weighed
4 99 kilos" --
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
6 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President, this is beyond the scope
7 of direct and particularly unfair given the fact that the Chamber said
8 that this material was irrelevant so we didn't lead it.
9 MS. WEST: Mr. President, may I be heard?
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
11 MS. WEST: During the direct he spoke about his time at the camp,
12 and although we did have a discussion about the material being
13 irrelevant, in paragraph 11 of his statement he indicates that -- he
14 speaks about his motivation for joining the SRK, which is related to this
15 camp and that's why I'm getting into it now.
16 JUDGE KWON: Did he say "camp"?
17 MS. WEST: If I can have a moment, please.
18 JUDGE KWON: Do you have more to conclude your cross-examination,
19 Ms. West? How much more do you need?
20 MS. WEST: Only a few moments.
21 JUDGE KWON: I'm sorry?
22 MS. WEST: Only a few moments.
23 Q. Sir, I'm not going to qualify what Ljubuski was, but as a result
24 of being there you indicated that you sobered up in paragraph 11 of your
25 statement. You said that:
Page 30324
1 "... increasing obvious hatred that the Croats and Muslims had
2 toward the Serbs forced us to sober up and see the falseness of
3 brotherhood and unity and to think back to the suffering of the Serbs in
4 the First and Second World Wars, when we were exterminated en masse."
5 Can you tell us what you mean by "sober up"?
6 A. Of course. In the Second World War I was left without my
7 parents. The Serbs have a historical memory such as it is and to avoid
8 1941 from being repeated when the Serbs in Herzegovina were killed
9 en masse, when pits in Herzegovina were filled with Serbian corpses, in
10 order to make sure that this didn't happen to me and to all Serbs, well,
11 150.000 Serbs fled from Sarajevo in order to avoid such things happening
12 to them, things that happened to them in the First World War and the
13 Second World War. This shows that they sobered up. They sobered up in
14 the sense that people came to their senses. Were they to wait for them
15 to be thrown into a pit again, into the same pit that my father was
16 thrown into, was I to be thrown into such a pit? To prevent such things
17 from happening, it's quite natural that I behaved as I did and everyone
18 else had no choice. They were faced with a fait accompli.
19 MS. WEST: Thank you, Mr. President. I have no further
20 questions.
21 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
22 Mr. Karadzic, do you have re-examination?
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just two or three questions,
24 Your Excellency, very brief questions.
25 Re-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
Page 30325
1 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Zurovac, when we spoke about indiscriminate
2 fire on positions, what was hit in that indiscriminate fire?
3 A. On the whole we knew where their positions were, where our
4 positions were, and so on. They would destroy buildings, private houses,
5 in indiscriminate firing so there was nowhere for us to sleep, nowhere
6 for us to take shelter. They would destroy houses, anything that might
7 serve a man was, quite simply, destroyed.
8 Q. Thank you. How many private houses were destroyed in this
9 indiscriminate fire?
10 A. Everything on our combat line a hundred per cent. There are
11 documents, there's footage after Dayton, and everything shows that all
12 those houses were destroyed. Unfortunately, they are still in that
13 state.
14 Q. Thank you.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please have a new
16 translation in which the term "randomly" would be changed to
17 "indiscriminately." Nonselective.
18 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. And was there any firing in the depth?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Were there any civilian casualties and was that as a result of
22 fire snipers?
23 A. On the whole as a result of sniper fire, to a certain extent as a
24 result of artillery fire, but most of the casualties sustained were
25 sustained as a result of sniper fire.
Page 30326
1 Q. Thank you. When you were asked about who had snipers, you asked
2 about what a Tandzara is. What does it mean?
3 A. A Tandzara is an M48 rifle, an old Yugoslav rifle.
4 Q. Thank you. Regardless of whether there were any sights
5 available, did you have snipers to whom you as a commander assigned
6 tasks?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Thank you. I won't ask you about the theoretical implications of
9 a siege. What was the combat task that your company had?
10 A. Defence exclusively.
11 Q. Of what?
12 A. Houses, territory, ancestral land, the places where we were born,
13 where we lived. This was a working area and the population was
14 90 per cent Serbs, so we were defending our lives.
15 Q. Thank you, Mr. Zurovac.
16 A. You're welcome.
17 JUDGE KWON: As regards your request for retranslation,
18 Mr. Karadzic, the Chamber will leave it at that. Simply, if you need
19 to -- if you like that part retranslated, I would like you to put it in
20 writing.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Zurovac, that concludes your evidence. On
23 behalf of the Chamber, I would like to thank you for your coming to
24 The Hague to give it. Now you are free to go.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
Page 30327
1 [The witness withdrew]
2 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Tieger.
3 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Mr. President. I didn't know if the
4 Chamber was about to rise or wanted to raise another matter, but there's
5 one quick matter I think I need to address before we adjourn. So you
6 just let me know when you think the time is.
7 JUDGE KWON: Now you have the floor, Mr. Tieger.
8 MR. TIEGER: Thank you. I simply wanted to respond to an e-mail
9 that Mr. Robinson sent concerning a proposed change in the witness order
10 and I'm afraid we do have to protest against this effort for the
11 following reason. As the Defence and I believe the Trial Chamber are
12 both aware, we are required by necessity to prioritise the translation
13 and therefore the subsequent analysis of documents potentially to be used
14 in cross-examination. And in that connection, the multiple shifts in the
15 witness order that have already taken place in the past week or so have
16 strained those resources and, therefore, the ability and the capacity of
17 the responsible attorney to deal with the material that is capable of
18 shedding light on the events at issue and potentially the credibility of
19 the witness. So on the heels of those previous changes, this does
20 unfairly disadvantage us, and I raise that point.
21 Now, I want to be clear, I'm not asserting that it is impossible
22 and, as always, we're prepared to do our utmost to accommodate the
23 Chamber. But particularly given the fact that this appears to be some
24 theoretical concern about the return of the witness which we believe
25 could be adequately addressed simply by commencing the witness's
Page 30328
1 examination-in-chief and having the witness then return, as we would
2 presumably do by retaining the current order, we consider that the impact
3 on the Prosecution under these circumstances would be unduly unfair.
4 JUDGE KWON: Let me be clear, next one is Malinovic?
5 MR. ROBINSON: That's correct, Mr. President.
6 JUDGE KWON: And in any event, the witness in question was one of
7 the witnesses we were supposed to conclude by the end of this week --
8 this week, was it not?
9 MR. TIEGER: Not originally, but as things ultimately transpired,
10 yes. But as I say, that -- that, as I recollect, is a result of multiple
11 changes that ultimately accelerated that witness.
12 JUDGE KWON: I noted that you commented you would be able to deal
13 with it, but after the --
14 MR. TIEGER: With --
15 JUDGE KWON: -- court session I would like you to have a word
16 with the Defence team and sort it out in a -- in a more co-operative way.
17 Whether it's -- please discuss it with the Defence and then come back to
18 the Chamber tomorrow.
19 MR. TIEGER: Very well, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE KWON: And before we adjourn, Mr. Tieger, the Chamber would
21 like to hear from you tomorrow morning on the following subject. The
22 Chamber has stated on a number of occasions that although it will not
23 impose time-limits on the Prosecution's cross-examination just yet, it
24 would continue to closely monitor the conduct of trial. Having heard
25 21 witnesses excluding the current -- the last witness, Dusan Zurovac,
Page 30329
1 the Chamber notes that the Prosecution has used much more time on
2 cross-examination than the accused on both examination-in-chief and
3 re-examination. The Chamber also notes that for the overwhelming
4 majority of these witnesses the evidence presented pursuant to
5 Rule 92 ter was extremely limited with short statements and very few
6 associated exhibits, if any. Often, the witnesses' Rule 92 ter evidence
7 also focuses on a limited number of issues. The Chamber would,
8 therefore, like to hear from you tomorrow for first thing on the issue of
9 time spent by the Prosecution on cross-examination.
10 The hearing is now adjourned. We will sit here at Courtroom 3 at
11 9.00 tomorrow.
12 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.00 p.m.,
13 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 15th day of
14 November, 2012, at 9.00 a.m.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25