1 Tuesday, 4 December 2012
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
5 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, everyone. Shall we bring in the
7 [The witness entered court]
8 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, Mr. Maletic.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Morning.
10 JUDGE KWON: Please continue, Ms. Edgerton.
11 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you, Your Honours.
12 WITNESS: DRAGAN MALETIC [Resumed]
13 [Witness answered through interpreter]
14 Cross-examination by Ms. Edgerton: [Continued]
15 Q. Good morning, Mr. Maletic.
16 A. Good morning to you.
17 Q. Yesterday we left off with some photographs and we're going to
18 continue briefly with three more on the same subject. I'd like us to
19 have a look, please, at 65 ter number 24121.
20 MS. EDGERTON: And I should note while we're waiting to see that
21 photograph, Your Honours, I've been in contact with the investigator for
22 the OTP who's responsible for matters dealing with Sarajevo and I'll be
23 able to advise the Court on the provenance of these photographs based on
24 the information I've received from him.
25 Q. Now, Mr. Maletic, this is a view from the roof of Lenjinova 6A
1 which was taken in August 1996. Does this show an area behind the
2 enemy's front line?
3 A. Yes.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be asked
5 whether this is a photograph taken from Lenjinova and from what side of
6 the river it was taken?
7 JUDGE KWON: Probably it's the subject you can take up in your
9 THE ACCUSED: Okay. Thank you.
10 JUDGE KWON: Please continue, Ms. Edgerton.
11 MS. EDGERTON: Yes, and I'd like to tender this photograph,
12 please, Your Honours. And with respect to this photograph, the
13 investigator did confirm that this was taken from Lenjinova 6A in August
14 1996 by an employee of the Office of the Prosecutor at that time.
15 JUDGE BAIRD: Ms. Edgerton, can you assist us with a small
16 matter. Now, you described the photograph. You said this is a view from
17 the roof of Lenjinova 6A taken in August, but isn't that evidence you're
19 MS. EDGERTON: What I was doing, Your Honour, in light of
20 Mr. Robinson's concern regarding the provenance of the photograph is I
21 was informing everyone of the provenance of the photograph based on the
22 information I'd received overnight from the Sarajevo investigator.
23 JUDGE BAIRD: Mr. Robinson, I should like very much to hear you
24 on this.
25 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President, and Judge Baird. Well, you
1 know, we don't dispute when the Prosecution makes a representation.
2 Obviously we know that their representations are always made in good
3 faith and based on facts, but we're not also ready to stipulate to any
4 facts as has been our position from the very beginning of the case. And
5 it's our position that this evidence as to where these photos were taken,
6 number one, should have been brought in the Prosecution's case if they
7 thought it was important and/or can be brought in rebuttal if they're
8 able to convince the Chamber that it meets the standard. But based on
9 the testimony of this witness, we don't see any foundation for admitting
10 the photo.
11 JUDGE BAIRD: Thank you very much indeed.
12 A rejoinder, Ms. Edgerton, at all?
13 MS. EDGERTON: Could I just have your indulgence --
14 JUDGE BAIRD: Indeed.
15 MS. EDGERTON: -- I might just want to speak to Mr. Tieger about
17 JUDGE BAIRD: Indeed, yes. Yes.
18 MR. TIEGER: If I can speak to this, just -- sorry, I can't see
19 Judge Baird.
20 JUDGE BAIRD: [Microphone not activated]
21 MR. TIEGER: I'll move over here, Judge Baird.
22 JUDGE BAIRD: [Microphone not activated]
23 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Judge Baird, please.
24 MR. TIEGER: I principally wanted to speak because I had the
25 discussion with Mr. Robinson last night after court in connection with
1 this very matter, although in the presence of Ms. Edgerton, and the point
2 I raised with him was that his concern seemed to be provenance. We had
3 encountered that issue during the course of this case countless times,
4 that is, is there an issue about the provenance of the document or not?
5 In many instances, the nature of a particular document precluded such an
6 inquiry or obviated the need for such an inquiry. Sometimes the nature
7 of the document required someone, either the Defence or the Prosecution,
8 to go back to their sources and identify the provenance so that the other
9 party could be satisfied. And we did that on an informal basis, that is,
10 neither party required the other to call a witness to demonstrate the
11 provenance in a classical fashion by adducing evidence from the
12 witness-stand. That has been the practice of the case. So when I
13 discussed that with Mr. Robinson last night, it was based on that
14 practice. And he agreed - as I anticipated - that should we be able to
15 satisfy him as to the provenance that we would proceed in the fashion
16 that has become the practice of this case from the outset, that is, that
17 the document would then be admitted in -- as -- because it -- the
18 authenticity was no longer at issue and it was what it purported to be.
19 So that's the basis for the information that Ms. Edgerton
20 provided today. It is not a -- it's not a case of a -- one of the
21 attorneys testifying in lieu of a witness; it is pursuant to a practice
22 that has been well established in the course of this case and that was
23 confirmed last night during our discussions.
24 JUDGE BAIRD: So the provenance is not an issue?
25 MR. TIEGER: I -- it should not -- it certainly should not be.
1 We confirmed that. Those representations in the past have been
2 sufficient. Mr. Robinson is certainly welcome to talk to our
3 investigator. I don't think he doubts it and I don't think it is an
5 JUDGE BAIRD: Thank you very much, Mr. Tieger. Thank you.
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Excellencies, may I caution about a
8 certain matter before you rule? "Sniper position" is the caption and
9 there is no foundation for that. The witness did not confirm this. This
10 was not put to him and the zoom makes it possible to manipulate these
11 photographs easily.
12 JUDGE KWON: I don't follow the "sniper position"?
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The caption, the caption. It
14 hasn't been interpreted. The caption if you look at this photograph is
15 "sniper position." On the basis of what may this be the caption? It is
16 the description.
17 JUDGE KWON: Caption or title is not a part of evidence at all.
18 Given the circumstances, in particular that the provenance of the photo
19 is not at issue, the Chamber will receive it.
20 Shall we give the number.
21 THE REGISTRAR: Document 24121 receives number P6021,
22 Your Honours.
23 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you. And if we could just have finally a
24 look at two more photographs in succession, 65 ter number 24135 being the
25 first and 24134 being the second.
1 JUDGE KWON: Do we have a problem with the e-court?
2 MS. EDGERTON:
3 Q. Now, this photo, Mr. Maletic, is from -- was taken from the 15th
4 floor of Lenjinova Bolnica [phoen] in Grbavica.
5 MS. EDGERTON: And if we could go to the next photograph, please,
7 Q. And then I'll have a question for you. And this photo,
8 65 ter 24134, is a view from the same location at a magnification of 200.
9 In both those photos do you see areas behind the confrontation line as
10 you knew it to be at that time -- as you knew it to be during the
12 A. And what is the question, sorry?
13 Q. Do both these photos depict areas in the enemy territory, in your
14 enemy territory, behind the confrontation line?
15 A. I cannot assess that from here. You said that it was seriously
16 magnified. I have to point out that I said in paragraph 25 that civilian
17 zones could be targeted, and as far as I know that did not happen. So as
18 I said, from some positions civilian zones could be targeted but it did
19 not happen.
20 MS. EDGERTON: Could we go back, please, to 65 ter number 24135.
21 Q. Now, Mr. Maletic, you said yesterday that you grew up in Sarajevo
22 and you knew these areas. Do you see here locations behind the enemy's
23 front line?
24 A. I see those locations here but they're awfully magnified here so
25 I cannot assess where this is viewed from.
1 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honours, these would be the last two
2 photographs I'd like to have tendered, please.
3 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President, we'll stick with our
4 objection, but I just want to - so that we're all on the same page
5 here - understand that these photographs can be admitted to understand
6 the witness's testimony. But as to the representation as to where
7 they're taken from, you don't have any evidence of that and so I take it
8 that that will not be part of the evidence in the case in light if the
9 Prosecution wants to prove where they're taken from, they would call a
10 witness or seek permission to call a witness for that.
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 JUDGE KWON: I think the Chamber is of the view Mr. Robinson's
13 comment is fair enough and in light of the development the Chamber also
14 will reconsider yesterday's decision not to admit 65 ter 23643 and we'll
15 admit the three photos all together.
16 Shall we give the numbers.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Photo 24135 receives number P6022. 24134
18 receives number P6023, and 2463 -- 2463 -- 643 [sic] receives number
19 P6024, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE KWON: Please continue.
21 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
22 Q. Now, Mr. Maletic, you also said in your statement that your
23 Supreme Command regularly informed you of actions that were prohibited
24 because they were contrary to the rules of war, and I wonder did they
25 warn you against the use of prisoners for forced labour in dangerous
2 A. Well, I was aware of some of these things, but I'm not aware of
3 all the details. We used prisoners at certain moments, like in workshops
4 and things like that. I cannot recall exactly.
5 Q. Let's have a look, please, at P5987. It's a document dated 21
6 May 1993 that you drafted to the command of the 2nd Battalion, reporting
7 on the escape of Muslim prisoners who had been taken from Kula to do
8 labour on the front line. Do you see the document on the page in front
9 of you or on the screen in front of you, rather?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Now, this document says that the prisoners were working under the
12 guard of Zeljko Mitrovic, who you agreed yesterday was in charge of the
13 labour squad in the 2nd Battalion. And when it was found that they
14 escaped, Mitrovic and the two soldiers with him opened fire after the
15 prisoners. Now, would you agree with me, Mr. Maletic, that this is
16 contrary to the rules of war?
17 A. Well, you see, there's one thing with regard to this remark. You
18 see, it says here that this took place during the night because this
19 location is exposed to fire all the time. So see, we did make an effort
20 to protect these prisoners because it is impossible to carry out this
21 kind of work during the day. This is a properly drafted note in my
23 Q. Would you agree with me that opening fire on prisoners of war is
24 contrary to the rules of war?
25 A. Well, if they were not running away, fire would not have been
1 opened; however, they formally fired when time had already gone by. You
2 see that in this statement here. So see, they came to inform that and
3 then they only fired formally and so on and so forth.
4 Q. And I'm not sure that I understand what "formally firing" means,
5 so let's get back to brass tacks. Would you agree that opening fire on
6 prisoners of war is contrary to the rules of war?
7 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President. It seems to me that
8 this question is ambiguous, that the question ought to be whether opening
9 fire on prisoners who are escaping is contrary to the rules of war.
10 JUDGE KWON: I don't see much difference.
11 Would you agree that opening fire on prisoners of war is contrary
12 to the rules of war? That was the question.
13 MR. ROBINSON: Right, but the document indicates that the
14 prisoners were escaping, so that's a totally different situation. In my
15 opinion, maybe I'm wrong, but opening fire on people who are escaping is
16 permissible even in the civilian context.
17 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
18 Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
19 MS. EDGERTON:
20 Q. That's fine. We can move on actually. But still on the same
21 theme, did your Supreme Command, when they told you about actions that
22 were prohibited because they were contrary to the rules of war, warn you
23 about forced expulsions?
24 A. Natural expulsions? Forced expulsions of the population? What
25 was that? I didn't quite understand.
1 Q. When your Supreme Command told you about actions that were
2 prohibited because they were contrary to the rules of war, did they tell
3 you that forced expulsions were prohibited?
4 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Edgerton, what do you mean by "Supreme Command"?
5 MS. EDGERTON: I was taking the wording of -- from the witness's
6 statement, Your Honours, and I'll just give you the paragraph citation in
7 one moment, if I may.
8 Your indulgence for a moment because there's a couple of copies I
9 have of the witness's statement and I'll have to find it.
10 I misspoke, Your Honours, and I find the words of the witness at
11 paragraph 18 and the witness actually said "our superior command
12 regularly informed us." So my apologies. Indeed, I did misspeak.
13 Q. To go back to the question, Mr. Witness, did your superior
14 command tell you that forced expulsions were prohibited?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Can we have a look, please, at P1266. It's a document dated
17 30 September 1992 which should be available in your language. Thank you.
18 A document dated 30 September 1992 on -- which on B/C/S page 2, the ninth
19 line down, reports on the expulsion of 30 Muslim -- pardon me, 300 Muslim
20 civilians from Grbavica on that day. So despite being warned that forced
21 expulsions were prohibited, Mr. Maletic, in fact, expulsions did take
22 place; correct?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Are you disputing, Mr. Maletic, the accuracy of this report?
25 A. One cannot see from here that they were expelled.
1 Q. The document specifically states, Mr. Maletic, that the writer
2 was able to confirm that approximately 300 Muslims, Muslim civilians,
3 have been expelled by the Serbs during the day from the area of Grbavica,
4 150 of them gathered at the Bristol Hotel, and the remaining at Bosnian
5 Assembly building approximately 1 kilometre east from the hotel. And is
6 the fact that they were expelled not obvious from the document on its
7 face, Mr. Maletic?
8 A. They probably wished to move to the other side of their own
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please, can the witness be read
11 about the fact that this was found out from the Bosnian liaison officer
12 who was the source of this information?
13 JUDGE KWON: I haven't read this document. Does it appear on
14 this text, Ms. Edgerton?
15 MS. EDGERTON: The sentence reads - and I'm happy to repeat it --
16 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
17 MS. EDGERTON: "Through the Bosnian liaison officer the writer
18 was able to confirm that approximately 300 Muslim civilians have been
19 expelled by the Serbs during the day from the area of Grbavica, 150 of
20 them gathered at the Bristol Hotel, and the remaining at the Assembly
21 building of Bosnia and Herzegovina located at approximately 1 kilometre
22 east from the hotel."
23 May I move on, please?
24 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
25 MS. EDGERTON:
1 Q. Now, you just said, Mr. Maletic, that they may have wished to
2 move from Grbavica of their own accord, and on that note perhaps we could
3 look at some of the conditions of life inside Grbavica. I'd like us to
4 go to P1474, and that's the notebook of Dr. -- pardon me, of
5 General Ratko Mladic in which on 25 March 1993 -- pardon me - he had a
6 meeting with Prime Minister Radomir Lukic which referred to, among other
7 things, the situation in Grbavica.
8 MS. EDGERTON: And if we could go to pages 157 of the English
9 transcript and page 159 of the B/C/S original.
10 Q. On the English page they -- we see where the citation begins.
11 And if we could in both versions go over to the next page. There
12 General Mladic notes:
13 "Some soldiers rape even Serbian women (in Grbavica). (Lukic)
14 himself took someone who had done this out of Sarajevo (he wouldn't say
15 his name)."
16 Does that reflect the conditions of life inside VRS-held
17 Grbavica, Mr. Maletic?
18 A. Yes, this relates to Grbavica, but I don't see what the point
19 was. This was within the remit of the civilian police; however, what was
20 really happening I don't know.
21 Q. Well, when your superior command told you about certain things
22 that were prohibited, did they tell you that sexual violence was
24 A. Yes, none of my soldiers was involved in any of such activities;
25 therefore, I have no knowledge about it.
1 Q. But nevertheless, despite the warning General Mladic appears to
2 have been informed that it was still going on.
3 A. And what is the question?
4 Q. Despite the warning, it was still going on, don't you agree?
5 A. No, I don't.
6 Q. So is it your assertion that General Mladic is ill-informed?
7 A. I can only speak about my part of the territory, i.e., the part
8 of Grbavica that was under my control. There were other battalions in
9 the area, for example, an armoured battalion, and so on and so forth.
10 Therefore, I couldn't know everything that was happening among the
11 soldiers. But as far as I know, there were no rapes, not only of Serbian
12 women mentioned here specifically, but of any women at all -- or at least
13 I know nothing about it.
14 Q. And you were the assistant commander for security and
15 intelligence for your battalion?
16 A. That is correct.
17 Q. But you received no information to that effect? You knew nothing
18 about these allegations that even Serbian women were being raped in
20 A. No.
21 Q. Thank you. Now, when you were advised by your superior command
22 about actions that were -- should be prohibited, did they tell you that
23 looting was prohibited?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. But yet looting and crime in Grbavica, it seems, were rampant,
1 Mr. Maletic. Isn't that the case?
2 A. Do you consider a crime if a Serb left Sarajevo, found shelter in
3 a flat or brought his own furniture to an empty flat, do you consider
4 that to be a war crime?
5 Q. Let's have a look at P1482, which is another copy of
6 General Mladic's notebook. E-court page 79 in English and page 77 in
7 B/C/S. And it refers to a Supreme Command session of 21 January 1993.
8 And there the defence minister at the time, General Kovacevic, noted the
9 looting and crime in Grbavica and he said of General Dragomir Milosevic:
10 "He did not cope well" -- oh, I'm sorry, I should wait -- thank
12 He said of General Dragomir Milosevic:
13 "He did not cope well at Grbavica because he did not prevent the
14 looting and crime."
15 Does this not reflect, Mr. Maletic, that looting and crime was
16 taking place in Grbavica but it was not being prevented by the military
18 A. Look, the depth of the Grbavica territory was covered by the
19 civilian police, that is to say the civilian police was in charge of what
20 was happening inside the territory.
21 Q. You've actually not answered my question. Mr. Maletic, my
22 question was: Does this notation in General Mladic's diary not reflect
23 that looting and crime was taking place in Grbavica but it was not being
24 prevented by the military command?
25 A. As far as military is concerned, looting was prohibited and I
1 told you what was going on with the soldiers who occupied flats and so on
2 and so forth. As for the looting, we were deployed along the front line
3 so we did not know what was going on.
4 Q. Thank you. We'll move on.
5 MS. EDGERTON: And if I may, Your Honours, I have two areas that
6 I hope will be rather brief before I conclude.
7 Q. Mr. Maletic, now to go just back briefly to your evidence about
8 snipers in the battalion command, you said - although you were assistant
9 commander for security and intelligence - that you didn't know about the
10 type of assignments and the manner in which they were executed in the
11 case of these snipers. Now, Mr. Maletic, this Chamber has heard evidence
12 that UNPROFOR knew with specialised troops in reconnaissance and
13 surveillance capabilities about the potential sniper positions, they'd
14 photographed them, they'd drawn out all the potential areas, and the
15 reference to that is General Fraser's evidence at transcript pages 8016
16 to 8017. They were -- they've also heard that UNPROFOR was very familiar
17 with the sniper positions, all for the purpose of having shooters reply
18 to these snipers to protect the civilian. And they've also heard at
19 transcript page 13197 that civilian residents of Grbavica knew not only
20 about the snipers, they knew their names, who they were, and where they
22 So, Mr. Maletic, yesterday you gave evidence that even though you
23 attended briefing meetings at battalion command, both as a company
24 commander and as assistant commander of security and intelligence, and
25 you conceded at page 80 of yesterday's transcript that you received
1 general information about the security situation, I wonder how you can
2 maintain that the civilians in Grbavica and UNPROFOR were actually better
3 informed than you about the names of the snipers in the 2nd Battalion?
4 A. I said that I did not remember their names and I can only repeat
5 that today.
6 Q. Now, in your statement you also said that you personally saw
7 freedom of movement as something very positive. I'd like us to have a
8 look at another document you wrote, 65 ter number 24156, please. And
9 it's dated 16 May 1993. And I'll just wait until it appears on the
10 screen. To all units of the 2nd Battalion, telling them to fully control
11 and identify persons in their areas of responsibilities and find out
12 their reasons to be there and saying that in case they do not possess
13 approval or a justified reason for that, it's necessary to arrest them
14 immediately and bring them to the battalion command. And if they try to
15 escape, they should be stopped; and if that's not possible, they should
16 be killed.
17 Now, paragraph -- if we could scroll down in English, please.
18 Paragraph 2 of this document and over onto the next page in English,
19 please. Thank you. Paragraph 2 of this document indicates that you've
20 received information from the Croatian Roman Catholic Church that -- or
21 information that the Croatian Roman Catholic Church has engaged some
22 foreign journalists to provide them with TV and photo material on
23 destroyed religious buildings in the area under Muslim control and in the
24 areas of Republika Srpska, and you write that:
25 "In order to prevent such activities, it's necessary to prevent
1 the entrance of foreign journalists to your areas of responsibility,
2 unless they have been previously announced and escorted by the authorised
3 commander from the battalion command."
4 And you also say if these persons are found in your area without
5 an authorisation, their documents and equipment should be confiscated and
6 the battalion command should be contacted for further instruction. So my
7 question to you is: Does this document reflect personal support on your
8 part for freedom of movement?
9 A. As far as this document is concerned, it is possible to allow
10 this during the war, since there was --
11 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please slow down and speak
12 more intelligibly.
13 JUDGE KWON: The interpreters were not able to hear you because
14 you spoke a bit too fast. Could you repeat your answer slowly. Thank
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If such cases did happen, it is
17 possible that this is permissible in war. Since there was no possibility
18 for escape, there were no executions consequently. Therefore, this
19 allegation is groundless. Since this condition was not fulfilled, this
20 kind of caution is justifiable during the war, and I am talking about the
21 front line, the forward line.
22 MS. EDGERTON: Could this be marked as a Prosecution exhibit,
24 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
25 MR. ROBINSON: No objection.
1 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Document 24156 receives number P6025,
3 Your Honours.
4 JUDGE KWON: I did note that your time was up a while ago, but I
5 take it you will be concluding very soon?
6 MS. EDGERTON: Yes. I think I could -- I think the remaining
7 examination would take - depending on the witness's answers of
8 course - ten minutes, if I may, Your Honours. I'm in Your Honour's
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please continue, Ms. Edgerton.
12 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
13 Let's have -- on the same subject let's have another look at or a
14 look at another document, 65 ter number 24155.
15 Q. And it's a document you wrote on 6 March 1993, indicating that
16 there were three foreign journalists on RS territory and ordering the
17 4th Company to increase control within their area of responsibility and
18 if they find these journalists to deprive them of freedom of movement and
19 bring them to the battalion command regardless of possible documents that
20 give them permission to work on RS territory. Now, does this document
21 support or reflect your personal support for freedom of movement, as you
22 indicated in your statement?
23 A. No. This refers only to individuals.
24 Q. So even though, Mr. Maletic, you indicated personal support for
25 freedom of movement, is your evidence now that that personal support did
1 not apply to individuals, civilians, as is the case in this document?
2 A. You can see exactly that it says here those who displayed open
3 hatred towards the Serbs and intolerance by means of writing reports,
4 reporting, and thereby caused unimaginable damage to the Serbian people
5 on the international scene. This is what refers to such people.
6 Q. And it was your determination that these journalists who, in your
7 view, were intolerant, it was your determination that these journalists
8 should not have freedom of movement?
9 A. Well, I cannot allow the enemy to come to my front line and shoot
10 and photograph my positions.
11 Q. And, Mr. Maletic, what then makes Tony Ashby, a photographer from
12 Western Australia; Dick Verkijk, a journalist from Holland; and
13 Maxe Tharton, a journalist from Western Australia, the enemy?
14 A. According to the information that we received from the command,
15 one can see exactly from this document what this is all about. That
16 means that these journalists are allowed to move around but they are
17 prohibited from coming to the front line in order to prevent them from
18 photographing the positions that could possibly be then shelled the
19 following day.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 MS. EDGERTON: Could this be a Prosecution exhibit, please.
22 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Document 24155 receives number P6026,
24 Your Honours.
25 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
1 Q. Now one last question. You talked in your statement about
2 Veselin Vlahovic and Zoran Vitkovic in the area of Grbavica and you said
3 you were not aware of the entire spectrum of problems these paramilitary
4 units were causing. But, Mr. Maletic, Colonel Osmic, as he was at the
5 time, advised General Mladic on 16 June 1992 - and the reference is
6 P1478, pages 172, 173, in English; and 170, 171 in
7 B/C/S - Colonel Milosevic told General Mladic Zoran Vitkovic is the chief
8 of those who steal.
9 And that's the same Zoran Vitkovic that you referred to in your
10 statement, isn't it, Mr. Maletic?
11 A. Yes. Yes. I spoke about Zoran Vitkovic and I said that since at
12 the time I was a soldier I only know - and I included that in my
13 statement - that there was a group under the command of Zoran Vitkovic
14 and they were headquartered in the building --
15 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters didn't hear the name of the
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They used to go to certain sections
18 of the front line where the Serbian fighters needed assistance because
19 they were under enemy attack. During one such attack by the Muslim
20 forces, Zoran Vitkovic got killed --
21 MS. EDGERTON:
22 Q. Mr. Maletic, Mr. Maletic, you answered my question with the first
23 two words in your sentence which is "yes. Yes." So I'd like to move on.
24 Now, this Chamber has also heard evidence from Mr. Ratomir Neskovic who
25 was formerly president of the Crisis Staff for Novo Sarajevo about the
1 other man you referred to, Veselin Vlahovic, Batko, in other words, and
2 at T 14315 to 14316 Dr. Karadzic referred Mr. Neskovic to his previous
3 testimony in the Krajisnik case about Batkovic, and Mr. Neskovic said --
4 and here's what was spoken about in the Krajisnik case. Mr. Neskovic in
5 that case said -- was asked:
6 "Was it understood that the primary targets of his attacks were
7 Muslims and Croats?"
8 And his answer was:
9 "To some extent, yes, but the main targets of his attacks always
10 had to do with money and looting and then of course especially Muslims
11 and Croats, mostly Muslims."
12 So, Mr. Maletic, president of the Crisis Staff for Novo Sarajevo
13 knew about the spectrum of crimes that Batko was involved in.
14 Colonel Milosevic and General Mladic also knew. So how can you, a man
15 who grew up in Sarajevo, a company commander on the front line in
16 Sarajevo, assistant commander for intelligence and security for your
17 battalion, claim - whose job it was to collect information - how can you
18 claim that you didn't know of the spectrum of crimes that these
19 individuals committed?
20 A. That man disappeared from the area before I joined the command as
21 company commander and assistant commander for intelligence and security.
22 Q. Thank you.
23 MS. EDGERTON: Nothing further, Your Honours.
24 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
25 Mr. Karadzic.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Good morning,
2 Your Excellencies. Good morning to everyone.
3 Re-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
4 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Maletic.
5 A. Good morning.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please have P998 in
8 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. While we are waiting for the document, in paragraph 18 of your
10 statement you said that the superior commands advised you of any
11 prohibition to take action, and Ms. Edgerton asked you something about
12 that. I would like you to have a look at the document. I would like to
13 see the last page of the document if possible. In the English the
14 penultimate page, please.
15 Can you see who this was sent to and did your unit also receive
16 these instructions for further action?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Thank you. I'll read out the last sentence of paragraph 6.
19 "It is most stringently forbidden to mistreat civilian unarmed
20 population and treat the prisoners in keeping with the Geneva
22 Did you receive this? Is this what you had in mind? And did you
23 abide by these instructions?
24 A. We received these instructions and we abided by them.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we go back to P6025 again.
2 P6025. It was admitted just earlier today. I wanted to focus on
3 paragraph 1 which esteemed Madam Edgerton failed to read. Could you
4 please read it out aloud.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "We received information from
6 several sources that groups of American special forces (members of the
7 so-called 'Green Berets,' target scouts - road scouts) have already been
8 inserted into the territory of the former BiH. In the event of foreign
9 military intervention, they are supposed to execute tasks such as guiding
10 the air force, securing airborne landing areas, collecting data on
11 strength of Serbian units, identifying and selecting the targets for
12 air-strikes, and other special assignments."
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Thank you. Who was the prohibition referred to in paragraph 1
15 supposed to be referring to -- sorry, item 4 -- no, sorry. Actually, the
16 last paragraph of paragraph 1, "with the aim of discovering," et cetera.
17 Who did this refer to?
18 A. The American special forces, and that is why I issued this order,
19 or rather, piece of information.
20 Q. So members of the aforementioned groups?
21 A. Yes. It says groups of American special forces that have been
23 Q. Can you read this aloud, "in case there is no ..." et cetera.
24 A. I can't find that.
25 Q. The last paragraph of item 1.
1 A. "With the aim of detecting ..."
2 Q. Yes, the sentence after that.
3 A. Now it's gone.
4 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please wait for page 2
5 because the interpreters cannot see that.
6 JUDGE KWON: Just a second.
7 Could you read slowly again.
8 THE INTERPRETER: Could the English translation be placed on the
9 screen. Thank you.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]
11 "Unless there are solid grounds and justification, arrest
12 immediately and bring to battalion command. If they try to flee, prevent
13 them from doing so. If that is impossible, liquidate them."
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Thank you. How would you or how did you treat the Serbs who
16 moved about the lines unauthorised? Did you apply measures against them
17 as well?
18 A. Of course. No unauthorised access was allowed to the front line.
19 Q. Thank you. Paragraph 3 of item 3.
20 THE INTERPRETER: Could we have that on the screen, please,
21 interpreter's note.
22 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. "If such persons are encountered in the combat area ...,"
24 et cetera.
25 What is the key point here? What dictates your treatment of such
1 people? In other words, what was happening with those who were
2 authorised access?
3 A. If they had authorised access, they could continue filming and go
4 about their journalistic tasks.
5 Q. Thank you. You were asked about this alleged expulsion. While
6 you were there, were there exchanges taking place organised by
7 commissions in keeping with certain lists; and if so, where, at what
8 bridges did such occurrences take place?
9 MS. EDGERTON: Before the witness answers, that's -- perhaps we
10 could ask Dr. Karadzic to rephrase because that's a very leading question
11 or perhaps it's been so leading that maybe there's no point in him
12 rephrasing any longer.
13 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I apologise. It is the
15 habit I have since the Prosecution case. It seems to be difficult to be
16 rid of it.
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Mr. Maletic, what was happening with the people who wanted to
19 cross from one side to the other? How was that regulated?
20 A. I have mentioned here that for a while the blue routes were open
21 and they were free to cross the bridges both ways.
22 Q. Could anyone go as they pleased or was it regulated?
23 A. With the prior agreement of the warring parties and provided
24 there was a truce, a cease-fire.
25 Q. Thank you. Can we now have P6019.
1 Could you tell us, what is the green building across the street,
2 if you recognise it?
3 A. Perhaps it's the building next to the machine engineering school.
4 Q. It was stated that this picture was taken from the 6th floor or
5 the roof of the Lenjinova Street building. Did you have sniper positions
6 on the 6th -- sorry, the 13th floor of that building in Lenjinova Street
7 or perhaps on the roof?
8 A. That was the front line and the fighters were dug in at the foot
9 of the buildings.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we have 6020 next.
12 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. As for the previous question, can you say yes or no? Did you
14 have sniper positions at that height?
15 A. I did not have sharpshooters in my unit. As for this photograph,
16 this picture was taken after the war, that's what we were told, so this
17 is not accurate. Perhaps there was a tree here. Another thing, it is
18 incomprehensible that traffic was allowed on the Muslim side when they
19 initiated combat, thus exposing vehicles and civilians to danger. There
20 was a real danger of being hit by stray bullets.
21 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. Mr. Maletic, what did you mean by
22 saying that you "did not have sharpshooters in my unit"? Did you mean
23 that there was no sniper in that position or you didn't have snipers at
24 all in your unit?
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the witness please receive
1 the following interpretation: Sharpshooters or snipers -- could the
2 witness receive accurate interpretation in the Serbian language.
3 JUDGE KWON: So could you clarify what you meant by saying: "I
4 did not have sharpshooters in my unit"?
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The witness said "snajperisti" and
6 it was interpreted as "sharpshooter."
7 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Sharpshooter and sniper
8 are interchangeable terms.
9 JUDGE KWON: You are not giving evidence, Mr. Karadzic. I was
10 asking Mr. Maletic.
11 Did you understand my question?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. While I commanded the company
13 in 1992 or part of that year, in our company we did not have sniper
14 shooters. Our defence line was at the foot of the buildings. We had
15 semi-automatic and automatic rifles, machine-guns, et cetera.
16 JUDGE KWON: What is the date of the document of the list of
17 names we saw yesterday, Ms. Edgerton?
18 MS. EDGERTON: The list is undated, Your Honours. It includes
19 the name of one Aco Petrovic who the witness said replaced the previous
20 battalion commander at a particular date which I can find momentarily.
21 So it's safe to assume that the list does not date from 1992.
22 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
23 Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
25 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. With all due respect for the interpreters, I wanted to ask you
2 this: Is "strelac" and "snajperisti" the same thing?
3 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: In the Serbian, there is a
5 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. I'm asking you, Mr. Maletic. "Sharpshooter was being interpreted
7 to you as "strelac." Are there words as "strelac" and "snajperisti" in
8 military parlance? Is there a difference?
9 A. "Snajperisti" is a sniper shooter. Perhaps the other term
10 applied to a soldier with an automatic rifle. That's what we call
12 Q. Thank you.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we look at 6022.
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Did you have positions at or on the 15th floor of
16 Lenjinova Street or on the roof? Did you have positions there?
17 A. Our positions were at the foot of the buildings there and we had
18 fortified dug-outs and bunkers.
19 Q. A hypothetical question, if I may, as a soldier could you tell us
20 what would be the trajectory of a projectile which went through a tram, a
21 streetcar, what would the trajectory look like? Where would be the exit
22 and the entry point?
23 A. What it would look like --
24 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour.
25 JUDGE KWON: Just a second.
1 Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
2 MS. EDGERTON: Before the witness answers, I would submit that
3 doesn't arise from the cross-examination.
4 JUDGE KWON: You showed this picture and he's putting his
5 question based upon this picture.
6 MS. EDGERTON: I understand Your Honour's ruling then.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Please proceed, Mr. Karadzic.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. If one were to shoot from this height, from the 15th floor or the
11 roof of the high-rise on the tram tracks, what would be the height of the
12 entry and exit hole? Would there be a difference?
13 A. There would be a drastic difference. The entry point would go
14 perhaps through the roof or the top of the tram and the lower part would
15 go further below.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we have 2126 and I would
17 kindly ask the usher to hand the pen to the witness.
18 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Mr. Maletic, can you identify this? Where was this photograph
20 taken from, from which position?
21 A. I cannot find my way.
22 Q. Do you see Metaljka over there in the background?
23 A. Yes, I do.
24 Q. Can you mark the faculty of philosophy and the museum?
25 A. The national museum, Zemaljski Muse?
1 Q. Yes.
2 A. How shall I mark it? Should I put a circle there?
3 Q. Could you put number 1 by the museum.
4 A. [Marks]
5 Q. And the building and the yard, does that also belong to the
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Thank you. Could you please mark the faculty of philosophy.
9 A. [Marks]
10 Q. Thank you. Now, please, do you see the river-bed, on that side,
11 the Serb side, can you mark your positions? Can you mark your positions
12 by drawing a red line.
13 A. [Marks]
14 Q. Thank you. Did you have any positions on the buildings up there?
15 For example, on the 7th floor of Metaljka, did you have a position there?
16 A. No, no, no. These ones mentioned at Metaljka 1 and 2, we used
17 them only at night because we could not approach them during the day. So
18 we used them mostly at night. All the positions were at lower levels of
19 the buildings.
20 Q. Thank you. Tell us this, these positions at lower levels --
21 actually, where were their positions? Can you use the green marker or
22 some other colour to mark their positions facing you? Well, the green
23 one wouldn't be readily visible. Take any colour, blue will do.
24 A. [Marks]
25 Q. Were they just by the river or a bit further off?
1 A. Well, they were in these buildings at lower levels and in certain
2 areas we saw that they were right by the river underneath that concrete
3 there. So it's at lower levels by the buildings, if you will.
4 Q. Thank you. Was there anything on these buildings, the museum,
5 was there anything there by way of military installations? Were they
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Thank you. So your positions were dug in and could you see
9 beyond their lines? Could you have a clear line of sight? You refer to
10 this in your statement. Is that what you meant when you said that from
11 your positions you could not see them?
12 A. That is what I tried to say, that you could not see the depth of
13 the territory from there.
14 Q. Thank you. Do you agree that opposite the faculty there is S, or
15 rather, this is a line where the tram moves onto the other side of the
16 street. So you can only see the beginning --
17 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, you're leading in a --
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I do apologise.
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Do you know of some curve where the tram had to slow down?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Did your soldiers await an opportunity there to fire at the tram?
23 A. No. That was always prohibited, to fire at civilians in civilian
25 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us whether you see that red building in
1 the background, can you indicate who kept what under their control behind
2 Metaljka and can you draw that for us?
3 A. That was not the line of my battalion. I just know that in this
4 red building -- well, it was partly Serb positions and partly Muslim
5 positions in that red building. This was not the area of responsibility
6 of my battalion so I just heard about that.
7 Q. Would you put a circle around that building that had been divided
8 between the two armies?
9 A. I do apologise, but I think it is this building.
10 Q. Thank you. By the trenches -- actually, could you put number 4
11 by this building and could you mark the trenches by 3.
12 A. 3? Our trenches, right?
13 Q. Yes.
14 A. [Marks]
15 Q. You can also place number 4 by this red building.
16 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, the Chamber needs to rise at 10.30
17 sharp, so if you need more time we'll break now.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, no, Excellencies. I could
19 finish now but I would like to ask Mr. Maletic to place a date here and
20 to initial this photograph and could it please be admitted, too.
21 JUDGE KWON: Yes, this will be next Defence exhibit.
22 THE REGISTRAR: This will be document number D2525, Your Honours.
23 MS. EDGERTON: And, Your Honours, would it be wise to have the
24 clean underlying photograph also admitted?
25 JUDGE KWON: I don't see any problem. That will be
1 Exhibit D2526.
2 JUDGE MORRISON: Just an observation, Dr. Karadzic, if you ask
3 someone if they agree with some proposition which you then make, that is
4 always a leading question, and that's what you tend to do. It's
5 something you drum into law students not to do. You'll find if you
6 preface your questions with: What, when, who, or where, well that
7 doesn't always exclude a leading question; it helps to do so.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Excellency. You
9 are right. I'm aware of this habit of mine, if you will.
10 JUDGE KWON: Are you done with your re-examination?
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Excellencies. Thank you.
12 JUDGE KWON: Well, thank you, Mr. Maletic, that concludes your
13 evidence. Please have a safe journey back home.
14 We'll rise all together and resume at 11.00.
15 [The witness withdrew]
16 --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.
17 --- On resuming at 11.03 a.m.
18 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber will give its oral rulings on three
19 matters. First the Chamber will issue an oral ruling on the accused's
20 motion to vary list of witnesses filed confidentially -- I'm sorry, filed
21 publicly with confidential annexes on the 22nd of November, 2012. In the
22 motion the accused requests that the Chamber allow him to vary his list
23 of witnesses pursuant to Rule 73 ter (D) by adding one witness. The
24 accused further notifies the Chamber that he does not intend to call an
25 additional batch of 26 witnesses who previously appeared on his witness
1 list. Moreover, the accused informs the Chamber that the witness he
2 seeks to add benefits from Rule 70 conditions from a previous case and
3 thus he attaches the factual basis for his request as well as the
4 witness's proposed statement as confidential annexes A and B to the
6 On the 23rd of November, 2012, the Prosecution filed its
7 response, stating that it does not oppose the accused's motion.
8 Having reviewed the information in annex A to the motion and the
9 proposed statement in annex B for the witness the accused wishes to add
10 to his witness list, and considering that the Prosecution does not oppose
11 this addition, the Chamber finds that there is good cause to allow the
12 accused to add this witness to his list and grants the accused's motion
13 in this respect. With regard to the Rule 70 conditions in place for this
14 witness from a prior case, the Chamber reminds the accused that it is his
15 obligation to make the appropriate Rule 70 application to the Chamber for
16 witnesses he wishes to call. The Chamber further notes that there is no
17 such a thing as an "existing Rule 70 protective measures" that continues
18 from case to case and that the Chamber must decide these issues anew in
19 each case. Accordingly, the Chamber instructs the accused to file a
20 Rule 70 application for this witness, attaching all relevant
21 correspondence with the state requesting the Rule 70 conditions well in
22 advance of the witness's scheduled testimony.
23 Accordingly, the Chamber grants the motion and allows the accused
24 to add the witness named in confidential annex A to the motion to his
25 65 ter list.
1 The Chamber will now issue its ruling on the Prosecution's
2 request, made orally on the 28th of November 2012, that the accused be
3 ordered to provide the Prosecution with outstanding witness statements
4 for all the witnesses he intends to call during his defence case. In
5 terms of dead-line, the Prosecution requests that the accused be ordered
6 to disclose these statements by the end of December insofar as witnesses
7 related to the municipalities and hostages components of the case are
8 concerned and by the end of January in relation to Srebrenica witnesses.
9 In support, the Prosecution argues that the accused has failed to
10 comply with Rule 65 ter (G) of the Tribunal's Rules in that his list of
11 witnesses does not contain adequate factual summaries of the witnesses'
12 evidence. Since the Prosecution has also not been provided with witness
13 statements for many of the witnesses, it is unable to undertake
14 investigations relating to those witnesses or identify the extent to
15 which they contradict each other.
16 The Prosecution also submits that, as instructed by the Chamber
17 during the pre-Defence conference, it tried to find a solution with the
18 Defence without the Chamber's involvement. However, it was advised by
19 the Defence team that further information on the witnesses' evidence
20 would not be forthcoming due to the Defence's lack of time and resources.
21 In that respect, the Prosecution notes that the accused has been warned
22 by the Chamber that his witness list is excessive and includes a large
23 number of witnesses who are to provide irrelevant, marginal, or
24 manifestly repetitive information, which in turn contributes to the time
25 and resource obstacles faced by the Defence.
1 The Prosecution finally explains that in asking for witness
2 statements rather than adequate Rule 65 ter factual summaries, it is
3 trying to alleviate the Defence's workload as the summaries can only be
4 provided after the statements have been drawn up.
5 In response, the accused submits that he opposes the request as
6 it is impossible for the Defence to meet the dead-lines requested without
7 more time and resources. The accused's legal advisor, Mr. Robinson, adds
8 that the Defence team has done everything possible to provide as much
9 information as possible to the Prosecution concerning Defence witnesses,
10 which included disclosing some 160 witness statements so far. He
11 reiterates, however, that the Defence does not have the resources to take
12 all the statements by December and January. As for providing more
13 detailed summaries of the evidence, Mr. Robinson submits that this would
14 amount to speculation since the Defence does not have more information in
15 relation to witnesses who have not yet been interviewed. Accordingly,
16 Mr. Robinson concludes that it would be best for the Prosecution and the
17 Defence to continue working together as they have done until now. In
18 cases where the Prosecution is disadvantaged by late notice, the Chamber
19 can postpone the testimony of affected witnesses.
20 The Chamber has reviewed the Rule 65 ter summaries provided by
21 the accused and agrees with the Prosecution that a significant number of
22 those summaries do not provide adequate notice regarding the witnesses'
23 evidence. For example, for many of the witnesses, the summaries are
24 general in nature and provide very little information other than the
25 component of the case to which the witness is relevant. In addition,
1 many are formulaic with the same summary being provided over and over
2 again, with very little or no difference between the witnesses.
3 Furthermore, as recently submitted by Mr. Robinson, the list also does
4 not include the witnesses whose evidence has been admitted or is sought
5 for admission pursuant to Rules 92 bis and 92 quater, despite Rule 65 ter
6 (G) clearly implying that those witnesses should be included too.
7 Accordingly, the Chamber is of the view that the accused's witness list,
8 as it stands now, is not in compliance with Rule 65 ter (G).
9 The Chamber does accept that the accused and his team are working
10 hard to obtain the witness statements of all the witnesses on the
11 accused's revised witnesses list of 11th of September, 2012. However,
12 the Chamber also notes that that list contains 583 witnesses who are to
13 testify under Rule 92 ter, with the exception of the accused himself, and
14 yet the Defence is in possession of only around 160 witness statements so
15 far. The implication is, therefore, that around 420 witnesses have not
16 been interviewed by the Defence at this stage. It is also clear from the
17 submission made before the Chamber that a large number of these witnesses
18 have never been contacted by the Defence and probably do not even know
19 that they are on the accused's witness list. This is an extremely
20 unsatisfactory state of affairs at this stage of the trial and is not
21 conducive to its efficiency.
22 The Chamber recalls here that it has already warned the accused
23 during the Status Conference of 3rd of September, 2012, that the first
24 version of his witness list which contained 579 witnesses was causing
25 concern as it, among other things, included a large number of witnesses
1 whose evidence was completely or largely irrelevant to the charges in the
2 indictment as well as unnecessarily repetitive witnesses. The Chamber
3 even provided specific examples of such witnesses and then ordered the
4 accused to revise the witness list, bearing in mind all those concerns.
5 When the accused eventually filed a revised witness list on the 11th of
6 September, 2012, he dropped only ten witnesses and included a number of
7 character witnesses with the result that the total number of witnesses
8 currently listed on the 65 ter list is 583. Since then, several
9 witnesses have been dropped by the Defence due to their refusal to come
10 and give evidence and the accused has removed an additional 20-odd
11 witnesses as indicated by my earlier oral ruling.
12 The Chamber is in agreement with the Prosecution that the
13 accused's problem with providing adequate factual summaries for his
14 witness list stems from his failure to adequately revise what is a very
15 unrealistic and excessive witness list. The Chamber is also concerned
16 because it seems that the accused's witness list was compiled without the
17 accused and his Defence team knowing what the listed witnesses will in
18 fact testify about. This is not only unfair to the Prosecution but also
19 goes against the spirit of the Rules and causes the Chamber to question
20 the accused's ability to adequately represent himself and organise his
21 Defence case properly. As the accused must be aware, the Chamber has to
22 ensure that this trial is fair both to him and to the Prosecution. The
23 Chamber is also under the obligation to make sure that the trial is
24 expeditious, which means that the accused cannot be allowed to call an
25 unnecessarily large number of witnesses, especially if their evidence is
1 also irrelevant or only marginally relevant to the charges against him or
2 if they are unnecessarily repetitive.
3 For all those reasons, the Chamber has come to the conclusion
4 that the Prosecution's request should be granted in part. The Chamber
5 therefore orders the accused to provide the Prosecution with adequate
6 summaries under Rule 65 ter of the evidence of all the witnesses he
7 intends to call. He shall do so by the end of January 2013 in relation
8 to the witnesses dealing with the municipalities and hostages components
9 of the case, and by the end of February 2013 in relation to the
10 Srebrenica component of the case. Given the Chamber's guide-lines on the
11 conduct of this trial of 8th of October, 2009, it shall not order the
12 accused to provide witness statements to the Prosecution by those dates,
13 but rather leaves that option open to the parties to agree on should it
14 be more practicable.
15 While the accused and Mr. Robinson have submitted that the
16 provision of the summaries by the dead-lines sought by the Prosecution
17 will be an impossible task, the Chamber recalls its position that the
18 accused's witness list, even in its current revised form, is unrealistic
19 and unreasonable for all the reasons outlined during the
20 Status Conference of the 3rd of September. Accordingly, the Chamber
21 orders the accused to further revise his witness list by Friday, 14th of
22 December, 2012, and, in doing so, to make a serious attempt at including
23 only those witnesses who are to give evidence relevant to the charges in
24 the indictment and who are not unnecessarily repetitive. Furthermore, in
25 order to comply with Rule 65 ter (G), the accused shall include all
1 Rule 92 bis and Rule 92 quater witnesses whose evidence was sought for
2 admission prior to 27th of August, 2012, and the admission of which has
3 been granted by the Chamber, as well as Krnojelac whose Rule 92 quater
4 evidence is currently being considered for admission by the Chamber.
5 Once the list is revised as instructed, the task of providing the
6 summaries by January and February will be less daunting.
7 The Chamber finally notes that if, following the filing of the
8 revised witness list, it is not satisfied that the accused has made a
9 genuine attempt to focus on relevant witnesses alone, it will consider
10 imposing, pursuant to Rule 73 ter (C), a limit on the number of witnesses
11 he may call.
12 Finally, the Chamber recalls that the accused's motion for
13 clarification of decision on Defence witness interviews, dated 26th of
14 November, 2012, is still pending. Given that the issues raised therein,
15 and particularly the number of witnesses the Prosecution wishes to
16 interview, are linked to the accused's witness list, the Chamber shall
17 postpone its decision on that motion until the revised witness list is
18 filed by the accused and the Prosecution is able to revise the list of
19 witnesses it wishes to interview.
20 In that respect, the Prosecution shall, by Friday, 21st of
21 December, 2012, inform the Chamber whether the number of witnesses it
22 wishes to interview has changed and, if so, shall notify the accused and
23 the VWS of the new list of those witnesses. The Chamber shall then
24 proceed to issue its decision on the accused's motion for clarification
25 of decision on Defence witness interviews.
1 Finally, the Chamber will issue an oral ruling on the
2 Prosecution's motion to exclude the evidence in part of witness
3 Milan Pejic filed on 30th of November, 2012, wherein the Prosecution
4 seeks the partial exclusion of Milan Pejic's evidence on the basis that
5 some parts are irrelevant to the charges in the indictment and the
6 accused's responsibility.
7 The accused filed his response on the 3rd of December, 2012,
8 opposing the motion and contending that the material is, indeed, relevant
9 to his case.
10 The Chamber reminds the accused, once again, that it will not
11 admit tu quoque evidence under the guise of relevance to this trial.
12 Accordingly, the Chamber orders that the third subparagraph of paragraph
13 24 should be excluded from the witness's statement as well as paragraph
14 27 and the four documents referred to in the second subparagraph of
15 paragraph 24. Further, while the Chamber considers that the remainder of
16 the witness's statement is of some relevance to the indictment, it finds
17 paragraph 17 difficult to understand and would benefit from the witness's
18 live explanation on this paragraph.
19 The Chamber therefore grants the motion in part, excludes the
20 third subparagraph of paragraph 24 as well as paragraph 27 and the four
21 documents referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 24, and
22 allows the accused to tender the remainder of Milan Pejic's statement
23 pursuant to Rule 92 ter. It further orders that the accused seek further
24 explanation on the evidence in paragraph 17 live from the witness.
25 Finally, the Chamber orders that the Prosecution shall have 30 minutes
1 for its cross-examination.
2 Unless there are any other matters, we'll bring in the next
4 [The witness entered court]
5 JUDGE KWON: Just for the record, in line 8 on page 7,
6 65 ter number 24643 should read 23643. Thank you.
7 Good morning, sir.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
9 JUDGE KWON: Would you take the solemn declaration, please.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Shall I read this?
11 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
13 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
14 WITNESS: BLASKO RASEVIC
15 [Witness answered through interpreter]
16 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Rasevic. Please be seated and make
17 yourself comfortable.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
19 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Excellency.
21 Examination by Mr. Karadzic:
22 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Rasevic.
23 A. Good morning, Mr. President.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we please have in e-court
1 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Mr. Rasevic, did you give a statement to the Defence team and can
3 you see it now on the screen before you?
4 A. Yes, I did give this statement, Mr. President.
5 Q. Have you read it and have you signed it?
6 A. Yes, I have read and signed it.
7 Q. Thank you. I'm waiting for the interpretation and I would
8 likewise kindly ask you to do the same.
9 Does this statement accurately reflect everything that you said?
10 A. Everything that is contained in my statement is absolutely
11 correct and accurate and I didn't make anything up.
12 Q. I rather thought whether it was recorded according to your words.
13 A. Yes, but in two places I noticed a typo in the name. Let me find
14 it. Instead of Dragas Bojo it should be Dragas Vojo.
15 Q. Thank you. Do you have a hard copy of your statement in front of
17 A. No, I only have it on the screen. I don't have a hard copy.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, can I please hand
19 the witness his statement in hard copy in the B/C/S?
20 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I didn't say "B/C/S." I said "in
23 the Serbian." B/C/S does not exist, but let's move on.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Apart from these typos, the substance is exactly as you said it?
1 A. Yes, yes, it is.
2 Q. If I were to put the same questions to you today here in this
3 courtroom, would your answers basically be the same?
4 A. Absolutely the same. Maybe the sequence of words and sentences
5 would be slightly different, but basically it would be identical.
6 Q. Thank you.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can I please tender this statement
8 into evidence and an associated document as 92 ter package.
9 JUDGE KWON: Any objections, Ms. Iodice?
10 MS. IODICE: No, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE KWON: We'll admit the statement as well as the document,
12 associated exhibit, i.e., 1D15006 .
13 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D6800 receives number D2527,
14 Your Honours. And 1D15006 receives number D2528 , Your Honours.
15 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
16 Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I would like now to
18 read the summary of Mr. Blasko Rasevic's statement in English.
19 [In English] Blasko Rasevic lived in Sarajevo. He was a bus
20 driver at GSP, city public transport, in Sarajevo.
21 At some point in the winter of 1991 and 1992 and from then on,
22 his colleagues and he observed a group of men with automatic rifles and
23 dressed in camouflage uniforms which he had not seen until then. The
24 uniforms were neither of the police nor of the JNA and they also wore
25 green berets. These groups were the Green Berets and the
1 Patriotic League, formed by the leaders of the SDA. He and his
2 colleagues on other bus lines were stopped by these groups who then
3 searched them, the passengers, and the buses. Bus searches were often
4 conducted in an arrogant manner, with open hostility towards the Serbs.
5 It was rumoured and eventually confirmed that the members of these
6 formations were Muslims from the criminal circles.
7 In late January or early February 1992, these armed paramilitary
8 groups started to move freely during the day. Serbs then in beginning of
9 March 1992 set up barricade in the area of the city where they had been
10 the majority in order to protect themselves and their families. At the
11 same time, Muslims erected their barricades in the areas where they have
12 constituted the majority. The barricades were in place until the 3rd of
13 March, 1992, when the three peoples made a political agreement to form
14 mixed patrols which were operational until April when the Muslims
15 perfidiously killed Serb police officer Pero Petrovic. Blasko Rasevic
16 states with full responsibility that the Serbs were deceived by the
17 Muslims into accepting these joint patrols and the removal of the
18 original barricades. The patrols were active, but the armed groups, the
19 Green Berets and the Patriotic League, continued to operate alongside
20 these patrols and exclusively at night. Therefore, the barricades were
21 removed but armed men remained and exercised control on the quiet.
22 When the Serbs lifted their barricades and took part in the joint
23 patrols, the Muslim forces took the opportunity, with support of the MUP,
24 police, to put under their control parts of the city that had previously
25 been under Serb control, like Pofalici, Buca Potok, Pionirska Dolina, and
2 On 4 April 1992 he was stopped by members of the Green Berets and
3 the Patriotic League and searched once again. That day, fearing for his
4 life, he decided to no longer go to work until the situation normalised.
5 That same day, realising that they were in the part of the city where
6 Muslims were controlling, dominant, he and his family fled to Mrkovici.
7 In Mrkovici, the police had openly sided with the Muslims and the
8 JNA had no power whatsoever. The neighbours assembled in the village
9 school and decided to self-organise in order to protect themselves. They
10 formed the two platoons comprised of volunteering civilians and ten
11 reserve policemen from the Mrkovici local commune. He was in charge of
12 one of those platoons.
13 On 5th of April, 1992, a group of Serbian refugees from the area
14 of Pionirska Dolina and the surrounding villages fled to Mrkovici,
15 seeking refuge. They managed to provide shelter and food for some of
16 those people and because there were many of them they sent the others
17 towards the Romanija plateau.
18 At dusk, the two platoons set off and took up positions at
19 Velika-Tvrdjava-Spicaste-Stijene elevation. They held that line
20 successfully until the end of the war. When the VRS was formed on the
21 12th of May, 1992, his platoon became part of the 2nd Romanija
22 Motorised Brigade.
23 From their positions they could observe the Muslim artillery
24 firing positions in the city, situated in civilian facilities. His unit
25 was often targeted by mortars mounted on trailers. Muslim forces
1 repeatedly launched random artillery attacks on the village, damaging a
2 large number of family homes and wounding and killing civilians.
3 Throughout the war his unit only carried out defensive tasks and
4 never received an order to attack. Never he nor any other members of his
5 unit or their subordinated or superior commands intended to cause
6 civilian casualties or terrorise civilians in the territory under Muslim
7 control or exert psychological influence on them. They never received or
8 issued any verbal or written orders to that effect. Muslim forces often
9 violated truce agreements to advance closer to their positions -- to the
10 Serb positions. They later lied to the media that it was Serb forces
11 that were violating the truce. They did this constantly prior to a
12 planned attack, falsely briefing the media that Serb forces were
13 attacking them in a particular area. Blasko Rasevic and his unit used
14 this to their advantage, considering those an indication of when and
15 where the Muslim forces would attack them.
16 50 per cent of the casualties in his unit were inflicted by the
17 Muslim sniper fire. The opposing unit to his was the
18 105th Mountain Brigade and another Muslim brigade, which he doesn't
19 remember the name. On June the 8th, 1992, Muslim unit launched a
20 large-scale attack, which they successfully repelled. The bodies of
21 Muslim soldiers remained on the battle-field and the Blasko Rasevic's
22 unit pulled the dead and buried them and then exchanged them, which
23 shows that -- with the full respect of the international law and also it
24 was -- they had been acting in defence and the other side was attacking
1 On 29th of January, 1993, Muslim forces launched a strong attack
2 and temporarily took control of Mala Tvrdjava, a small castle. The next
3 day his unit made an unprecedented effort and re-established control over
4 Mala Tvrdjava. In total they had five casualties and 22 wounded
6 His unit had a very fair relationship with civilian authorities.
7 Due to the difficult situation and poverty, his unit organised a soup
8 kitchen in the village providing meals for the entire local population as
9 well as that of surrounding villages.
10 Mr. Rasevic's unit never opened fire at civilians in Sedrenik.
11 After the incident that took place in February 1994 in Markale, there was
12 a firm conviction in his unit that the Serb forces had not committed the
13 incident and especially not the forces from Mrkovici because someone
14 would have had to know about it and such information would have certainly
15 leaked in their own unit.
16 [Interpretation] Now, this was the summary.
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Mr. Rasevic, would you be so kind as to tell us how many times
19 were you attacked and how many times offensives were launched against
20 your positions?
21 A. In the course of 1992, that occurred very frequently, these
22 attacks. And in addition to that, on the 8th of June and on the 26th of
23 October there was another offensive in which we lost two or three troops.
24 Then again it happened on the Orthodox Christmas, which is on the 7th of
25 January, 1993. A sabotage group of theirs numbering a few people - and
1 we found six of them later in front of Mala Tvrdjava - had come to plant
2 explosive and blow up the facility, but due to the vigilance of our
3 combatants they were noticed and they were eliminated. After that we
4 handed over their dead bodies. Similar incidents happened, for example,
5 on the 30th of June, 1992. There was a very dangerous attack between
6 Poljine and Hresa.
7 So it was happening all the time. They particularly targeted us
8 because they thought that it was significant in a way, it was a kind of a
9 dominant elevation and that it could cut off the Vogosca-Hresa
10 communication line which would then leave all our municipalities, Ilijas,
11 Vogosca, Ilija, Rajlovac, Hadzici, et cetera, in encirclement. But we
12 fought tooth and nail and we never let them pass.
13 Q. Thank you. Can we briefly look at P842. It's a map and could
14 you please indicate on the map this line that would have been severed and
15 in which particular area that was.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can the usher please help the
17 witness with the pen. Can we please enlarge this particular section even
18 more. We don't need the rest of the map. Thank you.
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Mr. Rasevic, can you see Stari Grad, Mrkovici, and Grdonj?
21 A. Just a moment.
22 Q. Before that would you like to have it enlarged even more?
23 A. Yes, please.
24 Q. Even more, please. Can you see where the 105th Brigade is?
25 A. Yes, yes, I can see the 105th.
1 Q. Can you see the word "Mrkovici"?
2 A. Well, not exactly.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we please have it enlarged yet
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Just a moment, please.
6 MS. IODICE: Your Honours, if I may, I just want to note that we
7 were not notified that this exhibit would be used with this witness.
8 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Robinson.
9 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, that's true, Mr. President. We apologise for
10 that. This was an idea that Dr. Karadzic had after meeting with the
11 witness, but we should have given notice this morning when we learned of
12 that idea.
13 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can you please enlarge it even
16 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Do you see Mrkovici --
18 JUDGE KWON: Just a second --
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
20 JUDGE KWON: Could you wait till assisted by our usher.
21 Mr. Karadzic, do you need to zoom in further?
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If I can only suggest to the
23 witness to look one centimetre below the top line and he can find
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I found Biosko and Mrkovici should
1 be to the left, but despite of that I cannot find it.
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. To the very top of the map.
4 A. Yes, yes. Vogosca -- oh, yes, this is where Mrkovici is. I can
5 clearly see it.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we please now zoom out and
7 could the witness also be assisted with the pen. Well, we can leave it
8 as this.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Can you please show where the Serbian territory would be severed.
11 Would you just draw a line with an electronic pen.
12 A. So that would -- yes. It would be here and they would attempt to
13 link up. So in actual fact everything else, if that were to be achieved,
14 would remain in encirclement.
15 Q. Thank you. Can you please put the date and your initials
16 somewhere to the bottom.
17 A. Today's the 4th; is that right?
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we please have this tendered
19 into evidence.
20 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
21 THE REGISTRAR: It will receive number D2529, Your Honours.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Another question, Mr. Rasevic. Did you have occasion to see
25 Muslim civilians near your lines doing something?
1 A. Yes, Mr. President, and often too. Even my fighters from the
2 lines warned them not to cut grass and gather hay in good visibility.
3 Otherwise someone might get an idea of opening fire at them or a shell
4 may drop. So that was in front of our lines, in front of
5 Spicaste Stijene and Sedrenik. That's where they were, the local
6 Muslims, and we mostly knew them as locals.
7 Q. Thank you. In line 10 the witness said that there may be a stray
8 shell rather than a shell land.
9 Why did you point out that these were local Muslims?
10 A. Well, the trenches were 50 metres apart or even only 20 metres in
11 some places. And they called out to each other across the lines and the
12 local inhabitants would warn our fighters that the next day there would
13 be some other people at their line, because they rotated every one or two
14 days, and that they should beware of the new shift because the new shift
15 would use any careless move to open sniper fire or engage our lines.
16 Q. Save for the cutting of grass and other farming work, were there
17 any other civilians in front of your lines? Was anyone cutting wood?
18 A. Yes. A part above Sedrenik had a pine wood and people cut down
19 trees, pine trees, for firewood. No one ever opened fire at those
20 people, at least I don't know of that, as they took away timber.
21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Rasevic. I have no further questions of you right
23 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Rasevic, as you have noted that your evidence in
24 chief in most part was admitted in writing in lieu of your oral
25 testimony. Now you'll be cross-examined by the representative of the
1 Office of the Prosecutor.
2 Yes, Ms. Iodice.
3 MS. IODICE: Thank you, Your Honour.
4 Cross-examination by Ms. Iodice:
5 Q. Good morning, Mr. Rasevic.
6 A. Good morning, Madam Prosecutor.
7 Q. Mr. Rasevic, in paragraph 20 of your statement you say that the
8 Mrkovici company was part of the 2nd Romanija Motorised Brigade. Your
9 brigade commander was Miroslav Krajisnik; right?
10 A. No, Madam Prosecutor. Miroslav Krajisnik was the commander of
11 the light Kosevo Brigade. When the VRS was established, my company
12 became part of the 2nd Motorised Romanija Brigade.
13 Q. Who was your commander, do you remember?
14 A. Yes, I do. The first commander of the 2nd Motorised Romanija
15 Brigade was Lieutenant-Colonel Radislav Krstic.
16 Q. Were you within the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps?
17 A. Yes, later on we certainly were. But that was after two or three
18 months, I'm not sure. In any case, then we became part of the
19 1st Romanija Brigade, which was later part of the Sarajevo-Romanija
21 Q. And at that point your commander was Vlado Lizdek; right?
22 A. Before Vlado Lizdek, colonel, the commander of the 1st Romanija
23 Brigade was Colonel Dragomir Milosevic.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 A. Thank you.
1 Q. Were you a member of the SDS before and during the war?
2 A. I was a member of the SDS when it was established in 1990. I was
3 a member and - how should I put it? - I had no position in the party. I
4 was an ordinary member and I still am -- actually, I'm no longer an
5 active member but I'm a sympathiser of the SDS.
6 Q. Thank you. And as a member and supporter, you were informed of
7 the party's goals and policies; right?
8 A. Well, as much as I could, as little time that I had once the war
9 broke out because there was no time afterwards, but I wasn't particularly
10 interested in politics. We were all there, at least the people I
11 associated with. Everyone was concerned because of the whole situation.
12 Muslims talked about Alija and the Serbs talked about their leadership
13 and apparently they couldn't agree on how to resolve the situation.
14 Q. Thank you. And you heard about the six strategic goals of the
15 Serbian people; right?
16 A. One couldn't really say I understood them at the time. I wasn't
17 engaged in all that back then. I'm not certain about that. I really
18 couldn't tell them what they were.
19 Q. You didn't hear that one of the goals was the division of
21 A. Actually, the Serbian Democratic Party -- or actually, the
22 representatives of Serbs, not only the SDS, at the time proposed a
23 cantonal division in Bosnia and Herzegovina of some sort. As for the
24 division of Sarajevo, once it had all fallen through and the conflict
25 broke out, that option appeared, to divide Sarajevo.
1 Q. Thank you. And --
2 A. You're welcome.
3 Q. -- and although you weren't very much interested in politics, you
4 were elected -- you were appointed as a member of the War Commission for
5 the Serbian municipality of Sarajevo centre; isn't that right?
6 A. I don't recall that. I never received such document. It may
7 well be that someone somewhere put it in writing, but I really don't know
8 a thing about that.
9 Q. Okay. I'll try to refresh your memory.
10 MS. IODICE: If we can have in e-court 65 ter 24245.
11 Q. So this is a presidential order dated 21st of July, 1992, and
12 signed by the accused, Dr. Radovan Karadzic. And you were appointed as
13 one of the five members of the War Commission for the Serbian
14 municipality of Sarajevo centre. Does this refresh your recollection?
15 A. This doesn't tell me anything. At this time, I was way too busy
16 with combat operations so that it would apply -- well, I know all these
17 names. There's no denying that. But this doesn't tell me anything.
18 Q. What this document tells you is that the appointment of the
19 members of the War Commission were confirmed and one of the members was
20 Blasko Rasevic under number 4. You were one of these members, weren't
22 A. I can see it here on this piece of paper. It is true what I can
23 see, but I'm telling you I have never received it and I have no clue, no
24 idea, really.
25 MS. IODICE: I would ask this document to be admitted,
1 Your Honours.
2 MR. ROBINSON: No objection, Mr. President.
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
4 MS. IODICE: Thank you.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Document 24245 becomes Exhibit P2527 [sic],
6 Your Honours.
7 JUDGE KWON: I'm sorry.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, I apologise. Exhibit P6027,
9 Your Honours.
10 MS. IODICE:
11 Q. So moving now to a different topic and I want to discuss your
12 role as Mrkovici Company commander. In paragraph 29 of your statement
13 you say that you held this position from the 31st of January, 1993, to
14 September 1994?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And your company didn't have two commanders, right?
17 A. Well, you know, after he was killed -- my commander was
18 Bojo Dragas. He was killed on the 30th of January, 1993, when we
19 recaptured Mala Tvrdjava. I was his deputy at the time. Automatically,
20 I became in charge of the company. It lasted -- well, I can't remember
21 exactly because I got fed up at some point. I was replaced by
22 Sasa Maksimovic. He didn't stay in that position long, only a month or
23 two, and I returned to be the company commander.
24 Q. And that was Sinisa Maksimovic, not Sasa Maksimovic; right?
25 A. Correct, you're right. You're right.
1 Q. Thank you. And that happened -- Mr. Maksimovic came here to
2 testify and he said that he was the company commander from the 27th of
3 July, 1994. So is it correct that you probably left the command at the
4 end of July 1994 -- rather, in September?
5 A. Well, I can't pin-point it, but I believe it was the 4th of
6 September, 1994, when I left, and he was probably in that position until
7 the 27th of July. He was there for only two or three months. He wasn't
8 there long. He was a young guy who had just come out of school. When
9 Spicaste Stijene fell on one occasion, he withdrew from the position and
10 I took over the company until early September 1994.
11 Q. Thank you. In paragraph 23 --
12 A. You're welcome.
13 Q. -- of your statement, you spoke about being targeted by mortars
14 placed on trailer vehicles and hid them behind buildings, schools,
15 kindergartens, hospitals, and they were firing from these positions.
16 MS. IODICE: If we could go the English to the next page.
17 Q. So those mortars that you discussed were hidden within civilian
18 facilities; correct?
19 A. Correct.
20 Q. And you could not see them since they were hidden; right?
21 A. As a matter of fact, we saw them when they opened fire at us from
22 those vehicles, from the back of those vehicles. Immediately after
23 firing they would flee, taking cover. As for the mortars, in the yard of
24 the Nemanja Vlatkovic school, which was a school for mentally challenged
25 children -- well, by that time they had emptied the school. Then in the
1 Kosevo Hospital they opened fire from there daily. Those working in the
2 Kosevo Hospital told me later that they came there as well with trucks
3 where the mortars were. They would fire and flee. Kosevo was in open
5 Q. Thank you. And you anticipated one of my next questions. You
6 said that they would fire and then very quickly move. So if you wanted
7 to respond to this fire you had to be very quick, you have to fire
8 immediately, because otherwise they would move and be somewhere else;
10 A. Precisely. In such circumstances when we knew they fired from
11 such positions, we didn't even respond. We didn't want to open random
12 fire. As for their positions where they were deployed, we would get in
13 touch with our superior command of what was going on and then they would
14 make decisions as to whether to engage or not.
15 Q. And engaging after they had moved would have had no effect,
16 right, because by then the mortars would have been gone?
17 A. I'm telling you, as for the mortars mounted on vehicles, on the
18 chassises of vehicles or trailers, we couldn't engage them because they
19 would fire one or two up to three shells and move away. There would have
20 been no point and we didn't engage them. As for those we did, when we
21 found out that they fired from different kind of positions, we did
22 engage. We used what we had because the biggest piece we had was a
23 Browning and we could only reach them by that. In that way we would try
24 to make them run.
25 Q. Didn't your unit also have mortars?
1 A. No. My company had only 60-millimetre mortars, the small ones,
2 and we had two 84-millimetre pieces later on. That's all we had.
3 Q. And moving on to the next subject, you agree that from your
4 positions you had a very good view over the city; right?
5 A. Right.
6 Q. And is it your evidence that SRK never fired from
7 Spicaste Stijene at all?
8 A. To my knowledge, never. Now, whether it happened when I was
9 absent - and there isn't much chance of that because I was there non-stop
10 at the lines - in my knowledge they didn't.
11 Q. Thank you. Could we have in e-court Exhibit P1619. This is a
12 report dated 5th of March, 1995. And if we go to page 3 in English and
13 in B/C/S, we can see under 8(a) (ii) and (iii), we can see that on that
14 day two civilians were wounded from fire coming from Sharpstone,
15 Spicaste Stijene. So if we now go back to page 1 in English and B/C/S,
16 under number 3(b) we can see that after that incident the EgyBat returned
17 the fire on the Bosnian Serb positions at Sharpstone and received a phone
18 call from Radava Battalion commander stating that -- stating that if "the
19 EgyBat APC in his target practice area ... is not removed within 30
20 minutes it will be fired upon.' Shortly after this call the sector
21 commander arrived at the APC location ... "
22 If we now move to 65 ter 23943 and we go to page 6. It should be
23 the next page probably. Just a moment, Your Honours.
24 MS. IODICE: Your Honour, I misspoke. The 65 ter should be
25 23935. My apologies again. The number is 29935.
1 THE REGISTRAR: I apologise, 29935 is not in e-court.
2 MS. IODICE: I will leave it, Your Honours.
3 Q. Mr. Rasevic --
4 A. Yes.
5 MS. IODICE: Just for a second, Your Honours.
6 [Prosecution counsel confer]
7 MS. IODICE: Your Honours, I'm sorry, the correct number is
8 23935. And if we can go to page 6.
9 Q. Mr. Rasevic, this document is dated 22nd of August, 1995, and if
10 we go to the bottom of the page at the end it says at -- and I'll read it
11 for you since there's no translation.
12 "At 221425B, 1 X mortar shell and 1 X RPG rocket were fired by
13 BSA soldiers from north-east of Sedrenik ... towards downtown."
14 So do you now agree that Bosnian Serb soldiers in your area were
15 firing at Sedrenik and towards the city and on civilian targets?
16 A. I don't agree. I mean, we never fired at civilian targets. As
17 for this case, I was no longer at Mrkovici, I mean I had left. So that
18 means that I cannot comment upon this. But I claim that my unit never,
19 absolutely never, opened fire at the civilian population except for where
20 we had observed their machine-gun nests or mortars or -- I mean those
21 launching ferry boats, what they used to target us, but never, never, I
22 am not aware that that happened.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we kindly ask for a
24 clarification here. Where is it written that civilians were fired at?
25 And what does this mean, north-east of Sedrenik?
1 MS. IODICE: The first document identified two civilians victims,
2 P1619, on page 3. This document identifies firing from north-east of
3 Sedrenik and I can ask the witness.
4 Q. North-east of Sedrenik corresponds more or less to your location;
5 is that right?
6 A. Well, you couldn't exactly put it that way. We were to the north
7 of Sedrenik. Now, I mean -- well, Sedrenik is sort of a settlement that
8 is wider than Spicaste Stijene, so to the north of Sedrenik and to the
9 north-east, that's where this other hill was and that's where their
10 forces were, opposite us. The altitude is the same like Spicaste Stijene
11 so that would be it. So it's a question of 50 or 100 metres. That's the
12 difference. So then there is Sedam Suma, seven forests,
13 Podrugav Do [phoen], and other locations that they held. It was the
14 other side that held that and that is to the north-east.
15 Q. Mr. Rasevic, this document identified -- identifies the side that
16 was firing towards down-town. It says from the BSA, which is the acronym
17 for Bosnian Serb army. This fire wasn't coming from the Muslim
18 positions. This fire was coming from the Bosnian Serb side.
19 A. It has to do with these two civilians who were killed, right, at
20 Sedrenik? Yes?
21 Q. No, I'm now talking of this document that you have in front of
22 you. This document says that one mortar shell was fired from the Bosnian
23 Serb side towards down-town.
24 A. Yes, yes. I see. So, so, at that time I was no longer at
25 Mrkovici. I was no longer company commander there. I left. I'm looking
1 at the date here. I left. I went from there, so I cannot confirm this,
2 I cannot deny it, because I was not there.
3 Q. And you also cannot exclude that there was firing from the SRK
4 positions at Spicaste Stijene; right?
5 A. On the basis of this document I cannot. I was not there and I
6 really cannot talk about things I haven't seen.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MS. IODICE: Your Honours, I would ask for the admission of this
10 MR. ROBINSON: No objection.
11 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Document 23935 receives number P6028,
13 Your Honours.
14 MS. IODICE: Just a moment, Your Honours.
15 [Prosecution counsel confer]
16 MS. IODICE: Your Honours, I have no further questions for this
17 witness. Thank you.
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, do you have re-examination?
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very briefly, Excellency. So could
21 the same document please be returned now. We can finish before the
23 Re-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
24 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Rasevic, now I'm going to read the next line
25 to you. I'll read it out in English so that they translate it better
1 than I would.
2 [In English] "At 221430B, 3 X mortar shells were fired from
3 Grdonj ... to Stari Grad ..."
4 [Interpretation] Who held Grdonj?
5 A. Grdonj was held by the Muslim forces throughout the war.
6 Q. Thank you. And what was the majority population in Stari Grad?
7 A. In Stari Grad the majority population was Muslim.
8 Q. And which forces held Stari Grad under their control?
9 A. Stari Grad was under the control of the Muslim forces.
10 Q. Thank you. You said that the lines were about 50 metres away.
11 What would be necessary? What kind of proximity would be needed to
12 establish from where the fire came, Serb or Muslim, if they're only 50
13 metres away from each other?
14 A. Well, I mentioned the example of Spicaste Stijene only a moment
15 ago and that other area, Podlugav Brijeg [phoen], we called it that. I
16 don't know what it's really called. That's precisely the case because
17 the altitude is the same to the north, or rather to the north-east. It's
18 the same locations. So it was very hard there to establish where a
19 sniper shot could have come from, if any.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Excellencies, I have no further
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Thank you, Mr. Rasevic.
25 JUDGE KWON: Well, then that concludes your evidence,
1 Mr. Rasevic. On behalf of the Chamber I would like to thank you for your
2 coming to The Hague to give it. Now you're free to go.
3 We'll rise --
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much,
5 Your Excellency. I would also like to thank you for your fairness.
6 JUDGE KWON: We'll rise all together and we'll have a break for
7 half an hour. I wanted to tell you this before we started today, but
8 given that there's a hearing at 3.00 scheduled to take place in this
9 courtroom, we need to rise at 4.30 and we'll have a -- 2.30, 1430, yes,
10 2.30, we'll have a shorter break for today.
11 We'll resume at 1.00.
12 --- Recess taken at 12.31 p.m.
13 [The witness entered court]
14 --- On resuming at 1.02 p.m.
15 JUDGE KWON: Yes, would the witness take the solemn declaration,
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
18 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
19 WITNESS: ZDRAVKO CVORO
20 [Witness answered through interpreter]
21 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Please be seated and make yourself
23 For this session we are sitting pursuant to Rule 15 bis with
24 Judge Lattanzi being away due to urgent official matters.
25 Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
2 Examination by Mr. Karadzic:
3 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Cvoro.
4 A. Good afternoon, Mr. President.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please have in e-court
7 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Mr. Cvoro, did you give a statement to my Defence team?
9 A. Yes, I gave a statement that we see here.
10 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could the witness please
11 approach the microphone. Thank you.
12 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Cvoro, could you come closer to the microphone
13 so that the interpreters could hear you better.
14 THE WITNESS: Okay.
15 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
16 Yes, please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
18 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Did you read this statement and sign it?
20 A. [Interpretation] I read the statement and signed the statement.
21 Q. Thank you. I'm waiting for the interpretation and I'm kindly
22 asking you to pause as well. When we're speaking Serbian, they're
23 supposed to interpret.
24 Does this statement reflect exactly what you said?
25 A. Exactly everything I said was written in that statement.
1 Q. If I were to put the same questions to you here today, would your
2 answers to these questions essentially be the same?
3 A. I hope they would be the same. Perhaps I could not repeat
4 everything in the same order, but at any rate it would be the same.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, may I tender
7 this package, the statement and eight documents that have not been
8 admitted and then there's some that have been admitted.
9 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, with respect to two documents referred
10 to in para 13, i.e., 1D800 and the other referred to by the ERN number, I
11 don't think they are either updated or translated into English. So in
12 order for you to tender to those -- those two documents, you need to put
13 that -- those documents to the witness live.
14 Otherwise, do you have any objection, Mr. Tieger?
15 MR. TIEGER: Otherwise, no, Mr. President. I would note that
16 what is currently listed as 1D00841 and for which presumably a Defence
17 exhibit number is sought is already admitted as P00737.
18 JUDGE KWON: Thank you very much.
19 Should we give the number to the witness's Rule 92 ter statement
21 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D6801 becomes Exhibit D2530,
22 Your Honours.
23 JUDGE KWON: And as regards the six other documents, associated
24 exhibits, the numbers will be given in due course by the Registrar.
25 Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Now I would like to
2 read out the summary of Mr. Zdravko Cvoro's statement. I'll read it out
3 in the English language.
4 [In English] Zdravko Cvoro was the president of the Crisis Staff
5 of the Pale municipality. From the 1st of January, 1992, to the 31st of
6 August, 1992, he was the president of the Executive Committee of the Pale
7 municipality. He was never a member of the SDS.
8 At the start of the war, the majority of the population living in
9 Pale was Serbs and a large number of Serb refugees moved from Sarajevo to
10 Pale. The municipality had difficulties in providing the refugees with
11 accommodation and humanitarian aid and all measures were taken to provide
12 them with the accommodation and basic living conditions.
13 During the war a number of incidents caused fear of retaliation
14 and insecurity among the Muslim population in Pale, as crimes were
15 committed by their compatriots. These included the killing and wounding
16 of Pale SJB policemen, then the massacre of JNA soldiers and VRS soldiers
17 who were transporting food and other supplies, and the killing and
18 expulsion of a large number of Serbs. As a result, there were individual
19 and subsequently collective requests to move out from Pale to Sarajevo.
20 Zdravko Cvoro, along with the president of the Pale municipality,
21 personally went to neighbourhoods inhabited by Muslims to convince them
22 to stay and assured them that as municipal officials they would guarantee
23 their safety. The Pale municipality confirmed it would ensure that
24 Muslims would enjoy all civil rights and normal living conditions.
25 Despite this, a large number of requests to move were received and at a
1 meeting of 18th of June, 1992, a decision was made by the Pale
2 municipality Assembly acknowledging the constitutional right to freedom
3 of movement and residence.
4 There was no forced expulsion of civilians of Muslim and Croatian
5 ethnicity from Pale. Those that left did so at their own request and out
6 of their own free will. Many left in organised convoys and took personal
7 belongings. Others made agreements with Serb neighbours in relation to
8 the safekeeping of their property. Those residents who did not wish to
9 leave continued to live together with the Serbs. There was no
10 destruction of non-Serb property in this area, except along the
11 demarcation line and where there was combat activity.
12 The Pale municipality Executive Committee drew up a document
13 requiring the SJB, police station, to undertake the protection of
14 property of non-Serbs until it is taken over by the authorised municipal
15 commission, as well as one regarding the establishment of a commission
16 for refugees and humanitarian aid. After the war immovable property was
17 returned to owners and a number of Muslims returned to their homes. Pale
18 Crisis Staff was put in place in case of the regular authorities were
19 unable to meet. The Crisis Staff was composed of more or less the same
20 people who were in the regular bodies. The difference was in the way of
21 work, in the sense that regular authorities used to have a period of up
22 to 15 days to make decisions, while the Crisis Staff had to respond in
23 urgent situations, for instance, in an hour's time. According to the
24 instructions of the Presidency of the SFRY, Yugoslavia, the republics had
25 an obligation to develop plans for emergency and the managers of those
1 plans were the Crisis Staffs. In the event of a natural disaster or
2 other emergency situations, the Crisis Staff was convened with the most
3 responsible members of the municipality as its members.
4 According to the law on Territorial Defence at that time, private
5 resources necessary for the functioning of the authority could be
6 employed. The situation was dramatic in terms of telephone lines in
7 Pale. There was a grave deficiency in the -- this aspect. Resultantly,
8 both Serbs and Muslims had their telephones switched off for this reason.
9 In addition, the army switched off telephones of other state authorities,
10 including the Ministry of Justice.
11 During the war, the Muslim municipality of Pale was formed, which
12 included Renovica and Praca and other Muslim villages. If the VRS wanted
13 to take over the Muslim municipality of Pale, it could easily have done
14 so, but it did not because the Muslim population was a majority there.
15 The Muslim community of Pale still exists today with its base in Praca.
16 In Pale, in the centre, there was a Catholic church which had
17 been preserved to this day, while there has never been a mosque in Pale
19 [Interpretation] That would be the summary in view of your
20 decision. Could we please call up in e-court 1D800, the one that I'm
21 supposed to deal with live with the witness.
22 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Mr. Cvoro, could you please take a look at this and tell us what
24 this report refers to, this SRNA report at the time. Would you like me
25 to read it out or would you like to read it?
1 A. As far as I can see, this has to do with the destruction of
2 certain lines that were linked with Pale.
3 Q. What is the date of this report?
4 A. The 28th of April, 1992.
5 Q. Thank you. Now, what does it say in the second paragraph? Can
6 you read all of it?
7 A. "Four sniper shots destroyed the mini link on the building of the
8 telegraph and the telephone in the street Vojvoda Putnika 100. From the
9 moment when telephone traffic was disrupted until the present day,
10 digital links work at only 30 per cent of their capacity."
11 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us where this street is, Vojvoda
12 Putnika, and what this building is?
13 A. It is in Sarajevo. It is the main street that runs by the
14 Marsal Tito barracks, the former Marsal Tito barracks, and it goes
15 towards the Malta neighbourhood.
16 Q. So how did this reflect on the state of the telephone lines in
18 A. Well, we had enough trouble as it was in terms of the number of
19 telephone lines. Pale was a small municipality that had small telephone
20 capacities. As these links were destroyed, the situation became much
21 worse and it was very hard to begin with, the situation regarding
22 telephone lines, that is.
23 Q. Thank you. And how did you resolve that, in view of the fact
24 that the state organs had their seat there and then there was television
25 and so on, how did you resolve that problem?
1 A. When the state organs, or rather, the republic organs moved to
2 Pale, major problems were created. First of all, they were supposed to
3 be provided with accommodation and telephone lines and other lines. In
4 addition to the republican organs, the SRNA news agency appeared asking
5 for proper premises and telephone lines so that they could function. We
6 were covered by Sarajevo. All the information that we received we
7 received as they wished. The then-appointed director Todor Dutina came
8 to see me and asked me to do whatever I could in order to establish the
9 SRNA news agency. I asked him, "Well, what have you got Todor?" And he
10 said, "I've got nothing." "What do you need, Todor?" And his answer
11 was, "I need an office, a telephone, and a typewriter."
12 I was president of the Executive Board and from my very own
13 office I gave Mr. Dutina a telephone with a Telefax and also a telephone
14 number and a typewriter. Then he went on to establish the SRNA news
15 agency. Many Serbs came to Pale. Among others, there were people who
16 were familiar with this line of work. They quickly made do and
17 established the SRNA news agency. The situation was similar as far as
18 television was concerned too. Many people asked for telephone lines or
19 telephone numbers. Also in Pale we also had only primary medical care.
20 All of that was based in the health centre there and the wounded and ill
21 already started coming in. A reserve war time hospital arrived in Pale
22 and we gave them premises within the Koran hotel and that is where we
23 established a military war time hospital. Also, many telephone numbers
24 were required by this hospital.
25 I also know full well that for the government and the Presidency
1 and the Assembly, we practically mobilised all the telephone numbers that
2 were not indispensable, both in the business sector and the social
3 services. It's not only that there weren't enough telephone lines.
4 There weren't enough telephone sets as such. From the municipality and
5 from Famos, we got all the telephone sets and started using them.
6 Q. Thank you very much indeed.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this document be admitted now?
8 JUDGE KWON: We'll mark it for identification.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Document receives number D2531, Your Honours.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
11 1D25730, can we see that briefly. It's marked with an ERN number
12 in the statement.
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Since there's no translation, Mr. Cvoro, I shall deal with this
15 very quickly, these communications, that is. So in the fourth line from
16 above Slobodan Aviljas is calling the Crisis Staff and introduces himself
17 by saying that as the Minister of Justice, Slobo Aviljas. Did you know
18 him and did he work at the Ministry of Justice?
19 A. Yes, I knew him personally, and we actually did our military
20 service together before.
21 Q. Thank you. Further down it says Slobodan Aviljas, Aco Kutlaca is
22 the interlocutor. It says:
23 "Listen, I am in the post office right now. I'm calling here
24 from the hospital. Somebody disconnected the telephone of the duty
25 judges up there where we are sleeping."
1 Further down Kutlaca says:
2 "Let me tell you, this was disconnected on orders from the
3 commander. You have to submit a request in writing in order to be
5 How come this happened? Is this in line with what you told us
6 about, that you had these problems and that you even disconnected the
7 telephone of the Ministry of Justice?
8 A. This confirms what I said, that we disconnected the telephones of
9 many institutions. Among others, this thing happened too and --
10 MR. TIEGER: I'm sorry to interrupt the witness, but I think this
11 is in line with the guidance the accused received before about questions
12 that are necessarily leading. This has been throughout a kind of an
13 invitation for witnesses to -- presenting material to him that we can't
14 even read in full and then leading the witness to what the point that
15 Dr. Karadzic wants him to affirm. Under the circumstances, I certainly
16 didn't object to the attempt to use the document, but I think it needs to
17 be used fairly.
18 JUDGE KWON: Do you follow, Mr. Karadzic?
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, I would like to respond.
20 Just a moment, please.
21 [Defence counsel confer]
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I can rephrase, but the fact
23 remains that the Prosecution is reading only parts of documents to
24 witnesses and then I have to spend my time in re-direct. And of course I
25 can rephrase this. I can just ask: How does this read in terms of your
1 own experience?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Am I supposed to say something?
3 You're asking me, President, aren't you?
4 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Yes, if the Trial Chamber allows me to do so, I'm asking you how
6 this reads in terms of your own experience with insufficient number of
7 telephone lines?
8 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, given the -- this Trial Chamber's
9 practice as regards the admission of intercepts, I don't think there's a
10 point on your part to putting this witness -- to the witness. Why don't
11 you just elicit from the witness directly as to the telephone situation
12 without having to rely on this intercept. We have difficulty following
13 this line of questioning without the interpretation.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I do apologise. Maybe I can ask
15 this way.
16 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Is it correct that --
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just a moment, please.
19 [Defence counsel confer]
20 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, before you -- if you start your
21 question: Is it correct, that is a leading question.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I do apologise. Thank you.
23 Everything you said is correct.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Now, who was it that you denied telephone lines for the needs of
1 the state organs and on what basis did you do that?
2 A. Well, look, the federal law on defence regulated things as
3 follows. In case of war or imminent threat of war, all resources can be
4 mobilised, all resources that can be used for the defence of the country,
5 or rather, the defence of the territory involved. That means that in
6 addition to the resources that the army has, that the business community
7 has, even personal resources can be mobilised for the defence of the
8 state or the defence of the territory, in keeping with that, even in
9 peace time conditions according to that law, when military exercises are
10 carried out, it wasn't only military conscripts that were mobilised.
11 Also materiel resources were mobilised, such as vehicles, scooters,
12 motorboats, and other resources that are needed for military exercises.
13 In war time the situation is even more drastic. So the situation
14 that we had to deal with was that we could not function, that we could
15 not meet all these needs that had cropped up, so we disconnected
16 telephones of Serbs too. I as president of the Executive Board did not
17 have a telephone either; that is to say, I gave up my own telephone so
18 that other organs could function, Serbs, companies, some of the Muslims
19 who had received this order. I can say that I did not even sign this
20 order, but I'm trying to explain what the reasons were for this order.
21 It is provided here as a document bearing my name and surname.
22 Q. Thank you. If you don't wish to it admit this intercept which
23 just proves that the ministry was also left without a telephone, then I
24 have no further questions.
25 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Karadzic.
1 Mr. Cvoro, as you have noted, your evidence in chief was admitted
2 mainly in written form in view of your oral testimony. Now you'll be
3 cross-examined by the representative of the Office of the Prosecutor.
4 Yes, Mr. Tieger.
5 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Mr. President.
6 Cross-examination by Mr. Tieger:
7 Q. Good afternoon, Witness. I want to speak to you first about this
8 aspect of your statement and it concerns these paragraphs. I want to
9 talk to you about the portions of your statement which assert that
10 Muslims became insecure because they feared retaliation for what their
11 "compatriots" had done, that's paragraph 4. And so they sought to leave,
12 although Serb officials tried to convince them to stay, that's paragraphs
13 5 through 6. So they left of their own free will, paragraph 6, in
14 organised convoys with their personal belongings and documents, and they
15 protected their property by entering into various agreements with their
16 Serb neighbours or through other arrangements, that's paragraphs 7
17 through 8. And I want to look at your assertion that Muslims left
18 voluntarily of their own free will.
19 This Court has heard evidence, Mr. Cvoro, that, among other
20 things, the Bosnian Serb police in Pale harassed, threatened, or
21 pressured Muslims to leave, and that's found at P0733, paragraphs 23
22 through 27, 33 through 34, 39, and 49. Mr. Cvoro, that was, in fact,
23 part of the reality that Muslims faced that made their departure not an
24 act of free will and not voluntary; isn't that right?
25 A. Mr. Prosecutor, the police was not under the jurisdiction of the
1 local authorities. I didn't have any authority over the police. They
2 have their vertical chain of structure. That was the case before the war
3 and that is the case nowadays. My only influence on the police would be
4 in the form of a request or a recommendation. There was no other way for
5 me to influence the work of the police.
6 Q. Well -- and I'll talk with you a bit further about that in a bit,
7 Mr. Cvoro. But for the moment I simply want to confirm, as I think you
8 impliedly did, that, in fact, the police in Pale, that is, the Bosnian
9 Serb police, engaged in efforts to force Muslims out?
10 A. I am not aware of that; however, we provided document D28 which
11 shows that the municipality of Pale in response to the written request of
12 the Muslims to move out responded to it and that happened somewhere in
13 early April. They said that there was no reason for them to --
14 Q. Excuse me, I know there are other documents and I see you want to
15 direct our attention to another issue. I'm focusing on the actions of
16 the police. Now, you said you weren't aware of that, but the fact is,
17 Mr. Cvoro, that that's exactly what you said in 1992, that the police
18 were engaged in such conduct. And I want to turn your attention to
19 D00031, a meeting of the Pale Municipal Assembly on the 18th of June,
20 1992. But, in fact, before we go there I want to point out -- I want to
21 show you and I want you to tell the Court how that meeting came about, so
22 let's turn to D0030, a document of 12 June 1992.
23 A. What document is that?
24 Q. It will be shown on the screen to you, sir. It should be in
25 front of you right now.
1 A. This is Mr. Starcevic, the president of the municipality. He is
2 sending it to the secretary of the Pale SDS. I was a representative of
3 the executive branch and the president of the municipality --
4 Q. I'm sorry, and I don't mean to raise my voice but I'm trying to
5 move us along quickly, so I only did that -- it's the only way I know how
6 to stop you for a moment.
7 I want you to confirm that this document is, in fact, a message
8 from the president of the Pale Municipal Assembly, Starcevic, who is
9 asking the secretary of the Pale SDS to urgently call a meeting of the
10 Pale SDS Main Board so that the party can adopt a general position on the
11 moving out of non-Serbian population from Pale. And he notes that if the
12 Main Board, that is, the SDS Main Board, can meet as soon as possible
13 then a session of the Municipal Assembly can be called for 18 June 1992.
14 Now, as far as you're aware, that's what happened on June 12th,
15 that Mr. Starcevic pushed the --
16 A. Yes, that is correct.
17 Q. Okay. And in fact in terms of the link or the interconnection
18 between the municipality and the party, I'd also like to turn to 65 ter
19 24210. And we'll get to the 18 June meeting in just a moment. This is a
20 document dated 26th of May, 1992. It bears your signature. It's a
21 request for allotment of funds --
22 A. Yes, addressed to the government of Republika Srpska.
23 Q. And if we continue on to page -- the next page of the English,
24 please, it includes some of the expenditures of the municipality. And we
25 see -- we have to continue to the next page of the English, I'm sorry, or
1 just scroll down, please, on the English so the Judges can see it.
2 JUDGE KWON: In B/C/S as well.
3 MR. TIEGER: Okay. Perhaps if we turn to page -- the next page
4 in the English as well, please.
5 Q. We see at the top of the -- toward the top of the page in English
6 a payment to the Serb Democratic Party Pale of 100.000 dinars, I take it.
7 And if we turn to the next page in English, we see in the middle of the
8 page funding of the Serb Democratic Party Pale has been stated according
9 to their needs. So this document, sir, is a reflection of the financial
10 support by the municipality to the Pale SDS?
11 A. Mr. Prosecutor, in the regular budget there were always
12 allocations intended for the financing of political parties. Therefore,
13 there is nothing illegal in this because the SDS party was a party that
14 had absolute power in Pale. The individuals who held official positions,
15 most of them were appointed by the party. This is only a request for the
16 provision of fund to finance only one portion, and that is specifically
17 the costs in the month of May. One can see the breakdown of the funds
18 and what the needs are, and that's the difference. Obviously there was a
19 need to provide a small portion of financing to the party as well.
20 Q. That's adequate, Mr. Cvoro.
21 MR. TIEGER: And I tender that document, Mr. President.
22 MR. ROBINSON: No objection.
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Document 24210 becomes Exhibit P6029,
25 Your Honours.
1 MR. TIEGER:
2 Q. And if we could now turn to the June 18th meeting which is
3 D00031. Now, there appear to be two items on the agenda, Mr. Cvoro, as
4 reflected on page 2 of the English. The first item is a report on the
5 security situation and, as we see in the document,
6 Lieutenant-Colonel Krstic takes the floor at one point and reports. But
7 the second item is the one referred to in the document we saw earlier
8 from Mr. Starcevic, and that is position to be taken by the Assembly on
9 non-Serbs moving out of the territory of Pale municipality.
10 And if we turn to item 2 which is located on the -- begins on the
11 fourth page of the English and I believe the same page in B/C/S. We can
12 see that there are various opinions provided by the attendees ranging
13 from the view that the government should first pass a decision and the
14 municipality would follow that to that there should be exchanges that
15 govern the transfer to UNPROFOR should handle it and so on. But I wanted
16 to look at what was stated at the bottom of the page in English by the
17 president of the municipality and the chairman of the Executive
18 Committee. Now, the chairman of the Executive Committee is you,
19 Mr. Cvoro; correct?
20 A. Yes, yes.
21 Q. And there you and the president of the Assembly object to the
22 activities of the public security station, that's the police, because it
23 had participated in the attempt to organise the Muslims and move them
24 out. You go on to say that was before a political decision had been made
25 and thus bypassing the official structures of power.
1 Now, Mr. Cvoro, that's a reflection in 1992 of the fact -- of
2 your awareness of the activities of the police to get Muslims out of
3 Pale; correct?
4 A. No, we were not satisfied with some of the work on the ground
5 done by the police, and we sent a request, or rather, a protest demanding
6 that this situation be rectified. I cannot say generally that the police
7 was involved in such activities because I have no knowledge about that.
8 Q. Now, with respect to the issue of the moving out of the Muslims
9 which is item 2 of this agenda and which was raised by Mr. Starcevic,
10 that was not a concern or issue that was isolated to Pale. In fact, the
11 issue of the moving out of the Muslims was being addressed elsewhere in
12 RS by RS officials; correct?
13 A. I'm not aware of that. I know about Pale and I can guarantee you
14 that there was no forced moving out of the Muslims from Pale. We did our
15 best by going on the ground. I myself went two or three times to the
16 villages where Muslims lived and I tried to persuade them --
17 Q. Mr. Cvoro, sorry, that's in your statement and I'm trying to use
18 our time as efficiently as we can. My question was about whether or not
19 the issue of moving out of the Muslims was simply something that arose in
20 Pale or was being addressed in other parts of the RS. And in that
21 connection I'd like to turn to 65 ter 00580.
22 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, while we're doing that I think that
23 the witness should in general be allowed to complete his answers because
24 it's -- if there's a shortage of time, it's not really an excuse to be
25 rude to the witness.
1 MR. TIEGER: Let me --
2 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. It just occurred to me how the terms
3 would be translated into B/C/S. When we say "moving out," it may be
4 transitive verb and intransitive verb. Is there a difference?
5 MR. TIEGER: I do take the point -- the Court's point, and so I'm
6 trying to rely on the translations provided, and then I think we can,
7 among other things, rely on the totality of the evidence to understand
8 the meaning of the term. But in terms of the strict usage of that term
9 in English, I'm attempting to follow the translations I've been provided.
10 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
11 Yes, bearing that in mind, let's continue.
12 MR. TIEGER: And, Mr. President, with respect to Mr. Robinson's
13 issue, time is a concern for a variety of reasons which I'm happy to
14 identify for the Court, but my -- my moments of interrupting the witness
15 are a reflection of that. So if -- given the nature of this week and the
16 fact that we will have down time this week because of the number of
17 witnesses that will be -- that translated, I'm more than willing to be
18 less vigilant about curtailing the witness if I'm assured that I'm not
19 going to be unfairly held to a -- an arbitrary limit, provided that I'm
20 focusing on relevant materials, as I'm clearly doing.
21 JUDGE KWON: Shall we leave the matter there and could you --
22 could you ask the question again.
23 MR. TIEGER: Sure.
24 JUDGE KWON: Because it was my impression that the witness was
25 not following your question properly, probably because of the translation
2 MR. TIEGER: Okay, that's fine.
3 JUDGE KWON: Let's give it a try again.
4 MR. TIEGER: Fine.
5 Q. Mr. Witness, just to make sure we're talking about the same
6 matter, we had looked a few moments ago at Mr. Starcevic's request for a
7 position by the Pale SDS Main Board about the moving out of the Muslims.
8 We had looked at the agenda item on the 18 June Municipal Assembly
9 session. An item which provided -- which asked -- for which the agenda
10 was position to be taken by the Assembly on non-Serbs moving out of the
11 territory. And then my question for you was about whether this -- in
12 fact, I was stating to you the fact that this issue concerning the moving
13 out of the Muslims was not one that arose in Pale only but that was being
14 addressed elsewhere in the RS. And you said that you were not -- you
15 claimed that you were not aware of that as I understood.
16 MR. TIEGER: Just, that's the problem with paraphrasing. If
17 Mr. Robinson thinks that's a problem, then he can read out where we are
18 now. I'm trying to bring the witness up-to-date.
19 JUDGE KWON: Let's make the question simpler. So what is your
20 question, Mr. Tieger?
21 MR. TIEGER: I'll repeat what I said verbatim before Mr. Robinson
22 made his objection.
23 Q. My question was whether the issue of the moving out of the
24 Muslims was simply something that arose in Pale or was being addressed in
25 other parts of the RS. And that had been --
1 A. Mr. Prosecutor, as far as other parts of the RS are concerned, I
2 don't know. I was the representative of the executive branch. The
3 initiative for the moving out was launched by the Muslims themselves.
4 They came to see me both individually and in groups. They also came to
5 see Mr. Starcevic. Mr. Starcevic then --
6 Q. I am going to interrupt.
7 A. -- launched an initiative to address this issue --
8 Q. Excuse me, Witness.
9 A. -- at the highest level at the municipality.
10 JUDGE KWON: I think you answered the question, Mr. --
11 MR. TIEGER: Yes --
12 JUDGE KWON: -- Cvoro. Let's continue.
13 MR. TIEGER: The witness answered the question and then proceeded
14 to repeat various parts of his statement.
15 Q. Witness, I want you to look at this exhibit. This is an article
16 from Javnost and it refers to the government of the Serbian autonomous
17 region of Birac, and specifically in the second paragraph it refers to a
18 decision passed on the "safe moving of Muslims from that area." The
19 suggestion to the neighbouring Muslim-Croat municipalities to organise
20 this within seven days. And the reason given by the government to take
21 that step, as it says, as a result of crimes Muslim extremists carried
22 out against Serbs in this area.
23 Now, Mr. Cvoro, this is, is it not, a reflection -- and this is,
24 by the way, the 6th of June, as you can see, this is a reflection of the
25 same discussion that you alluded to going on in other parts of the RS at
1 approximately the same time; correct?
2 A. This has nothing to do with this text. This is the first time
3 that I see it and I can categorically assert that I'm not familiar with
4 this manner. This was beyond my scope of responsibility. I was
5 addressing the problems relating to the Muslims in Pale and that was all.
6 That was my task and my objective and I think that I successfully
7 achieved it.
8 Q. Very well. I'll move on --
9 MR. TIEGER: But I tender this document, Mr. President.
10 MR. ROBINSON: Objection, Mr. President. This is a classic
11 example of something that cannot be admitted because it doesn't directly
12 contradict the witness. It isn't written by or for anybody within his
13 purview or his sphere. So he wouldn't be expected to know anything about
15 JUDGE KWON: However, did the witness not say that he didn't know
16 whether similar things were happening in other regions?
17 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, and this doesn't contradict that whatsoever.
18 If similar things were happening in other regions, that's one thing. But
19 if he knew -- the question is whether he knew, and this doesn't shed
20 light on that at all. If it was something he would be expected to have
21 seen, such as something in his municipality, in his organ, okay, it
22 should be admitted. But simply the way this is so general and so
23 unconnected to his own duties and position that it's not admissible in
24 our view.
25 MR. TIEGER: Mr. President.
1 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Tieger, would you like to respond?
2 MR. TIEGER: Yes, I do wish to respond. That is an inaccurate
3 and unduly restrictive interpretation of impeachment. This witness -- I
4 mean, it certainly is possible to impeach a witness -- and by the way, I
5 would like to ask if the witness -- I think we've been a little bit too
6 lax about arguing objections in front of witnesses, so we may want to
7 determine whether this witness speaks English; and if he does not, then I
8 think we should continue the discussion with his headphones off.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
10 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
11 MR. TIEGER: Yeah, it's certainly possible to impeach a witness
12 with direct evidence, that the activities he says he engaged in are
13 contradicted by the documents, but the reality here is that this witness
14 is not being proffered for a travel log of his own -- merely his own
15 activities during the war. He's being proffered to show that this was --
16 that what happened in Pale was spontaneous, voluntary, and unrelated to
17 any policy by the leadership. And his -- apart from the fact that given
18 his proximity, his physical proximity, to the leadership in Pale gives
19 rise to at least a realistic impeachment of the claim that he didn't know
20 anything about what was happening elsewhere. It also is a contradiction
21 of the general proposition raised by the Defence in proffering this
22 witness at all; that is, this is a purely isolated individual
23 municipality thing that had nothing to do with policy. And we surely are
24 entitled to combat that with evidence that it was happening across the
25 RS. And I would note also, and I'll be happy to take it up with the
1 witness, that 65 ter 15087 reveals clearly that Javnost is a party organ
2 and so there is that additional confirmation. This is information that
3 the party wanted to disseminate.
4 THE ACCUSED: May I, Excellency?
5 I'll respond in English. This witness hasn't been invited for
6 the purpose that Mr. Tieger said, but for the purpose of refuting what
7 was done by the Prosecution concerning this very municipality, which is
8 in the indictment. And this is the top of the executive power in this
9 municipality, very responsible man and very responsible authority, who
10 was not a member of SDS. And I don't see any reason to go throughout
11 Republika Srpska. We are dealing with this municipality.
12 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber finds the document to be relevant to the
15 credibility of the witness and will receive it.
16 THE REGISTRAR: Document 00580 receives number P6030,
17 Your Honours.
18 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Cvoro, for your co-operation.
19 Please continue, Mr. Tieger.
20 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Mr. President.
21 Q. Now, continuing in connection with the issues raised by the
22 paragraphs in your statement that I alluded to at the outset, this
23 Trial Chamber has also heard evidence that another factor leading Muslims
24 in Pale to conclude that they had no choice but to leave was the arrival
25 in Pale of badly beaten Muslim civilians who had been expelled from
1 Bratunac in May 1992 and which was one way that Muslims in Pale learned
2 what was in store if they didn't leave "voluntarily."
3 Now, I'd like you to look at a few moments of P3206, a video.
4 [Video-clip played]
5 MR. TIEGER:
6 Q. Mr. Cvoro, do you recognise these battered men as among the group
7 of Muslims that were -- that passed through Pale in the middle of May
9 A. Mr. Prosecutor, I don't know anything about who brought these
10 Muslims to Pale by what means and who sent them on. I do know that we
11 reacted promptly. We gathered the Crisis Staff and went to see someone
12 from the authorities, trying to tell them that such things ought not
13 happen in Pale and that these Muslims have to be released, or rather,
14 allowed to join their compatriots. Thanks to the president and the prime
15 minister, this was done quickly. As far as I am concerned, I was not
16 involved in any of it. I didn't know about it. I was just awakened in
17 the middle of the night by the police who said, "We have many Muslims who
18 were brought in Pale by someone and left there." Do you know what it
19 means to bring someone and leave them there in that situation? Could we
20 have done anything other than accommodate them and provide them with the
21 basic necessities as well as to ask that they go to where they belonged?
22 This was indeed done promptly.
23 Q. And just for the record, Mr. President, that went from 00.53 to
25 The Crisis Staff was directed by the government to transport
1 those prisoners out of Pale and into Muslim territory; correct?
2 A. I don't know who was in charge of that activity, but I do know
3 that security was provided by the police and other units. They left Pale
4 safely. There was also a problem how to secure means of transport and
5 how to accommodate them. How to move them securely. We found certain
6 trucks where they could be put on so that they wouldn't cause problems or
7 that some Serbs wouldn't do anything stupid. As far as I know, they
8 arrived there and they reported themselves there and were safe and sound.
9 Q. The Trial Chamber, Mr. Cvoro, has also heard evidence that yet
10 another reason why the Muslims who departed Pale did not feel they had
11 any real choice but to leave was the presence of notorious paramilitaries
12 not only in the municipality but actually "put up at the Panorama Hotel,"
13 and that's P0733 paragraphs 39 through 40. And that too, Mr. Cvoro, was
14 part of the reality of Pale, correct, that notorious paramilitary figures
15 were put up at the Panorama Hotel?
16 A. I had no contact with such forces. At the Panorama there were
17 refugees from Croatia. They were accommodated at the Panorama. In 1994
18 we also received a great number of refugees from Croatia who stayed there
19 until late May.
20 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: 1991.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Later on we were unable to
22 accommodate them any further and we sent them on to Serbia. I don't know
23 of any paramilitary organisations or armed forces who were there at the
24 time. I did not meet such people, and I'm very sorry but I can't help
25 you on this topic.
1 MR. TIEGER:
2 Q. Well, let's look quickly at P01107, a document dated the 10th of
3 August, 1992. And if we turn to the next page in English, please. Next
4 page, please, I'm sorry.
5 As you see at the top:
6 "It was stated that while inspecting the Pale public security
7 station that a group of 'Arkanovci' are still present at the 'Panorama'
8 Hotel. Chief Koroman presents that as a solved problem because he is
9 expecting their commander in a couple of days with whom he would solve it
10 without a problem."
11 And I think you've seen the cover page of this document,
12 Mr. Cvoro. This is a reflection, is it not, of the presence of
13 paramilitary figures put up at the Panorama Hotel in 1992?
14 A. I tell you again, in August there was the Executive Council. I
15 was the main person in the executive authority. I had no jurisdiction
16 over the police. The army and the police had their own affairs and I did
17 not meddle in that. That's all I know.
18 Q. Okay. Thank you. Now, the Trial Chamber's also heard evidence,
19 again I'm referring to those portions of your statement indicating that
20 Muslims left of their own free will, evidence that one of the reasons why
21 the Muslims in Pale felt they did not have a free choice about whether to
22 leave was because Nikola Koljevic, one of the members of the collective
23 Presidency at that time and who later assumed the position of
24 vice-president of RS, essentially encouraged them to leave by telling
25 them they were not wanted and, therefore, should not stay, that's P0733,
1 paragraph 38.
2 Now, I note that was -- that's not something included in your
3 statement. Do you purport to be aware of Mr. Koljevic's positions
4 regarding population transfers?
5 A. Mr. Prosecutor, I am not familiar with that and I don't know how
6 I could control Mr. Koljevic in any way.
7 Q. Thank you, sir, then I'll move on. For the benefit of the
8 Chamber I would refer, among other things, to P00986 and P00794.
9 MR. ROBINSON: [Microphone not activated]
10 MR. TIEGER: Okay, that is a bit of an argument, I understand.
11 But that has been done in the past for -- in order to avoid confronting
12 the witness, but I accept that.
13 Q. Mr. Cvoro, in paragraph 15 of your statement, you say that some
14 people came to verify the agreements concerning property, regarding
15 protecting each other's property. And you emphasise in your -- in
16 paragraph 15 that this applied to both Serbs and non-Serbs, and I
17 understand this to be your effort to show that people were independently
18 interested in leaving and so some of them came to the municipality just
19 to make sure that their agreements would be honoured. Is that basically
21 A. You see, this is how it was. Pale is a small community. Muslims
22 and Serbs knew each other well. Many Serbs and many Muslims who lived in
23 Sarajevo had their own homes, houses, and apartments. When the Serbs
24 arrived in Pale, they had acquaintances and lifelong friends with whom
25 they stayed in contact. People tried to protect their property. The
1 Serbs who had already left and the Muslims who were supposed to leave got
2 together. They came to the municipality to legalise such arrangements.
3 We did not accept that because there was no legal basis under the war
4 time circumstances.
5 Q. Mr. Cvoro, the fact of the matter is that non-Serbs who sought to
6 leave were not permitted to do so until a list of their property was made
7 and that property taken over by the municipality; isn't that the reality
8 why people came to the municipality --
9 A. No.
10 Q. Well, let's look at P00738, please.
11 A. No.
12 Q. P738 is a document dated the 6th of July, 1992. And it bears
13 your signature as well as the signature of the commander of the civilian
14 protection staff, Mr. Blagojevic. And it provides that the Pale police
15 station is requested to take immediate measures to protect the property
16 of non-Serbian inhabitants who have moved out of the territory until this
17 property is taken over by an authorised municipal commission. And it
18 provides in part 2:
19 "Individuals or families of non-Serbian ethnicities who wish to
20 leave the territory of Pale municipality must not be allowed to do so
21 until a list of their property is made and the property is taken over in
22 accordance with the regulations in force ..."
23 So contrary to the suggestion in paragraph 15 of your statement,
24 Mr. Cvoro, this document is directed at the non-Serbian population and
25 compels them to deal with municipal officials to make sure that a list of
1 their property is made and provided to those officials; correct?
2 A. You see, we informed the police station to secure such parts of
3 territory where there were non-Serb residents, given the fact that there
4 had already come in some requests for their moving out. We organised
5 municipal commissions which were to take over responsibility for the
6 property left behind by the Muslims. The station was only included from
7 the point of view of security of people working in the field. The
8 commissions in question had to make up lists of property and inventory
9 left behind by the Muslims. Also in item 2 it became a problem that many
10 Muslims - I cannot speak for the Croats because they did not move out,
11 they remained in Pale - but many left without a hand-over and there was a
12 problem. The problem was that there were people trying to steal that
13 property. That is why we informed the police station to secure the
14 property. The civilian protection staff commander was in charge of
15 gathering -- actually, of securing the property and preserving both
16 movable and immovable assets.
17 Q. And when you talk about securing and preserving the property, and
18 when you refer in your statement to protecting that property at paragraph
19 6 or 7 or 15, that protection was not for the Muslims who had given up
20 the property so they could leave the municipality, but it was protection
21 so that the property would end up in the hands of the commodity reserves
22 of Republika Srpska? That's where that property was going? Yes or no
23 and then I want to direct you to a couple of documents in connection with
25 A. Property was protected, although I can't say it was 100 per cent.
1 There was looting. We tried our best to protect all property, movable
2 and immovable. The greatest problem was immovable property. We tried to
3 have it gathered in one place and stored, be it in the garrison command
4 premises or in some other institutions. In charge of all that was the
5 civilian protection staff. We weren't too pleased with the work of those
6 commissions, and later on we established audit commissions because there
7 were abuses. And the audit commissions were in charge of screening what
8 the real situation was in the field and where those abuses occurred.
9 Q. Mr. Cvoro, we still have the document of the 6th of July up
10 there, and why don't we look at the preamble which provides that:
11 "Pursuant to Article 86 of the Statute of Pale municipality,"
12 which I presume invests -- or vests the chairman of the Executive Board
13 and others with appropriate authority, "and the instructions of the
14 Government of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina regulating
15 the distribution of war booty ..."
16 So this document and the conclusions reflected in it, including
17 the fact that non-Serbs who wished to leave will not be permitted to do
18 so until a list of their property is made, is pursuant to the government
19 regulations on collecting war booty. Isn't that right?
20 A. I wouldn't call it war booty. In any case, we wanted to protect
21 that property so that it didn't go to people who didn't need it. Only by
22 having a proper list could we gain a clear insight into what the
23 situation was like in the field. That's why we established such
24 commissions which were tasked with creating appropriate lists.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's not who didn't need it, it
1 says -- it should be who it did not belong in terms of rights.
2 MR. TIEGER:
3 Q. Well, let's be clear on what this document refers to. It refers
4 to the instructions of the government of regulating the distribution of
5 war booty. So let's look quickly at two documents. One of those is
6 already in evidence, P05502.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Apologies, I was only trying to say
8 that the words in line 21 are not interpreted accurately. The witness
9 said that the property was kept safe so that it wouldn't go to those who
10 had no right to enjoy it. And not to those "who didn't need it."
11 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
12 MR. TIEGER:
13 Q. These are the July 13th instructions and the implementation of
14 the decree concerning war booty. And in particular I direct your
15 attention to the first line of the -- item 1, which refers to the fact
16 that this regulates in greater detail the application and means of
17 implementation of the earlier decree, which was number 8 of the
18 Official Gazette/892, number 8 of the Official Gazette 1992, and in that
19 connection I would turn your attention to 65 ter 17747, which is number 8
20 of the Official Gazette of 1992. And we can see from the last page and
21 you can see it there on the Serbian that that's dated the 2nd of June,
22 1992, and it provides, among other things, in Article 2 that a municipal
23 commission will be set up to receive the valuables, that commission will
24 keep them until they are delivered to the treasury of the national bank
25 of the Serbian Republic of BiH, or Article 5 which provides that the
1 municipal commission shall take care of the movable property and assets
2 pending their delivery to the republic's emergency reserves.
3 So this is the document concerning war booty and regulating the
4 distribution of war booty to which the preamble of P738, that is, the
5 July 6 document refers; right?
6 A. It is a governmental decree which was binding on all organs of
7 the authorities for all organs of the executive branch. I see nothing
8 that is in dispute there.
9 MR. TIEGER: I tender that document, Mr. President.
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes, that will be received.
11 THE REGISTRAR: [Microphone not activated]
12 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
13 JUDGE KWON: Exhibit 6031.
14 MR. TIEGER:
15 Q. Now, Mr. Cvoro, the commission referred to in Exhibit 6031 that
16 we just looked at, that is, the commission that is supposed to take care
17 of the movable property and assets pending delivery to the republic's
18 emergency reserves is reflected in D00034. And I'd like you to look at
19 that quickly. This is a document dated the 14th of July which bears your
20 signature, Cvoro, and it refers to the fact that given -- the conclusion
21 that given the fact that the central commission and subcommissions in
22 charge of making a list of movable and immovable property of non-Serbian
23 citizens have not completed their tasks and there have been resulting
25 So that document, Mr. Cvoro, refers to the commission which is
1 envisioned by the government decree we looked at a moment ago.
2 A. This first and foremost has to do with the commission established
3 by the Executive Board, that is, the previous commission. We were not
4 happy with the work of that commission and it is stated here that given
5 the fact that the central commission and subcommissions in charge of
6 making a list of movable and immovable property of non-Serb citizens who
7 have left Pale municipality have not fully completed their tasks. And as
8 I have explained a moment ago, we established a separate audit commission
9 to check the work of the previous commission and what had been done, so
10 as to come up with the appropriate results, the real results. The
11 problem were rural areas where Muslims had lived, where there was plenty
12 of abandoned cattle, and that was where the focus was. There was a lot
13 of misappropriation and we were not happy with that segment of their
15 MR. TIEGER: Mr. President, I note --
16 JUDGE KWON: Shall we adjourn for today?
17 MR. TIEGER: Yes.
18 JUDGE KWON: You will continue tomorrow.
19 MR. TIEGER: Thank you.
20 JUDGE KWON: You will have about ten minutes tomorrow.
21 MR. TIEGER: Mr. President, ten minutes won't quite do. I've
22 been really -- I can tell you that I marked this out very, very
23 carefully, and I can advise the Court of several factors which make it
24 much different, if the Court needs that information, but I don't think
25 I'll need a great deal of time but I certainly more than ten minutes.
1 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
2 MR. TIEGER: Okay. Thank you.
3 JUDGE KWON: Tomorrow morning at 9.00.
4 Mr. Cvoro, we'll adjourn for today and continue tomorrow, but in
5 the meantime you are not supposed to discuss with anybody else about your
6 testimony. Do you understand that, sir?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand.
8 JUDGE KWON: The hearing is adjourned.
9 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.29 p.m.,
10 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 5th day of
11 December, 2012, at 9.00 a.m.