1 Tuesday, 16 July 2013
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.
6 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, everyone.
7 Would the witness make the solemn declaration, please.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
9 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
10 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Kapetina. Please be seated and make
11 yourself comfortable.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 WITNESS: DRAGAN KAPETINA
14 [Witness answered through interpreter]
15 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
16 Good morning, Mr. Harvey.
17 MR. HARVEY: Good morning, Mr. President, Your Honours. May I
18 introduce Amelia Mattis, who is from the Thomas Jefferson Law School in
19 San Diego and has been with my team since May of this year. Thank you.
20 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good morning, Excellencies. Good
22 morning to everyone.
23 Examination by Mr. Karadzic:
24 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Kapetina.
25 A. Good morning.
1 Q. I have to ask you to pause between our exchanges and also that we
2 both speak slowly, and we shall thus lose less time and avoid correcting
3 the transcript.
4 Mr. Kapetina, I'd like to ask you if you have given a statement
5 to my Defence team.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Can we please have 1D9168 in e-court. Please pay attention. We
8 have versions in B/C/S, both versions. Can you see the statement on the
9 screen in?
10 A. Yes, I do. However, I have a correction. There was a slight
11 error under item 11.
12 Q. Thank you. We'll come to that.
13 A. All right.
14 Q. So you have read the statement and signed it; is that correct?
15 A. That is correct.
16 Q. Could you please wait for the interpretation to conclude.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can the witness please be shown the
18 last page so that he can identify his signature.
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Is this your signature, Mr. Kapetina?
21 A. Yes, that is my signature.
22 Q. Thank you. Everything that you told my Defence team, was that
23 faithfully reflected in the statement, and do you need to make any
25 A. Yes. I said under item 11.
1 Q. Can we please have page 4, or it may be even 3.
2 A. The beginning of the sentence should not read "May" but "March."
3 That's the only mistake.
4 Q. Thank you. That has been recorded. As for the remainder of your
5 statement, does it truthfully reflect what you told the Defence team?
6 A. Yes, fully.
7 Q. If I were to put the same questions to you today as the ones put
8 to you by the team, would your answers essentially be the same?
9 A. Yes, fully.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, I would like to
12 tender this statement and the associated exhibits into evidence.
13 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Edgerton, do you have any objections?
14 MS. EDGERTON: A few, actually, Your Honour, and a couple of
15 observations. The -- there have been associated exhibits removed from
16 the 92 -- from the final statement that were included in the 92 ter
17 notification, so I can go through those or Dr. Karadzic can. It's --
18 JUDGE KWON: Just pausing there.
19 Mr. Karadzic, I take it that you are tendering four items of
20 associated exhibits.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, your Excellencies, four of
22 them, and I would like them to be added to our 65 ter list. There's a
23 fifth one which I will probably have to lead live, which is a manual
24 drafted by Mr. Kapetina for emergency situations, however it hasn't been
25 translated and I will have to discuss it with him.
1 As for the others have already been admitted under either P or D.
2 JUDGE KWON: I will express the Chamber's view first,
3 Ms. Edgerton.
4 Among them, Mr. Karadzic, the Chamber is of the view that two of
5 the items not forming an indispensable and inseparable part of the
6 statement. They are 1D9736, referred to in paragraph 19; and 1D9738,
7 referred to in paragraph 30. Without them the statement can be
8 understood without any difficulty. So if you need to tender them, you
9 should lead them live with the witness, as well as showing the relevance
10 of the documents. Otherwise, do you have any objection with respect to
11 the two remaining items, Ms. Edgerton?
12 MS. EDGERTON: No.
13 JUDGE KWON: We will receive the statement as well as two
14 associated exhibits.
15 THE REGISTRAR: 92 ter statement 1D9168 will be D3856. 10643
16 will be Exhibit D3857, and 30076 will be Exhibit D3858.
17 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic. Please continue.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I'm going now to read a
19 summary of Mr. Dragan Kapetina's statement in English.
20 [In English] From 1985, Dragan Kapetina worked at the republic
21 secretariat for the national defence, later the ministry of defence of
22 Bosnia and Herzegovina. In 1990, before the multi-party elections, he
23 was appointed chief republican defence inspector of the Republic of
24 Bosnia and Herzegovina. He remained in this post until the end of March
25 1992. After May 1992, he did specialist work at the Ministry of Defence
1 of Republika Srpska. In March 1995, he was appointed secretary of the
2 Ministry of Defence of Republika Srpska.
3 As the chief republican inspector, his duty was to oversee the
4 implementation of the federal laws on national defence and to monitor the
5 implementation of the republican laws.
6 After the first multi-party elections in BH in 1990, the key
7 posts in the Ministry of Defence of Bosnia and Herzegovina were assigned
8 to the Muslims and Croats. The HDZ candidate, Jerko Doko, became
9 minister, and Kazim Begovic, a JNA colonel nominated by the SDA, became
10 his deputy. Doko was Croat and Begovic was Muslim. This distribution of
11 key positions in the Ministry of Defence of Bosnia and Herzegovina
12 prevented the Serbian personnel from performing their regular duties.
13 During this period, the Ministry of Defence of Bosnia and Herzegovina
14 focused on taking over the powers of the federal organs in the sphere of
15 defence, breaking up the JNA and transforming the Territorial Defence
16 into the armed forces of the republic. All of these activities were in
17 direct contravention with the provisions of the federal and republican
19 In May 1991, Minister of Defence Jerko Doko rejected the annual
20 inspection programme presented by Dragan Kapetina because it was not
21 reconcilable with Doko's task to break up the existing defence system.
22 Dragan Kapetina expressed his concerns about the widespread and
23 systematic violation of valid laws and drafted an official report to the
24 government and the Presidency of B and H to warn them that they were
25 exceeding their constitutional powers. When adopting decisions on the --
1 Mr. Kapetina's warnings at meetings of the government and the
2 National Defence Council of B and H, the Serbian members were out-voted.
3 Before the war, the Presidency of BH and the other state
4 authorities, including the Ministry of Defence, were principally engaged
5 in preventing Muslims and Croatian conscripts from BH from being sent to
6 the JNA and in creating the core of the BH Army out of the
7 Patriotic League, the Green Berets, the MUP reserve forces and
8 Territorial Defence.
9 Dragan Kapetina quit his job at the ministry in March 1992 and
10 returned to his village in the municipality of Hadzici exclusively for
11 security reasons. During the stay in his village, the political council
12 of the Serbian municipality was established together with the Assembly of
13 the Serbian people in Hadzici, and he was elected vice-president of the
14 Assembly. The proclamation of the Serbian municipality of Hadzici was a
15 measure taken to protect the Serbian people and preserve peace in the
16 area. The newly established Assembly decided to fully respect all
17 agreements made bit three people at the republican level with a view of
18 resolving the crisis. As for the Muslim part of Hadzici municipality,
19 the Muslim authorities took a number of tough measures against the
20 Serbian population.
21 On 30th of April, 1992, Dragan Kapetina drove his family to
22 Serbia out of fear for their safety, but his parents remained in their
23 family house, which was under the control of the Muslim authorities. His
24 father was taken to the Silo concentration camp in Tarcin where he died
25 in November 1992 due to the dreadful conditions and torture.
1 On 10th of May, 1992, Mr. Kapetina resumed his work at the
2 Ministry of Defence in Serbian Republic of B and H in Pale. The focus of
3 his work was to develop two systemic laws, the Law of the Army and the
4 Law of the Defence. In addition he worked on sub-laws and regulations on
5 application of the International Law of War.
6 In July 1995, Mr. Kapetina was called to the office of
7 Mr. Karadzic, who wanted information about the situation in Srebrenica.
8 Mr. Karadzic appeared very angry because he could not establish
9 communication with the commander of the Main Staff, the Chief of the Main
10 Staff, the Drina Corps, or the minister of defence, and he did not know
11 what was happening in Srebrenica.
12 And that would be short summary. I would now like to go through
13 some documents.
14 MS. EDGERTON: Just before we do that, and I realise the summary
15 isn't evidence, Your Honour, but when Dr. Karadzic said that when
16 adopting decisions on Mr. Kapetina's warnings at meetings of the
17 government the Serbian members were out-voted, that's not the evidence of
18 Mr. Kapetina. The evidence in paragraph 19 is that his warnings weren't
19 discussed at the meeting. So Dr. Karadzic should be a bit careful in his
20 summaries. Also, adding things to his summaries, for example, the ethnic
21 background of Mr. Doko and Mr. Begovic, which is not in Mr. Kapetina's
23 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Please proceed.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
25 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Can we please have 1D9736 in e-court. [No interpretation].
2 MS. EDGERTON: Before Mr. Kapetina answers, I'm not receiving
3 English interpretation.
4 THE INTERPRETER: Apologies from the interpreter.
5 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] There are so many Serbs here that
6 I believe that all of you have learned the Serbian language by now.
7 THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Karadzic please repeat the question.
8 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, you need to repeat your question.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Mr. Kapetina, can you tell us the name of the publication, the
11 date of the publication, and in ethnic terms who the author of the
12 article is?
13 A. I can't see exactly the date. I'd say it was September 1991.
14 Yes, 18th September 1991, and I think that the author of this article is
15 a Bosniak, Zead Dernisevic [phoen]. I think he's a Bosniak.
16 Q. Thank you. What can you say about this statement that there was
17 only one conscript from Livno? Can you tell us what is reflected in this
18 article. And then there's another reference to you, Dragan Kapetina, the
19 minister of defence, et cetera?
20 A. Yes. The president of Bosnia-Herzegovina was preventing
21 conscripts from going to serve in the JNA even though that was beyond the
22 powers, constitutional powers, of the constitution, and we can see here
23 that there was only one conscript from Livno, probably a Serb, his name
24 was Maljkovic, and another 87 failed to respond, and then there was my
25 written warning to the Presidency of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the
1 government of Bosnia-Herzegovina in which I cautioned the two highest
2 government bodies that they were assuming the powers of federal organs
3 and that they were operating beyond the powers that they have.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we please have the next page in
6 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. You can see this middle paragraph in Serbian which makes
8 reference to this five-hour meeting. Can you tell us who the
9 participants are, and can you tell us their ethnicity? Can we enlarge in
10 middle column. This sentence which starts "Inace..." This is the last
11 paragraph. Can you just tell us the names and tell us who they are and
12 what was the meeting about.
13 A. Yes. Representatives of the JNA held a meeting with members of
14 the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the promise was made that
15 the conscripts who were being sent to serve in the army would not be
16 dispatched to war zones but, rather, to trading centres that were far
17 away from the then-war zones, for example, in Croatia at the time. And
18 here we have representatives of the 5th Army and the commanders of all
19 the corps deployed in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
20 Q. Thank you. Vukosavljevic, commander of the Territorial Defence,
21 Serbian, Muharem Fetahagic and Fikret Jakic?
22 A. Muslims.
23 Q. Commander of the Banja Luka and Tuzla Corps, and so on and so
24 forth. And Jure Pelivan the prime minister.
25 A. That is correct.
1 Q. Thank you. Can we now have page 3 so that we can see what
2 Dragan Kapetina's assessment was. Already in September of 1991 you were
3 issuing warnings; is that correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted into evidence?
6 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Edgerton.
7 MS. EDGERTON: Well, the article's been read out. I was trying
8 to find out what Mr. Kapetina said the meeting was about somewhere in the
9 article, and I haven't been able to do that yet. We have no foundation
10 with respect to the larger article itself, and I have no idea how this
11 warning -- or we have no idea how this warning, which Mr. Kapetina hasn't
12 commented on, relates to his written evidence. So I'd say there's
13 insufficient foundation, Your Honours.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I could ask Mr. Kapetina how this
15 meeting took place, what was the cause for convening it, and what was the
16 participation of the Ministry of Defence of BH in trying to resolve those
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In that period --
19 JUDGE KWON: Just a second, Mr. Kapetina.
20 Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
21 MS. EDGERTON: Maybe he could ask Mr. Kapetina if he was there.
22 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Mr. Kapetina, you heard Ms. Edgerton's
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wasn't in the meeting held at the
1 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. This exhibit relates to paragraph 19. Mr. Kapetina, was your
3 written paper and submission are made at the meeting, and did you have
4 any contribution, not in physical sense, in these meetings and in these
5 attempts to put things in order in terms of the law?
6 A. This meeting described by the author did not contain -- did not
7 contain my warning. It was held with representatives of --
8 representatives of JNA stationed in Bosnia-Herzegovina. However, my
9 written warning to the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, that they
10 were breaking the laws and the constitution, was discussed at the meeting
11 of the National Defence Council chaired by Mr. Alija Izetbegovic, the
12 president of the Presidency.
13 At this meeting the majority were Serbs. However, my warning was
14 not discussed. Instead, quite simply, the president of the Presidency
15 removed this warning from the agenda.
16 Q. Thank you.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Excellency, I believe that this is
18 within the official remit of Mr. Kapetina and is certainly a relevant
20 JUDGE KWON: We'll receive it.
21 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D3859, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE KWON: Before you continue, Mr. Karadzic, I forgot to ask
23 you one question -- ask one question about an associated exhibit. That
24 is Variant A and B document, the 65 ter number of which is 10643. I told
25 that I would admit it, but what it's point of tendering it separately,
1 because we have that document in evidence.
2 Yes, Mr. Robinson.
3 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. I don't think it's necessary.
4 I was going to suggest that we not admit that.
5 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
6 [Defence counsel confer]
7 JUDGE KWON: Yes. We'll strike it off. Please continue,
8 Mr. Karadzic.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we now see
10 1D9738. It is related to paragraph 30 in the statement of Mr. Kapetina.
11 Thank you.
12 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Could you tell us, do you know this document and what is it? The
14 date, who issued it, and what is it about? Do you see the heading?
15 A. Yes. This is a brief about certain aspects of the political and
16 security situation in the area of Hadzici municipality. I had some
17 information that is covered in this brief, and I believe the author of
18 this brief was my co-worker at the Ministry of Defence before he
19 transferred to the command of the military district, Milan Atlagic. I
20 didn't have the entire text, but I did have some knowledge about these
21 events in Hadzici.
22 Q. This is the end of February 1992. That's the date of the
23 referendum, isn't it?
24 A. It is.
25 Q. Can we see page 2 in Serbian. Look at the penultimate paragraph
1 where certain things are underlined. What is it about?
2 A. Yes. The brief speaks about the arming drive, the distribution
3 of light weapons, where they are stored, and that a certain Ahmet Budic,
4 a reserve officer employed at the TAT enterprise is involved. There are
5 rockets, rocket launchers for the zolja. Leaders of the Bosnia community
6 in Hadzici were involved. I heard information about this but not exactly
7 what is written here.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted?
9 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Edgerton.
10 MS. EDGERTON: I -- I miss again foundation, Your Honours. We
11 don't know to what extent this information corresponds with what this
12 witness might have heard. In fact, he said it's not exactly what's
13 written here, and he has -- no. I think there's not been sufficient
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Can I draw your attention to paragraph 30, and could you tell us,
18 although you've said it already, who is the author, and how is he related
19 to you? Was he in the same service?
20 A. Lieutenant-Colonel Milan Atlagic worked at the Ministry of
21 Defence for four years in the security sector. Then he moved to the
22 command of the military district but also -- but that was also part of
23 the Ministry of Defence. He was my co-worker, and I received information
24 like all the other senior staff at the ministry that related to security
25 matters. I've said before that I did not receive this brief as such, but
1 I knew most of these things and Atlagic had informed me. I didn't say
2 otherwise. I even had more information. For instance, in that period
3 the police in Hadzici seized a truck on Mount Igman full of light
4 weaponry that was smuggled by the paramilitaries belonging to the MUP of
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I believe, Your Excellencies, that
7 we have now enough foundation to admit this document.
8 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber will admit this.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D3857, Your Honours.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we now see
12 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Mr. Kapetina, in paragraph 7 of your statement, you talk about
14 the manual for developing a contingency plan that you wrote in 1990.
15 Were you shown the paper known as Variant A and Variant B, and what can
16 you tell us about it?
17 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Before you answer, Mr. Kapetina.
18 Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
19 MS. EDGERTON: And Your Honours I'm sure are aware this is a
20 document that the Prosecution objected to. It's a very lengthy document
21 that was used with this witness during his previous testimony in the
22 Krajisnik case some years ago and wasn't even translated at that time.
23 There's not a page of this document that's been translated.
24 JUDGE KWON: I don't follow your objection. So you are objecting
25 to putting this document to the witness at all?
1 MS. EDGERTON: Yes, Your Honour, because it is so large and it is
2 untranslated. There's simply no way for us to even begin to think of
3 dealing with this document when we're not able to read it.
4 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Robinson.
5 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. I can understand the
6 Prosecution's position, but hopefully Dr. Karadzic will take the witness
7 to a particular portion of this document that can be addressed and
8 admitted if appropriate.
9 JUDGE KWON: We'll consider whether we can admit it or not at the
10 end of the examination.
11 Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we see page 8 of this book.
13 That's 9. Could we see the previous page.
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Mr. Kapetina, what is defined in this chapter? This is chapter
16 1. Could you describe to us in your own words what is said in this
18 A. First of all, I authored this manual, and as chief republic
19 inspector, it was my duty to inspect together with other inspectors
20 contingency plans, and through this manual I tried to help those who made
21 such contingency plans in Bosnia-Herzegovina to make them more easily.
22 And those who made such plans was everybody from local authorities, local
23 communes, businesses, socio-political organisations, even associations of
24 citizens. Each one had the obligation to develop a contingency plan, and
25 I wanted this manual to facilitate their work and to teach them how to
1 make these plans. On this page I tried to define contingencies using, of
2 course, the provisions of the Law on All People's Defence.
3 Q. In line 24 what is missing is that the making of these plans was
4 their duty. Did you say that it was their duty?
5 A. Yes, it was their legal obligation. All those who made
6 contingency plans were legally obliged to do so in keeping with the Law
7 on All People's Defence. Everybody had to develop a contingency plan for
8 contingencies such as aggression, military aggression, or internal
9 conflicts that involved the use of weapons.
10 Q. When you said a moment ago socio-political organisations were
11 also an entity in the defence system, can you translate that into normal
12 language? What are socio-political organisations?
13 A. I'll try. In the previous system it was the League of
14 Communists, The Socialist Alliance of Working People,
15 The Socialist Alliance of Youth, and in the multi-party system it was the
16 political parties.
17 Q. Thank you. Can you now read out the third paragraph from the top
18 about the Law on All People's Defence.
19 A. The Law on All People's Defence defines contingencies as follows:
20 Other contingencies for the purpose of this law are understood to mean
21 armed or other activity that directly jeopardises the independence of the
22 country, its sovereignty, and territorial integrity, and the established
23 social system under the constitution of SFRY.
24 Q. So the law defines contingencies.
25 A. Correct.
1 Q. Could we now see page 15. So this is the manual. What does this
2 manual achieve? What do entities in the defence system have to do? Is
3 this based on the law, and if they follow the manual, would they be
4 complying with their legal obligations?
5 A. This entire segment of planning when we're talking about
6 contingency plans envisages measures to prevent contingencies, that is
7 preventive measures, to avoid contingencies, and then there is the
8 repressive part aimed at eliminating contingencies once they occur.
9 In addition to the law, there were also guidelines to eliminate
10 contingencies and the decision on the methodology for the development of
11 contingency plans. Those were federal regulations at the level of
12 Yugoslavia, where as Bosnia-Herzegovina also had guidelines by the
13 Presidency of Bosnia-Herzegovina for the development of contingency plans
14 in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and I was one of the authors and participants in
15 the development of these guidelines. My manual was based on the republic
16 law on the two federal regulations and one republic law on the
17 development of contingency plans.
18 Q. Thank you. Could you read out the first paragraph from section
19 3, "Preventing contingencies from occurring..."
20 A. "... all the way up to the adoption of guidelines to eliminate
21 contingencies (19 July 1989) and the decision on the basis of a uniform
22 methodology to develop contingency plans (24 November 1989) the tasks,
23 measures, and procedures to prevent contingencies from occurring were
24 established in the plans to prevent and eliminate contingencies."
25 Q. Thank you. It was fast, but the interpreters managed. Can we
1 now see page 23. The previous one.
2 Section 3, The substance of contingency plans, these bullet
4 A. Under item 4 of the decision of the federal executive council,
5 contingency plans shall contain an estimate of the political and security
6 situation, i.e., assessment of the security situation. So everybody does
7 this evaluation at their own level.
8 Second bullet point: Tasks, measures, and procedures,
9 organisation of forces and resources to eliminate contingencies in one's
11 And third bullet point: Measures of readiness.
12 Q. Can we now see page 25. The entire page is important, but could
13 you read out the last paragraph.
14 MS. EDGERTON: Well --
15 JUDGE KWON: Instead of asking the witness to read out which was
16 untranslated, why don't you ask the witness to -- ask the witness a
17 question directly, not in a leading way.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I will try, but this has not been
19 translated, and we'll see how that will reflect on the transcript.
20 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Mr. Kapetina, on this page we see some text about measures to
22 eliminate contingencies. Can you tell us what is envisaged, which
23 obligations does the law impose in the prevention and elimination of
24 contingencies that we see in the last paragraph on this page?
25 A. I said at the beginning that this plan has a preventative nature
1 aimed at preventing contingencies from occurring, and all entities are
2 supposed to plan measures in keeping with the law. First of all,
3 everybody is supposed to do their job in keeping with the constitution
4 and the law to consistently enforce regulations, ensure co-ordination,
5 co-operation. Simply comply with all their obligations in keeping with
6 the constitution and the law, which prevents the occurrence of chaos,
7 anarchy, and other things that could jeopardise peace and stability.
8 Q. In the last line it says in that sense one of the possible
9 approaches in the development of documents to eliminate contingencies,
10 what is this supposed to mean, document to eliminate contingencies?
11 A. I had not seen this document for a long time because I didn't
12 keep a single copy for my own use. I would need to see page 26.
13 Q. Could the witness please be shown the next page.
14 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, if I may before the witness goes
16 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
17 MS. EDGERTON: I'm really wondering what the relevance is of the
18 very detailed evidence that we're hearing that I've had no notice of, as
19 I've indicated, regarding this document from 1990.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I respond?
21 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, this document preceded
23 Variants A and B and the indictment bases many charges against me on the
24 Serbian side on that. This is from 1990, not from 1995, because this is
25 what laid the legal foundation for what followed. Papers A and B cannot
1 be understood without this document.
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 JUDGE KWON: Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
5 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Could you just tell us. You see the model of this paper here.
7 The last paragraph, "Measures established in the guidelines on measures
8 for readiness." Can you tell us what this is about?
9 A. Yes, the Presidency of Yugoslavia issued a document entitled
10 "Guidelines on Measures of Readiness," and there were three degrees
11 involved, and all the planning entities in Yugoslavia were duty-bound to
12 carry through these measures in order to prevent contingencies. That is
13 to say so that there would not be any kind of armed intervention on other
14 intervention so that this would be nipped in the bud as I've already
15 explained, and I say here how entities are supposed to work this out on
16 the basis of a table with clear tasks. Those who will carry them out,
17 the way in which this will be carried out, and co-operation with other
18 entities if so planned.
19 So I've just given a model, an example of how this document --
20 or, rather, how this can be done in an easier manner and how it could be
21 more user-friendly.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I believe that from line 6 -- ah, I
23 see, that's the answer, yes. All right. Could we see the next page now.
24 In line 16, that's not the question. That's part of the question. Ah,
25 thank you. Yes. Now it's been corrected.
1 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation].
2 Q. Could you please present item 4 to us now, the content and way
3 plans are -- contingencies plans are elaborated at municipality level.
4 Could you please read this out to us.
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
6 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honours, I apologise, but this evidence is
7 not in this witness's statement. This evidence is being presented in the
8 context --
9 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. When you're saying that it is not in
10 the statement, means that detail is lacking. He referred to the manual,
11 so to speak, in para 7.
12 MS. EDGERTON: Correct, Your Honour. That's the only mention,
13 only comment relating to this document in this statement.
14 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, I also noticed that Ms. Edgerton --
15 JUDGE KWON: Could you put a pause.
16 MR. ROBINSON: I'm sorry.
17 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please continue.
18 MR. ROBINSON: Ms. Edgerton earlier stated that she had no notice
19 that this document was going to be used, but in fact it's listed as an
20 additional exhibit in our Rule 92 ter notice, and this is a partial
21 Rule 92 ter witness so items can be led live which are not detailed in
22 the statement which is what Dr. Karadzic is doing. It's unfortunate that
23 the document is being translated and I -- is not translated and I realise
24 it puts the Prosecution at a disadvantage, but I don't think that that's
25 any bar to making whatever use of the document that can be made at this
1 time, and the Prosecution can recall the witness or ask to recall the
2 witness if later when the document is translated it finds that there were
3 questions that it would have put and that it didn't.
4 JUDGE KWON: But the issue is still the use of untranslated
5 document, which is in particular lengthy and -- yes, Ms. Edgerton.
6 MS. EDGERTON: Yes. Of course we've had notice of this document.
7 It was one the documents I indicated that we had in -- that I had
8 initially objected to. It's not translated. This is a critical issue
9 that we should have had notice of, and this detailed evidence is not in
10 the witness's statement, and quite frankly, Your Honour, we shouldn't
11 have to apply to recall this witness because we're prejudiced for the
12 lack of translation of a document that's previously appeared before these
13 Chambers -- before this Tribunal and not yet been translated.
14 JUDGE KWON: Could you expand further the fact that this appeared
15 before the Chamber and had not yet been translated.
16 MS. EDGERTON: I misspoke. Not this Chamber, Your Honour.
17 Another Chamber of this Tribunal in the Krajisnik case.
18 JUDGE KWON: It was admitted in other Chambers?
19 MS. EDGERTON: I'll just check the admission status in the
20 previous proceedings with Mr. Reid. That'll just take a couple of
21 minutes, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE KWON: So when it was used in the other Chamber, the
23 Prosecution should have been in the position to know about the document.
24 MS. EDGERTON: If I could just have your indulgence while
25 Mr. Reid checks this I could respond to Your Honour.
1 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, Mr. Sladojevic has found the
2 portion of the transcript of the Krajisnik case where this document was
3 admitted which is admitted as D123 on page 20109, and also noted that
4 Mr. Tieger cross-examined the witness in the Krajisnik case on this
6 JUDGE KWON: About the translation at that proceedings? Do you
7 have a clue?
8 MR. ROBINSON: No.
9 MS. EDGERTON: I do. And thank you to Mr. Sladojevic.
10 Four pages of that document were admitted which were translated.
11 JUDGE KWON: And you didn't have the time to compare the pages
12 that were admitted in that case and those shown to the witness in this
14 MS. EDGERTON: I didn't know that -- what pages were going to be
15 shown to the witness in this case, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE KWON: So are you objecting to the last question?
17 MS. EDGERTON: And -- pardon me, it's D123 in the Krajisnik case
18 rather than 1203, just to correct the record. And --
19 JUDGE KWON: So the question was how the contingency plans were
20 elaborated at municipality level. Are you objecting to that question or
21 not, Ms. Edgerton?
22 MS. EDGERTON: Yes, Your Honour. We have had no notice that this
23 detailed evidence was going to be presented today from this witness.
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Edgerton, the Chamber agrees that Defence notice
1 was not a very kind one, but in light of the para 7, the Chamber has no
2 difficulty with continuing with this evidence. The Chamber agrees with
3 Mr. Robinson if necessary the Prosecution is entitled to recall this
5 MS. EDGERTON: That's fine, Your Honour. And just to correct the
6 record in terms of this exhibit because I don't want to be misleading.
7 This document was assigned D123 in the Krajisnik case at transcript page
8 20109. It was admitted -- portions of this document, said His Honour
9 Judge Orie, were provisionally admitted awaiting translation and further
10 specification, and that was repeated at transcript page 20110, D123 being
11 provisionally admitted. And I was unable to be more accurate previously
12 because I didn't have the pages in front of me, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
14 Probably you need to ask the question again, Mr. Karadzic.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
16 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Mr. Kapetina, you told us who all the Defence entities were, and
18 you mentioned socio-political communities which means municipalities,
19 local communes, and republics in plain language. Can you tell us what
20 the municipalities were charge of, and that is what item four deals with
22 A. The plan for contingencies at municipal level contains an
23 assessment of the political security situation in the municipality, then
24 tasks, measures, and procedures, organisation, forces, and resources for
25 the elimination of contingencies and measures of readiness.
1 Q. Thank you. Could we have the next page, please. Let's not read
2 it out. Can you just tell us what this assessment of the political
3 security situation in the municipality pertains to.
4 A. Well, this assessment mostly speaks of the situation regarding
5 the socio-political system, the work of state organs, the functioning of
6 the economy, economic entities then social services, education, culture,
7 and so on. That is to say, the overall situation with regard to
8 political activities at the level of the municipality.
9 Q. Thank you. Can we have page 34 now. Can you present this
10 chapter to us: Elaboration of plans.
11 A. Yes, this is the content of plans with regard to state organs,
12 that is to say local government organs. The content is the same like for
13 other planning entities. One starts from an assessment and then each
14 organ gives an assessment within their own purview on the basis of law,
15 and then of course they take measures to prevent contingencies and
16 eliminate them once they've happened.
17 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could Mr. Karadzic please
18 repeat his question? It is too fast for interpretation.
19 JUDGE KWON: Just a second, Mr. Karadzic.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Page 42 --
21 JUDGE KWON: The interpreters couldn't hear your question.
22 Please repeat your question.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I just asked for page 42.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Can you tell us what this chapter 7 pertains to?
1 A. It speaks of the content and way in which these plans are
2 elaborated at the level of local communes.
3 Q. To what extent -- actually, what kind of correlation is there
4 between this and the measures that are taken at the level of the
5 municipality and the level of the entire federal state?
6 A. Practically the local commune was the basic cell of the society
7 at the time, and this plan basically pertained to measures and tasks that
8 would be implemented by citizens directly as entities of the system
9 within the local commune.
10 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us where socio-political organisations
11 belong within this system? Was this before the multi-party system was
13 A. Yes. This manual was written before the multi-party system was
15 Q. Thank you. What is the position and role of the ruling political
16 party in the system of All People's Defence and the system of managing
18 A. Any political party, regardless of whether it is the ruling party
19 or a party in the opposition, was duty-bound to have its own contingency
20 plan, and these plans were mostly made at the level of the republic. The
21 organ of that political party at republican level, that is. However,
22 Municipal Boards and all local boards also had their own plans within
23 that plan. So the party may have had these plans -- or, rather, did have
24 these plans along the vertical line from the republican level all the way
25 to the level of local commune.
1 Q. Thank you. Now I'd like you to remember papers A and B. That
2 was shown to you in the -- in the Krajisnik case; right?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Can you tell us -- or, rather, what is it that you can tell us
5 about the foundation in law and the content of that paper?
6 A. Earlier on I said, and I'm saying again, that each and every
7 party in Bosnia-Herzegovina at the time and on the basis of the law and
8 other bylaws that we refer to here, the guidelines of the
9 Federal Executive Council and of the Presidency and so on. So each and
10 every political party was duty-bound to elaborate its own contingency
11 plan and adapt it to its own way of political organisation from top to
12 bottom. I think that this document that was elaborated by the SDS that
13 consists of Variant A and Variant B and two levels of readiness was done
14 in a professional and lawful manner and that this was the obligation of
15 the ruling party to have this kind of plan for this kind of situation
16 which may occur and may threaten peace and other values of the system.
17 And if there are no other questions, I can go on. I can tell you what it
18 was that I observed in this instruction.
19 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
20 MS. EDGERTON: Well, Your Honour, this man was presented to us as
21 a fact witness in his statement and in his 92 ter summary, and I don't
22 think it's appropriate for Dr. Karadzic to take him in his questions
23 outside of that, to have him offer evidence as some kind of legal expert
24 of the foundation in law of the Variant A and B document which he
25 admitted that he never saw at the time, only when he was interviewed by
1 the OTP in 2004.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I answer?
3 JUDGE KWON: Should we hear it in the absence of witness,
4 Ms. Edgerton, or would it be okay to continue?
5 Just a second. I'm asking Ms. Edgerton.
6 MS. EDGERTON: Rather than continually interrupt the proceedings
7 this morning, maybe it would be better and more efficient to deal with
8 this in the absence of the witness once and for all.
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
10 Mr. Kapetina, if you could excuse yourself for a moment.
11 [The witness stands down]
12 [The Trial Chamber confers]
13 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Excellencies, this man was
15 inspecting how the Defence entities were operating and how they kept
16 custody of the plan. So he was controlling the legality of all the
17 documents and enactments adopted by these organs. So this is matter of
18 fact. This is not a matter of expertise.
19 JUDGE KWON: Did you ask the witness about the manual he wrote or
20 the Variant A and B in which he was not involved at all?
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I asked him about Variants A and B,
22 whether it was in line with the law, because it was his duty to supervise
23 whether the companies and other entities adopted contingency plans. He
24 was entitled to go and to inspect the documents to review them.
25 JUDGE KWON: Did he participate in drafting variant A and B?
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't think so, but he recognised
2 that as an expert work. If I may remind you --
3 JUDGE KWON: Just a -- what was he at the time? Could you remind
4 us again.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] He was the Chief Inspector of the
6 Ministry of Defence in Bosnia-Herzegovina. He inspected the procedures
7 of preparing for emergency situations.
8 JUDGE KWON: Would you like to add anything, Ms. Edgerton?
9 MS. EDGERTON: Just first in response to this last answer that
10 Dr. Karadzic has given. In fact, the witness is not clear on what his
11 duties were at the time the Variant A and B document was issued. He
12 talks of being marginalised by Mr. Doko in March of 1991. He talks of
13 being put at the disposal of Mr. Simovic, and then in March or April of
14 1992, he talks about finally leaving the Ministry of Defence, but he's
15 referred to documents which at the same time show that he's carrying out
16 tasks for the Serbian Assembly. So his actual duties are completely
18 And with respect to what's gone on earlier, I do apologise, Your
19 Honour, for what -- my repeated interventions over the course of the
20 morning, and Your Honours have acknowledged some measure of deficiencies
21 in the notice that we've been given. I've raised the question or the
22 issue of the untranslated document, but, Your Honour, I would say that
23 what we're now doing actually compounds the prejudice that we're working
24 under when it comes to dealing with the document. Dr. Karadzic in his
25 questions are taking the situation one step further by having this
1 gentleman comment as a legal expert on a document which he previously
2 hasn't seen before, and I think that's inappropriate.
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Robinson.
4 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. I think that the question
5 that was asked by Dr. Karadzic could be rephrased, because to ask about a
6 foundation in law seems to invite an expert opinion which this witness is
7 not here to give, but I think given what the role of the witness played
8 in the drafting of this manual and in the Defence preparations, he can be
9 asked how these Variant A and B tallies with the preparations that had
10 been made by the SFRY organs without giving any kind of expert opinions
11 just as, for example, Prime Minister Djeric could be asked on -- as a
12 Prosecution witness about things that he didn't participate in but how it
13 related to the actions of the government. So I don't think there's
14 anything calling for an expert opinion if it's done that way.
15 MR. TIEGER: Well, since everybody gets the chance to stand up
16 today, I guess I'll take the opportunity and simply say --
17 JUDGE KWON: Just a --
18 MR TIEGER: I'm sorry, Mr. President.
19 JUDGE KWON: Just a second.
20 Yes, Mr. Tieger.
21 MR TIEGER: Sorry, to be so hurried. I have no idea offhand what
22 analogy Mr. Robinson is attempting to draw between previous occasions
23 when witnesses have been asked about events in which they didn't directly
24 participate, but in this case it is quite clear that the accused is
25 attempting to bridge a factual gap caused by what didn't happen at the
1 time. So he wants to rely on the fact that the witness could have done
2 something that he didn't do, and indeed had the witness engaged in some
3 kind of action at that time it would be sufficiently relevant in this
4 context to elicit, but since that didn't happen, now the accused wants to
5 bridge the gap by either asking for speculation about what might have
6 happened if he did or seeking what is inevitably either an expert opinion
7 on the legality or other aspects of a document which he didn't see at the
8 time or by intruding on the province of the Court by drawing conclusions
9 that fall within the Court's authority.
10 So he's already discussed a document that he participated in and
11 drafted. We have another document before us. The Court will be in a
12 position to make such comparisons and draw such conclusions as may be
13 appropriate. I happen to think this is a bit of a storm in a teacup in
14 any event, but I do draw the line on trying to turn this witness into a
15 kind of expert, in particular given the deficiencies in notice provided
16 to the Prosecution to which the Court has already referred.
17 THE ACCUSED: May I?
18 JUDGE KWON: I do indeed see this as a storm in a teacup. Is he
19 going to say more than what is contained in para 7, his observation about
20 Variant A and B?
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, Excellency, given that under
22 item 2 it is said that he was the chief inspector, I may have asked him
23 what was the purview of chief inspector. However, since this paper,
24 Variant A and B, is hugely significant --
25 JUDGE KWON: His evidence is that he saw that for the first time
1 in July 2004, and he made observation on that document in his statement.
2 I think that's all he can say about this document. Why don't you just
3 move on.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Excellencies, this entire manual of
5 his makes it impossible to understand the entire situation in
6 Bosnia-Herzegovina. It's not based only on Variants A and B. It is all
7 based on the local laws and circumstances at a given time. Variants A
8 and B is just a small part. But for this statement not to be too
9 extensive, we wanted this document to be adopted in its entirety because
10 it would help the Chamber understand how things operated in terms of the
11 law. And a comparison also can be made between Variants A and B and the
12 plans that everybody else were obliged to prepare, and as an inspector,
13 it was his duty to supervise it, and there is no better witness to
14 evaluate this paper than this witness.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE BAIRD: Mr. Robinson, now, you did say that the question as
17 structured, it really elicited expert evidence. Fair enough. And you
18 mentioned the way it could have been approached. Can you give us some
19 idea, can you give us some knowledge as to the structure of that
20 particular question you had in mind?
21 MR. ROBINSON: What I had in mind was whether -- was how
22 Variant A and B tallied with the plans that had previously been in place
23 for the SFRY. That's in general. But in discussing with Dr. Karadzic,
24 he, I think, has some very specific questions that might be better put to
25 the witness than on a general level. So perhaps he could explain some
1 questions that he believes he would prefer to ask.
2 JUDGE BAIRD: Dr. Karadzic.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. First of all, I would
4 like to ask the question about the essence of his work. Secondly, who
5 controlled the drafting and drawing up of plans. And thirdly, what was
6 the role in the place of paper A and B even though he hadn't seen it
7 before 2004, but I would like to hear his opinion about its place in the
8 defence system that was in place in the former Yugoslavia. What about
9 Crisis Staff and their place and role, whether they were lawful or
10 unlawful? To put it simply, he was the one who was monitoring the
11 lawfulness of preparations for defence. It was up to him to evaluate
12 this whether it was exaggerated or insufficient and whether it was in
13 accordance with the law. It was his duty from his point of view to
14 assess the lawfulness of these operations.
15 JUDGE BAIRD: Thank you.
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE BAIRD: Mr. Tieger, now that Mr. Karadzic -- Dr. Karadzic
18 has given us -- has given us an idea as to the questions he has in mind,
19 do you wish to comment on that please for us so that we have a situation
20 from both sides.
21 MR. TIEGER: Well, as I see it, Mr. President, I understand that
22 the points that Dr. Karadzic wants to raise and the alleged basis for
23 doing so, he again cites the witness's position at the time, again notes
24 that it had nothing to do with what happened at the time because he
25 didn't in fact know about the Variant A and B document. The alleged
1 credentials he cites for this witness are exactly what a party cites when
2 he wants to explain why someone is entitled to give an expert opinion.
3 So again this emphasises the expert nature of what he is about to ask the
4 witness to do. And interestingly, again, although Dr. Karadzic keeps
5 citing the witness's duty to do this thing, we note that he didn't do it,
6 which seems to underscore apparently the secret nature of the Variant A
7 and B document. But in any event, he has not articulated a basis for
8 doing anything other than attempting erroneously to call this witness as
9 an expert witness to testify about that document.
10 JUDGE BAIRD: Thank you.
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 JUDGE KWON: Given the time, the Chamber will have a break. We
13 will resume at five past 11.00.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I say just one thing? It would
15 be better to call papers A and B by its correct title, because it speaks
16 about emergency situations. The manual is not a legal text. It just
17 provides guidelines and directions.
18 --- Recess taken at 10.32 a.m.
19 --- On resuming at 11.10 a.m.
20 [The witness takes the stand]
21 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Edgerton and Mr. Tieger, the Chamber has no
22 difficulty with the question suggested by Mr. Robinson and Mr. Karadzic.
23 We will allow the question.
24 Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
1 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Mr. Kapetina, can you tell us what was the main job of the chief
3 inspector, the job that you had?
4 A. In a nutshell, my main job was to supervise the implementation,
5 the constitution, and the laws pertaining to defence.
6 Q. Thank you. In what way did you discharge these duties?
7 A. I did it by means of inspection and supervision of planners,
8 mainly the civilian structures of a society starting from state organs at
9 the republican level, then socio-political communities, primarily
10 municipalities and districts, and I also inspected companies that were of
11 special interest for the defence of the republics and other entities in
12 compliance with the inspection plan.
13 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us if there is suspicion that some
14 organised forces were in the course of preparing violence or rebellions
15 that can precipitate emergencies, what was the obligation of entities
16 involved in that including parties?
17 JUDGE KWON: Just a second.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Their first task was to make an
19 assessment --
20 JUDGE KWON: Put a pause. Please wait for some time before you
21 start answering the question.
22 The same for you, Mr. Karadzic.
23 Now could you answer the question.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Their primary task was to
25 continuously monitor the situation and to assess the overall security and
1 political situation in a specific municipality or organ or other planning
2 entity and to define measures that would pre-empt the emergence of such
3 situation or even escalation of certain processes.
4 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Thank you. How is this continuous monitoring being implemented
6 in practice? Are any new procedures being introduced or duty shifts or
7 what? How can you do this on a continual basis?
8 A. This is being done by implementing regular measures but also by
9 reinforced measures. You said yourself that it can take the form of
10 emergency duty shifts or establishing communication and co-operation and
11 checking up. All these measures depended on the decision of a specific
12 planning entity.
13 Q. Are you familiar with the notion of Crisis Staff, and what can
14 you tell the Chamber about the place of the Crisis Staffs in our system
15 of All People's Defence and civilian protection in general?
16 A. Crisis Staffs were not regular organs. As a rule, they were
17 formed on an ad hoc basis depending on the specific circumstances.
18 Mainly those tasks would assume the duties and powers of the regular
19 organs who are failing to carry out their constitutional and legal
20 obligations, and they continue to exist until such time when the regular
21 organs became capable of discharging their regular duties. So as I said,
22 those were not regular organs. Those were ad hoc organs established on a
23 case-by-case basis, and they have a mandate of implementing and using
24 their constitutional and legal powers for a limited period of time.
25 Q. Can you tell us who made up a Crisis Staff?
1 A. Well, it depends which level we are talking about. If it is on a
2 local level, it depended on the specific situation. In most cases those
3 were members of the leadership who were already holding offices in the
4 existing organs. If we're talking about a municipality, a president of
5 the municipality would be at the head of the Crisis Staff, president of
6 the Executive Committee would be one of the members, and this would also
7 include all those responsible for restoring law and order and suppressing
8 any events that precipitated the crisis by virtue of their office. This
9 could be the chief of police, then the secretary for national defence,
10 perhaps some members of the ruling parties, and that would be the core
11 composition of a Crisis Staff, but it could include other members as
12 well. Basically those were people who held main positions in a local
14 Q. Thank you. The decisions taken by these ad hoc bodies, were they
15 evaluated under regular circumstances? Were they being assessed,
16 adopted, or rejected, which means that the Assembly can only convene
17 after the emergency situation ceases to exist.
18 A. Yes. An Assembly is allowed to evaluate the operation of a
19 Crisis Staff, and it has this power.
20 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, at least you should put a pause.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm sorry.
22 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Can you list us situations in a which a Crisis Staff is
1 A. For example, at the local level a Crisis Staff is being formed if
2 regular state organs are dysfunctional. For example, if it is impossible
3 to convene the Assembly or if the Executive Committee is failing to carry
4 out its duties or if any other administrative organs are not functioning.
5 These are the circumstances that call for the establishment of a Crisis
6 Staff, and its main duty is to make the regular organs capable of
7 resuming their duties. Once they achieve that, it ceases to exist.
8 Q. Thank you. And what about natural disasters, accidents,
9 catastrophes other than war? What is the procedure then?
10 A. If we are talking natural disasters or large-scale accidents, our
11 system had civilian protection staffs that would then be activated and
12 work to deal with the situation and control the damage caused by a
13 natural disaster or other phenomenon that is a threat to life and
14 property. In such situation a municipality can establish an operative
15 body that is supposed to oversee the situation on the ground and take
16 measures to address the consequences and control the damage caused by
17 natural disasters and other accidents.
18 Q. Thank you. What about continuous monitoring? You mentioned duty
19 service. What are the obligations of defence entities in controlling
20 transport, supplying of -- or, rather, monitoring the amount of weapons
21 in circulations controlling entry by unauthorised persons, et cetera.
22 What are their duties in terms of security?
23 A. Considering that the defence system in the former Yugoslavia was
24 totalitarian -- or, rather, social, that is to say the entire society was
25 involved in the system, every local community was involved and had the
1 obligation, as well as individuals, to monitor all developments that
2 could threaten peace, order, as well as human lives and property and to
3 report to the competent authorities such as the warning and alert centres
4 and other services whose job was to prevent such threats.
5 Q. What are the obligations of defence entities in terms of moving
6 population and property from threatened to safer areas?
7 A. That is only one measure that could be planned. It is known as
8 evacuation. That means moving population and property that could be
9 threatened by a natural disaster, an accident, incidents, or armed
11 Q. If a municipality has ten local communes, five Muslim and five
12 Serb, what are its obligations and what can a legal commune legally do in
13 terms of self-organisation and defence?
14 A. The local commune has its own plan, a contingency plan for
15 natural disasters, accidents and war. In the case of war it would be a
16 defence plan. In the case of natural disasters, that would be another
18 The local commune plans its own forces to implement these plans,
19 but for each measure it has to ask for approval from the higher
20 authority. In such cases a higher authority authorises the enforcement
21 of contingency plans.
22 Q. Do Defence entities have anything to do with the transport of
23 goods, smuggling, transport of technology, et cetera? Do they have any
24 responsibility to protect citizens in those terms?
25 A. Of course contingency plans include such measures as well, but
1 these measures are enforced by the competent authorities, although local
2 communities and citizens may report such things to the competent
3 authorities and ask them to take steps against those who cause trouble.
4 Q. If there is a danger of war or armed insurgency, what are the
5 competencies of defence entities in terms of movement of conscripts and
6 their travel abroad. Do they have any powers in that field?
7 A. Of course, if some measures contained in the plans are ordered to
8 be implemented by the state, then restrictions may be imposed on the
9 movement of conscripts, and they may be required to regularly report to
10 the competent authorities to report their absences and travel but when
11 the competent state body puts in place such a measure or orders the
12 implementation of that plan.
13 Q. Where are these plans kept? Are they submitted to you or are
14 they kept somewhere, and do you inspect the existence of such plans
15 regularly or not?
16 A. All these plans are kept by the responsible officer in the entity
17 itself. That is to say, person who manages a particular local body keeps
18 the plan. If we are talking about a political party or a municipality,
19 it would be the president of the Municipal Board of that party who has
20 the plan in safekeeping, and the inspector comes to that person to
21 inspect the plan and the measures contained therein.
22 Q. What happens if the inspector finds there is no plan?
23 A. If the entity fails to produce the required plan when the
24 inspector comes, then he is subject to penalties under the law, and the
25 person who is the plan manager is also subject to penalties. The person
1 who was supposed to initiate the development of the plan.
2 Q. Did you inspect the SDS, the Serbian Democratic Party?
3 A. From the establishment of the Ministry of Defence after the first
4 multi-party system, I was not allowed to inspect anything anywhere,
5 including the SDS. To be quite clear, I'm not the only inspector. I am
6 the leader of a team of inspectors from the competent state body. I'm
7 just man number one in the team of inspectors.
8 Q. If an inspection had been made and found that there was no
9 contingency plan in the SDS, what would be the role of the inspector sent
10 by you?
11 A. In addition to repressive measures, it's possible that we would
12 talk to the person who was supposed to develop that plan because we don't
13 only have a repressive role but also an instructing role. We have check
14 first whether the dead-line for developing the plan was realistic and
15 reasonable and give a new dead-line. Only if a plan was not made after
16 that second dead-line, then the entity would be subjected to fines and
17 other penalties.
18 Q. In those places where plans do exist, what does the inspection
20 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. Earlier on the witness said that he
21 was not allowed to inspect anything anywhere, including the SDS. What's
22 the basis of continuing with the witness about the potential inspection
23 vis-a-vis the political parties?
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, the witness said
25 that he was prevented from doing that job illegally, that it was an
1 unlawful step taken by the minister. I was asking him what he would have
2 done before he was prevented from doing his job, what he would have done
3 before the minister in question took up that post.
4 JUDGE KWON: I'm not sure I'm following.
5 Mr. Kapetina, were political parties, including the SDS, the
6 subject of any inspection by your team?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
8 JUDGE KWON: On what basis is a political party subjected to
9 inspection by the government?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To give an example: If the
11 programme of inspections envisages an inspection in the municipality,
12 then in that municipality, the inspector would visit one entity in each
13 field, in the industry, in the public industry. They would choose also
14 one political party. It would be a random check, not every entity, just
15 to establish the general picture in that municipality to assess the
16 situation in terms of planning and requirements. To provide a final
17 evaluation of the whole situation in one municipality, it is necessary to
18 cover all planners, all those who have the obligation to have a
19 contingency plan.
20 JUDGE KWON: Then I'll quote your answer, your previous answer to
21 Mr. Karadzic's question, so could you clarify what you meant. I quote,
22 this is what Mr. Karadzic asked you:
23 "Did you inspect the SDS, the Serbian Democratic Party?"
24 Your answer:
25 "From the establishment of Ministry of Defence after the first
1 multi-party system, I was not allowed to inspect anything anywhere,
2 including the SDS."
3 What did you mean?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I made an inspection plan for 1991
5 that was not endorsed because the minister of defence is supposed to
6 endorse the inspection plan. I did the same plan for 1992. Again, it
7 was not endorsed. I conducted inspections only before 1990, when there
8 was no Ministry of Defence but the Republic Secretariat for National
9 Defence. So before the multi-party elections I carried out inspections
10 together with my team, but after the multi-party elections I was no
11 longer able to do that because the minister of defence prevented me by
12 refusing to sign the annual inspection plan.
13 JUDGE KWON: Very well. Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Can you tell us the reasons why the new minister prevented
16 inspections from taking place?
17 A. Since in Bosnia-Herzegovina the whole nature of the political
18 system changed from a one-party system - we moved to the multi-party
19 system - there was an urgent need to adapt the defence system to these
20 changes, to harmonise it with new nature of the social and political
21 system. First we introduced amendments on the Law on National Defence
22 and the Law on Conscription, and we needed to develop the bylaws that
23 would allow the enforcement of the laws I just mentioned, but apart from
24 the programmed tasks, the ministry did absolutely nothing. Its staff was
25 busy tearing apart the existing system. They were tearing apart the JNA,
1 tearing the TO apart into ethnic components, and chaos and anarchy,
2 lawlessness were introduced into the system. There were no instructions
3 given to local authorities on how to act. Basically, the ministry did
4 not do the job that it was set up to do, although, as I said, there was
5 an urgent need to work even harder than before because the political
6 system had changed its nature.
7 Q. In line 11 you said the minister and the group of people around
8 him. Is that what you said, because it's not on the record?
9 A. Yes. I mentioned a group of people. Those were mainly assistant
10 ministers loyal to the minister from the ranks of the Muslim and Croat
11 communities. Although, even some Croat individuals were not loyal to
13 Q. Was that position of the minister in keeping with the law?
14 A. Certainly not. His position and his conduct were not in keeping
15 with the law. They were contrary to the law.
16 Q. We have in evidence an intercept of your conversation with me.
17 Did we know each other before that conversation? Did the SDS make the
18 keeping of your position conditional upon membership in the SDS? Were
19 you a member of any party?
20 A. The first multi-party elections I was a member of the SDP, which
21 was a party that was the successor of the former League of Communists,
22 and I was on the ticket for the local parliament in Hadzici, those
24 Before that conversation, which I believe was in July 1991, I did
25 not know you, nor did you know me. That conversation occurred, as we can
1 see, quite spontaneously, and one of the first things you asked were --
2 was whether I had to become a member of the SDS in order to keep my job
3 and whether I had to do as the -- whether I had to do the SDS's bidding.
4 Nobody ever imposed any conditions on me, no one and no party. I had
5 worked my entire career in the local administration as a civil servant,
6 and all I did I did in keeping with the powers given me by the law and my
8 Q. In line 17 it says local administration, whereas you said state
9 administration; right?
10 A. Yes, yes. I worked in the state administration until 1992.
11 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not hear the first year.
12 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Thank you. Later on when you became part of the Government of
14 Republika Srpska, were any conditions imposed upon you? Did you have to
15 join the SDS?
16 A. No. There were no conditions imposed on me that I had to become
17 a member of the party or that I had to carry out any kind of particular
18 party instructions. By way of illustration, in the Ministry of Defence
19 all assistant ministers from the ethnic Serb community who were appointed
20 assistant ministers of defence were not members of the SDS:
21 Ljubisa Terzic, under-secretary, he was not a member; Dragan Markovic was
22 not either; I wasn't; and no one else was a member of the SDS. But we
23 stayed on. We continued to work in these jobs because we were
24 professionals and civil servants.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Excellencies, I would like to
2 tender this manual which is quite instructive, and without it it is
3 impossible to understand the civil war in Bosnia-Herzegovina and the
4 actions of various entities. So it's either going to be the translation
5 service or the Defence is going to make sure that all of it is translated
6 and then maybe the Chamber will say that not all of it is needed, but I
7 believe that this manual on action in emergency situations deserves to be
8 part of the evidence in this case.
9 JUDGE KWON: Shall we mark it for identification for the moment
10 and see whether or not to admit it later on, Ms. Edgerton?
11 MS. EDGERTON: Perhaps only those pages that were referred to in
12 evidence, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE KWON: I was thinking the Prosecution may find some other
14 relevant parts from the document, but if you say so, we'll only mark
15 those pages referred to for identification.
16 Shall we assign a number.
17 THE REGISTRAR: It will be MFI D3860, Your Honours.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Had I known, I would have presented
19 more pages, but let's see. Perhaps we'll do it in some different way,
20 bar table it.
21 Thank you, Excellencies. For the time being I have no further
22 questions for Mr. Kapetina.
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
24 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you, Your Honours.
25 Cross-examination by Ms. Edgerton:
1 Q. Mr. Kapetina, can you hear me in a language you understand?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. I'd like to start, if I -- I'd like to start your
4 cross-examination by looking at a document you've commented about and
5 referred to in your statement. I'll choose P960. And that's the
6 Variant A and B document.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I suggest that the witness be
8 given a hard copy of this document.
9 MS. EDGERTON: I think the witness will be able to deal with this
10 just fine, Dr. Karadzic, if I go slowly.
11 JUDGE KWON: But witness was able to follow the document through
12 the monitor. Let's see whether he can follow or not.
13 MS. EDGERTON:
14 Q. I'd like to go over now, Mr. Kapetina, to page 4 in English of
15 this document and page 3 in your language, under the heading "First
16 level," which appears on the previous page, I guess, and instruction
17 number 4.
18 Now, the instruction in this document says:
19 "Convene and proclaim an assembly of the Serbian people in the
20 municipality composed of representatives of the Serbian people in the
21 Municipal Assembly."
22 And just so you know, you found this same passage under the
23 second level of instructions in this document as well, but my question
24 for you is, Mr. Kapetina, since you seem to know something about planning
25 and have looked at this document, maybe you could identify for us the
1 legal provisions, the legal or constitutional provisions that allow a
2 political party to unilaterally create parallel Serb municipality organs?
3 A. First of all, I have page 2 on the monitor, and you said page 3,
4 if I'm not mistaken, in Serbian.
5 JUDGE KWON: I think she was referring to point 4, where it says
6 "Convene and proclaim an assembly of the Serbian people in the
7 municipality ..."
8 Do you see that, Mr. Kapetina?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Ah, yes. Paragraph 4, yes.
10 JUDGE KWON: And do you remember the question?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I do. I do. I would like to
12 ask you to show the last page of that document.
13 MS. EDGERTON:
14 Q. I'd like to ask you to answer my question.
15 A. Because it will contain -- because it will contain the answer
16 that I'm going to offer to you.
17 Q. Mr. Kapetina, why don't you just give the answer?
18 A. I shall answer instantaneously. In this instruction these are
19 measures and tasks. That is to say that no one ordered this. This --
20 this was put on a menu, if you will, and for this to be correct, to show
21 that this is correct, do put the last paragraph of this document on the
22 screen for me.
23 JUDGE KWON: I do not --
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Transcript.
25 JUDGE KWON: I do not understand why you should see the last
1 page. You cannot answer the question?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've answered. This is just a
3 measure that contains the instruction at this level, and this is on the
4 menu for those who are supposed to carry it out. No one ordered this
5 measure. No one from the Serb Democratic Party said: "I hereby order
6 that an Assembly of the Serb people be proclaimed," et cetera, et cetera.
7 That's why I'm asking you for the last page because that is precisely
8 what is written there.
9 JUDGE KWON: The question was, Mr. Kapetina, whether it was a
10 menu, order, instruction, whatever it might have been, what's the basis
11 to unilaterally create parallels of municipalities organs. That was the
12 question. I assume that it was not an order at all, instruction. Even
13 it says just suggestion. What's the basis, that was the question.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Now I will -- well, now was it
15 constitutional and lawful at the level of the republican parliament to
16 out-vote the legally elected representatives of a constituent people?
17 Was that legal? Was that constitutional and lawful?
18 JUDGE KWON: Is that your answer, Mr. Kapetina?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, this is just one of the
20 possible reactions at local level. That is to say, when one group of
21 deputies or all the deputies of one constituent people are thrown out of
22 parliament, when you out-vote them with regard to all key questions of
23 national interest, what can you expect from that kind of legally elected
24 parliamentary group? It cannot accept to have someone excluded from
25 political life if they had won the election and evidently they had. So
1 this is just one of the possibilities that was envisaged in the
2 instruction, that this be done at local level, too, drawing on the
3 experience of what happened in the republican parliament. But I note
4 once again that no one ordered this. This was provided as a menu within
5 the instruction, and that is why I'm asking you to show the last page.
6 JUDGE KWON: I will ask Ms. Edgerton to continue.
7 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
8 Q. I'd like to go to actually a different page. No. Actually, it's
9 the same page in English and the same page in B/C/S.
10 Mr. Kapetina, just look down one clause to instruction level --
11 instruction number 5, and you also find the same passage under the second
12 level of instructions. It says in instruction 5:
13 "Carry out preparations for the establishment of municipal state
14 organs..." and it lists them, "... and prepare a list of nominees for
15 offices and duties in the said organ."
16 And then it says:
17 "Prepare the take-over of staff, buildings, and equipment of
18 security services centres and their integration with the newly
19 established organ of the interior at the seat of the centre."
20 So about this subparagraph or this instruction, I'd like to ask
21 you the same question: Can you identify the legal and constitutional
22 provisions in place in December 1991 that allowed a political party to
23 form, mobilise, and resubordinate a separate Serbian police station and
24 police forces?
25 A. First of all, this instruction does not say that they should be
1 established, these organs. Rather, it says that preparations should be
2 carried out. Do you know that a political party that is in opposition,
3 not in government, can also form a shadow government? They can prepare
4 personnel for setting up a new government. That is the right that a
5 political party has. One that is in opposition, not one that's in
6 government. So these are not documents of establishment. These are
7 documents referring to preparations.
8 Q. So, Mr. Kapetina, you can't answer either of my questions, can
10 A. I've answered every one of your questions. You can either be
11 satisfied or unsatisfied with the answers, but I keep telling you that we
12 should look at the last page of this paper, and you keep avoiding that.
13 Q. So, Mr. Kapetina, you can't answer my questions because there
14 were no provisions in place at that time that allowed for a political
15 party to unilaterally create Serb municipality and police organs. It's
16 quite simple, isn't it?
17 A. That is not correct. You are proceeding on the basis of a
18 certain perception. For me members of parliament who were elected to the
19 republican parliament are not a political party, whereas you keep saying
20 that they are the representatives of a party. For me, these are legally
21 elected members of parliament elected by the people. Further on, legally
22 elected members of government, from your point of view they are members
23 of the SDS. From my point of view, in my perception --
24 JUDGE KWON: I'm not sure if the witness understood the question.
25 Shall we move on?
1 MS. EDGERTON: Sure, Your Honours.
2 Q. In fact -- so, Mr. Kapetina, in fact you've already said you
3 never saw this document before 2004; right?
4 A. That's right.
5 Q. You don't know what happened with this document when it was
6 handed out. You don't know what was said when it was disseminated;
8 A. Well, since I am in this field and that I'm professionally linked
9 to this field, I assume what was suggested when it was distributed and
10 distributed down to those who needed --
11 Q. I didn't ask you for assumptions. I asked you whether or not you
12 knew. Are you now saying that you knew about its distribution and its
14 A. I can only assume. I don't know.
15 Q. That's fine then. We'll move on then to another area. I want to
16 ask you -- I want us to have a look at a document you discussed in your
17 evidence in chief, D3857. So this is a document that was signed by
18 Milan Atlagic, who you said in your written evidence was an associate of
19 yours before he moved to the security unit of the 2nd Military District.
20 So I just want to know is your evidence that Milan Atlagic, who was a
21 career JNA officer, who before he took this job, head of the military
22 police for the military district, was Milan Atlagic passing you strictly
23 confidential military information in February 1992?
24 A. Milan Atlagic worked in the sector for security of the Ministry
25 of Defence. His immediate superior or supervisor was Colonel Bjelosevic.
1 Colonel Bjelosevic was assistant minister of defence for security affairs
2 and I was the chief republican inspector. Milan Atlagic did not gather
3 intelligence from the JNA. Rather, he was in charge of security for the
4 civilian sector and the civilian sector of society and that's the kind of
5 information he exchanged with me.
6 Q. So let me stop you right there, Mr. Kapetina. My question was is
7 it your evidence that Atlagic was passing you strictly confidential
8 military information, because that's what this document says on the top
9 right-hand and top left-hand corners, was he passing you strictly
10 confidential military information in February 1992?
11 A. In my statement I said that I had not received this information
12 in writing but that I was in a position for Milan Atlagic to provide some
13 information to me of a security nature. Not about the JNA, rather, from
14 the ground, from local communes.
15 Q. So your answer is yes.
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And that would be a violation of military security on his part,
18 wouldn't it?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Let's go over to the second page of this document. Bottom
21 left-hand corner. This document is addressed and only copied to the
22 security organ of the 2nd Military District, the security organ of the
23 4th Corps, and the security organ of the military district command. Your
24 name isn't there, Mr. Kapetina.
25 A. I've already said that I had not received information in writing.
1 I repeat that once again. I did not receive this paper. I was in a
2 position to get certain information, security information, from the
3 ground from Colonel Atlagic; that is to say, from municipalities in
4 Bosnia-Herzegovina and from state organs and so on. I did not say that I
5 had received this information.
6 And now for your information, the command of the military
7 district that Lieutenant-Colonel Milan Atlagic worked in on the 28th of
8 February was beforehand in the sector of military mobilisation affairs of
9 the Ministry of Defence, and it was only later that this was transferred
10 to the command of military district. So the law -- or, rather, the top
11 people in Bosnia-Herzegovina were not in favour of this new organisation
12 that --
13 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could the witness start
14 answering from the last sentence. It was too fast for interpretation.
15 JUDGE KWON: You were speaking too fast, Mr. Kapetina --
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
17 JUDGE KWON: -- for the interpreters to follow. So I would like
18 you to kindly repeat from where you said about the law, "... the top
19 people in BH were not in favour...," from there.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They didn't want to accept the new
21 solutions in the amendments in the law on military obligation, that
22 carrying out military obligation in the republic should be carried out by
23 military territorial organs where this Colonel Atlagic worked. That is
24 the command of the military district.
25 According to the previous law, this work was done by the Ministry
1 of Defence and the municipal secretariats for national defence.
2 Therefore Milan Atlagic was a colleague of mine. Say in this period we
3 were on the same floor in the Ministry of Defence, and we were
4 acquaintances and colleagues, and we had the same work.
5 Q. I want to jump over in your statement now to a little bit of your
6 work history in the Ministry of Defence of Republika Srpska. It seems
7 from your statement you're a pretty long-standing employee because you
8 worked with General Subotic, General Kovacevic, Mr. Ninkovic,
9 General Milovanovic, and it was under General Milovanovic that you also
10 severed as a deputy defence minister for a period, I think; right?
11 A. In 1997 I was elected deputy minister of defence, and at that
12 point in time Milovanovic was not minister of defence. It was
13 Milan Ninkovic. I did not work in the Ministry of Defence of the
14 Government of Republika Srpska during the term of office of
15 General Manojlo Milovanovic.
16 And what you mentioned here that I worked with Subotic,
17 Kovacevic, and Ninkovic, yes.
18 Q. And then you were military advisor to Mr. Parvas who was the Serb
19 member of the Bosnian Presidency for a period of time.
20 A. Yes, that's right. I was advisor for security and defence of the
21 member of the Presidency of Bosnia-Herzegovina from Republika Srpska.
22 Q. Until what point?
23 A. From 2002 to 2006, that term.
24 Q. And now you're a businessman; right?
25 A. Well, I work in a company. I wouldn't say that I was a
2 Q. And you're involved -- the company's work is selling arms --
3 exporting arms and ammunition out of Bosnia and Herzegovina; right?
4 A. Yes. Beforehand I worked in that company. Yes. That company
5 had a licence and a certificate for exporting arms and military
7 Q. So clearly you were a valued member of the defence staff having
8 been in office for so long. You've got some long-standing experience in
9 defence matters. Is that fair to say?
10 A. I think the answer is yes.
11 Q. And in July 1995 when Mr. Ninkovic, who was your minister at the
12 time, was out on the western front, you then were the most experienced
13 official in the defence ministry. You were the most experienced guy left
14 in office; right?
15 A. Well, if we take into account the other assistant ministers,
16 then, yes, I was secretary of the ministry. There were also, say, five
17 or six assistant ministers who also had experience in state
18 administration and the system of defence.
19 Q. Okay. I just want to get to the point in your statement now
20 where you talk about being called to Dr. Karadzic's office sometime
21 between the 5th and the 10th of July. Now, you had -- did you have your
22 office downstairs in -- in Dr. Karadzic's building or were you in a
23 separate building where the rest of the ministry officials were housed?
24 A. I was in a different building where the Ministry of Defence of
25 the Republika Srpska was housed, and that was in the Famos factory. I
1 was not in the same building as the president of the republic.
2 Q. And at that time, just to sort of set the stage for this, at that
3 time his office was on the second floor of the building, and it was kind
4 of down the corridor and on the left-hand side; right?
5 A. You mean the office of the president of the republic?
6 Q. I do.
7 A. I really don't remember. It was possible that it was on one of
8 the stories. It's been a long time ago. I really don't know remember
9 whether it was on an upper floor or on a ground floor.
10 Q. It doesn't really matter. In any case, if Dr. Karadzic needed
11 you, you could be there quickly; right?
12 A. That is right.
13 Q. And you didn't need a formal appointment to get there either. He
14 could just pick up the phone and call who he needed from your ministry or
15 you, and it was your job to get there as quick as you could; right?
16 A. Right. Of course, this was done through the secretary, not by
17 the president himself.
18 Q. And when you go up to see him on that occasion in his office,
19 your evidence is that he knew something was going on about Srebrenica,
20 but he didn't know what; correct?
21 A. My impression was that he had received some information but that
22 he didn't have reliable information as to what was actually happening
23 around Srebrenica. In other words, according to the president's conduct,
24 I understood that the information that he received was not the
25 information that he got from officials of Republika Srpska but, rather,
1 from members of the international community, hence he wanted someone to
2 paint a clear picture to him regarding the situation in and around
4 Q. All right. Now, talking about his conduct, can you show us or at
5 least describe in more detail exactly how Dr. Karadzic pulled his hair
6 out, knocked over a chair, kicked and knocked over chairs and a table,
7 and asked who the idiots were who ordered Srebrenica? Can you show us or
8 at least describe it more detail?
9 A. Well, exactly what you said in your question. In a word, he was
10 furious for not having been informed about anything, primarily by his
11 associates, and he did exactly how I described it. He was kicking a
12 stool, an armchair. He was pulling his hair out. Quite simply he
13 couldn't -- he couldn't accept not to be informed about something that
14 his associates were obliged to inform him about. That's how I understood
16 Q. Well --
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Transcript.
18 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. Yes.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The witness said he inadvertently
20 kicked. What is this called?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A stool.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. He inadvertently kicked.
23 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
24 MS. EDGERTON:
25 Q. When you pull your hair how the, that's going to cause a great
1 wound, isn't it? It's something you do with great force. How did
2 Dr. Karadzic do it? I want you to show us.
3 A. Well, he wasn't pulling his hair out literally. You may have
4 noticed that during all this time here that since Mr. Karadzic has long
5 hair he sometimes put his fingers through his hair, but according all his
6 body language and gestures, I understood that he was infuriated for not
7 having received the information from those who should have provided it to
8 him. That was my point.
9 Q. All right. Let's talk a bit more about his body language. And I
10 actually want you to look at a photograph for us. It's P4560. And it's
11 photograph -- it's page 1 of P4560, and it's a photograph of Dr. Karadzic
12 in his office in the Famos factory on the 13th of July, 1995.
13 So there's Dr. Karadzic in his office, and he's there,
14 Mr. Kapetina, with Srdjan Trifkovic, and there's a table in front of
15 Dr. Karadzic with a bowl of fruit on it and some flowers. So when you
16 say Dr. Karadzic knocked over a table, was it this heavy meeting table
17 that he and Mr. Trifkovic are sitting at in his office? What's funny
18 about that, Mr. Kapetina, because that's your evidence in your statement,
19 so I want to find out how it happened?
20 A. I don't think that I said in my statement that he knocked the
21 table over. Maybe a chair or a stool. The table was never mentioned.
22 If that was included in my statement, I should have corrected it. There
23 was no mention of any table.
24 Q. Your statement at paragraph 43 says:
25 "This answer of mine further infuriated the president so that he
1 knocked over a chair, kicked and knocked over some seats, and a table,
2 pulled his hair out, and asked aloud, 'Who needs this right now? Who
3 ordered it? Who are these idiots?'"
4 That's what your statement says. So did he knock over a table or
6 A. No, and that's not what I said.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I be of assistance? There is
8 no mention of a table in the Serbian version. Can we please see the
9 relevant paragraph.
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Shall we take a look at para 43 of his
12 We have no clue other than having to ask the witness to read out
13 the first sentence of para 43.
14 MS. EDGERTON: Correct.
15 JUDGE KWON: Could you read the first sentence very slowly.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "This response of mine made the
17 president of the republic even more infuriated so that he overturned a
18 chair. He kicked and turned over a suite, a chair again, he pulled his
19 hair out and asked a question out loud: 'Who needs this at this point in
20 time? Who ordered this? Who these are idiots? Haven't I told you 100
21 times that the status of Srebrenica has to be resolved within the
22 framework of an overall solution for the BH and that no offensive
23 measures should be taken towards the safe haven?'"
24 So there was no mention of a table. After such a long time I
25 cannot be sure whether the president received me in the office of the
1 president of the municipality. I think that when he asked me over, he
2 was in the offers the president of the municipality, because looking at
3 this picture that was not the office at all.
4 MS. EDGERTON:
5 Q. So we have a problem with the English translation. That's one
6 thing. And you're now adding to your statement saying that Dr. Karadzic
7 didn't receive you in his office but in the office of the president of
8 some municipality. Who was that?
9 A. No. In the office of the president of the National Assembly.
10 Q. Oh. So now Dr. Karadzic called you about Srebrenica from
11 Mr. Krajisnik's office. Is that right?
12 A. Roughly speaking, that would be correct. After having seen this
13 interior and this office, I realise that that was not the office where he
14 received me.
15 Q. So when Dr. Karadzic called you from -- was Dr. Karadzic in the
16 habit of calling you from Mr. Krajisnik's office?
17 A. If they happened to be together in either of the office, it made
18 no difference where he would ask me to come over, but in most instances
19 he asked me to come to his office.
20 Q. So Mr. Krajisnik would have been there then?
21 A. Not at the time.
22 Q. Who else was in the room, in Mr. Krajisnik's office, when
23 Dr. Karadzic called you from that location to ask you about Srebrenica?
24 A. There was no one else. President Karadzic and I were the only
25 people, and there were two secretaries in the adjacent office.
1 Q. So you would have had to go through the secretaries to get to
2 Mr. Krajisnik's office.
3 A. Probably. Yes, of course.
4 Q. Right. Now, let's go back to the picture we had on the screen,
5 P4560. Page 1.
6 All right. Now not accepting for the moment that the meeting
7 happened in Mr. Krajisnik's office, I just want to ask you about
8 furniture. When you say Dr. Karadzic kicked and knocked over chairs, was
9 he kicking and knocking over these leather-bound office chairs that you
10 see he and Mr. Trifkovic sitting on?
11 A. I said that he did it inadvertently because he was so agitated
12 and nervous that he was walking around the office and waving his hands,
13 so in the process he knocked over a chair. He turned over a stool. And
14 I wrote all this down in order to describe the state of mind that the
15 president was in. I wanted to depict to you his state of mind at the
16 time when he asked me to come over to speak to him.
17 Q. So we went from him being so furious that he was ripping his hair
18 out and forcibly turning over the furniture in whatever office you met
19 him in to him running his hands through his hair and inadvertently
20 knocking into furniture; right?
21 A. I have to reiterate that one the chairs definitely was turned
22 over. Whether this was intentionally or intentionally, but I think that
23 it doesn't affect the reason why I went there and why the president asked
24 me to come over.
25 Q. And when Dr. Karadzic said to you or asked you who the idiots
1 were who ordered Srebrenica, that must have been some kind of a trick on
2 his part; right?
3 A. Well, I never talked to the president by using tricks. At least
4 I was convinced of that. I only had serious talks with the president. I
5 never used any tricks, nor do I believe that the president ever treated
6 me unfairly. I am sure that all our conversations were serious, relating
7 to the situation and to our business and our tasks, and I don't think
8 that the president acted by using tricks. He never treated me in that
10 Q. Well, he must have been deceiving you then, Mr. Kapetina, because
11 when he spoke in public at the opening of this trial, he said:
12 "All of a sudden it turns out once all soldiers enter Srebrenica
13 that they had left Srebrenica. That's when I ordered them to enter the
14 town, to restore peace and order. I have a letter to that effect,
15 because General Tolimir says that's what I actually ordered?"
16 So he must have been deceiving you because it was him all along,
17 Mr. Kapetina.
18 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President, I'm going to object to
19 that. The statement and the testimony has been that somewhere between
20 the 5th and 10th of July this conversation to place, and she's now
21 referring to some event that happened later than the 10th of July. So I
22 don't believe that it's a fair question to imply that Dr. Karadzic is
23 deceiving him based on that example.
24 JUDGE KWON: I'm not sure when you said some event that happened
25 later than the 10th of July.
1 MR. ROBINSON: The entry into Srebrenica, what she just described
2 in her question. Those events took place after that.
3 JUDGE KWON: What's the date of Mr. Tolimir's report or letter?
4 MR. ROBINSON: I believe --
5 MS. EDGERTON: P2276, 9 July, 1995.
6 MR. ROBINSON: This was a very late evening of the 9th of July.
7 JUDGE KWON: So it's between the 5th and the 10th, so I don't see
8 any difficulty with the question. Why don't we continue, Ms. Edgerton.
9 MS. EDGERTON:
10 Q. So, Mr. Kapetina, what I put to you was that Dr. Karadzic must
11 have been deceiving you, then, because in public he said he ordered them
12 to enter the town to restore peace and order, and he said he had a letter
13 to that effect because General Tolimir says that's what he actually
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I intervene. Firstly, in line
16 16 the witness said that I never treated others as well in the same way.
17 Secondly, the witness should be made aware of the difference between
18 ordering and consenting. And also in page 62 it should be explicitly
19 said which soldiers are we talking about, which soldiers entered
20 Srebrenica and which soldiers left Srebrenica. I'm sure that this is an
21 error in the transcript. I am sure that Ms. Edgerton spoke correctly,
22 but it seems that it was not recorded as it should.
23 JUDGE KWON: Very well. Probably, Ms. Edgerton, you could read
24 the citation again to the witness.
25 MS. EDGERTON: Yes. Just your indulgence for a moment. I'll
1 read it again.
2 Q. The citation comes from transcript page 982, lines 7 to 10, and
3 the citation is:
4 "All --"
5 JUDGE KWON: That's Mr. Karadzic's opening address?
6 MS. EDGERTON: That's correct.
7 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
8 MS. EDGERTON:
9 Q. "All of a sudden, it turns out, once all soldiers enter
10 Srebrenica, that they had left Srebrenica. That's when I ordered them to
11 enter the town to restore peace and order. I have a letter to that
12 effect, because General Tolimir says what I actually ordered."
13 Now, Mr. Kapetina, you've had a lot of time to think of an answer
14 to this question, so can we hear it? Was Dr. Karadzic deceiving you?
15 A. Dr. Karadzic, or rather, the president of the republic, would
16 invite me only in a situation where the minister of defence was absent.
17 He always called me when it pertained to my purview. Since I knew that
18 on that particular day the minister of defence was not at Pale, I believe
19 that President wasn't deceiving me. First of all, I don't know which
20 date it was exactly. It may have been the 5th of July, and I believe
21 that that was the sole reason why the President called me, because he
22 couldn't establish communication with the commander of the Main Staff,
23 the chief of the staff, or any responsible person on the Main Staff who
24 could give me accurate information, and that was the only reason why he
25 called me to come to his office. He asked me if I had any information,
1 not information on my own but information that I had received from either
2 state or military organs, and that was the only reason why he asked me to
3 come over, nothing else.
4 Q. Mr. Kapetina, you say you gave evidence that he asked you:
5 "Who needs this right now? Who ordered it? Who are these
6 idiots? Didn't I tell you a hundred times that the status of Srebrenica
7 should be dealt with within the overall solution in Bosnia-Herzegovina
8 and not to take any offensive operations in relation to the safe areas?"
9 Mr. Kapetina, either Dr. Karadzic was lying to you, or when he
10 gave his opening address which was carried in the media around the world
11 he was lying to the public. Which is it?
12 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President. That -- I -- that's a
13 question that falls into the category of when did you stop beating your
14 wife. I don't think that it's an either/or. It can be others -- other
15 explanations as well.
16 JUDGE KWON: So now you were told about Mr. Karadzic's opening
17 speech in this trial. Do you still stand by what you said in your
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I fully stand by what I said in my
20 statement, and Madam Prosecutor misread my -- his statement.
21 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please slow down. We cannot
22 keep up the pace.
23 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Edgerton misread what? Could you repeat from
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The President didn't use the
1 singular. He used plural. He said, "Didn't I say 100 times at official
2 meetings." He didn't say anything to me personally, because I didn't
3 undertake any actions with regard to Srebrenica.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Excellencies, if I may say, the
5 sentence from the opening statement was misrecorded. I didn't use the
6 word "enter suddenly" talking about soldiers, but when soldiers left
7 Srebrenica, this is what's creating this confusion.
8 JUDGE KWON: That does not make much difference. Let's leave it.
9 Shall we continue.
10 MS. EDGERTON:
11 Q. Mr. Kapetina, you've just said --
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Yes. I was afraid that the transcript was not
13 working, but it's okay. Please continue.
14 MS. EDGERTON: I do realise we're over time, though, Your
16 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Do you have long, some more?
17 MS. EDGERTON: I do.
18 JUDGE KWON: Shall we have a break?
19 MS. EDGERTON: That's fine, thank you.
20 JUDGE KWON: Yes. We will resume at 1.25.
21 --- Recess taken at 12.40 p.m.
22 --- On resuming at 1.28 p.m.
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Edgerton, please continue.
24 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you, Your Honour.
25 Q. And, Mr. Kapetina, just when we broke before lunch, in the
1 context of talking about paragraph 43 of your statement, you told
2 His Honour Judge Kwon that you stood by that evidence, and what I want to
3 do now, picking up from your assertion, is I want to show you three
4 documents, and then I'm going to ask you a question.
5 The first document is D2097, and it's a report of the Main Staff
6 of the Bosnian Serb Army, dated 6 July 1995. I'm sure there's an English
7 translation, so we'll just wait a second.
8 MS. EDGERTON: Great. Thank you. Could we please go over to
9 English page 4 and B/C/S page 3, section 6(b), which says:
10 "In reference to the situation in the zone of responsibility of
11 the Drina Corps, units of the corps are at the required level of combat
12 readiness. The forces have been prepared and grouped for active combat
13 operations towards the enclaves of Srebrenica and Zepa and on receiving
14 an interim report will inform you of the combat results achieved so far."
15 Now, if we could go over to page 1 of both these documents, the
16 English and the B/C/S, please.
17 Q. You see, Mr. Kapetina, that among all the other recipients of
18 this VRS Main Staff daily combat report, the president of the Republika
19 Srpska is listed first; right? If you see that, and then we're going to
20 leave this document and go on to the next one.
21 A. I've seen it. We can move on.
22 Q. Thanks. Now I'd like us to have a look at D02080. It's an
23 interim combat report from General Krstic, dated 9 July 1995, to the VRS
24 Main Staff, and it says at paragraph 3 under the heading "Decision for
25 further operations."
1 "Taking advantage of the success achieved, regroup the forces and
2 carry out a vigorous and decisive attack towards Srebrenica."
3 So you see that; right?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Now, I'm going to tell you what Dr. Karadzic said about this
6 document in this trial, and that's from transcript page 27725, testimony
7 dated 20 April 2012, and it's referring to July 1995, the same date of
8 this document. Dr. Karadzic said:
9 "Do you remember that on that day it was in the evening, after
10 2220," that's 10.20 p.m., "General Krstic informed the main staff that he
11 had the opportunity of liberating Srebrenica, of entering Srebrenica, and
12 a half hour later Tolimir sent a telegram back to him with my approval?"
13 Right. Now I want to show you the document from General Tolimir,
14 and then I'll ask you a question. And that document from General Tolimir
15 is P2276, dated 9 July 1995, and it's an order from General Tolimir, and
16 it's copied to Dr. Karadzic for information, and it's transmitted to
17 Generals Gvero and Krstic personally, and it's about the conduct of
18 combat operations around Srebrenica, and it says:
19 "The President of Republika Srpska has been informed of
20 successful combat operations around Srebrenica by units of the
21 Drina Corps and that they have achieved results which enable them to
22 occupy the very town of Srebrenica."
23 And in the second paragraph it says:
24 "The president of the republic is satisfied with the results of
25 combat operations around Srebrenica and has agreed with the continuation
1 of operations for the take-over of Srebrenica, disarming of Muslim
2 terrorist gangs, and complete demilitarisation of the ... enclaves
4 So Mr. Kapetina, when Dr. Karadzic told you that he couldn't
5 establish communication with the commander of the Main Staff or any
6 responsible person on the Main Staff who could give accurate information,
7 that's not true, is it, because these documents show exactly the
8 opposite, these documents and Dr. Karadzic's own words in this trial.
9 A. What is the question?
10 Q. The question is, Mr. Kapetina, that when Dr. Karadzic told you
11 that he couldn't establish communication with the commander of the
12 Main Staff or any responsible person in the Main Staff, that that wasn't
13 true, was it?
14 A. I don't know whether it was true or not. Maybe
15 President Karadzic invited me on the 5th of July. You are commenting on
16 something that happened on the 6th or 9th. Perhaps he summoned me on the
17 5th when he did the not have that information, or perhaps on the 4th. I
18 said roughly between the 5th and the 10th. You're acting like I remember
19 dates. Maybe he invited me on the 5th, and then these reports followed
20 after that on the 6th and 9th. Perhaps they came later. I'm telling you
21 from what I know, from what I heard, and from what I was told at the
22 meeting, that he had no information from the Main Staff, that he was
23 unable to contact the defence minister.
24 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Robinson.
25 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President, I didn't object because the
1 question was complicated and I didn't want to disturb the flow, but this
2 is the second time today that the President has used Dr. Karadzic's
3 non-evidentiary submissions as evidence, and I just want to point that
4 out, and I believe that that's not correct, and I just hope that we all
5 have the same understanding. So when he puts a question to a witness in
6 his capacity as self-representing accused, there is no factual assertion
7 there that is evidence either for or against him. Similarly when he made
8 an opening statement, not the personal statement he made at the beginning
9 of the Defence statement but the opening statement at the beginning of
10 the case. That is also not factual assertions as a witness or as a
11 person so that those also cannot be used as evidence. So I hope we all
12 agree on that. Otherwise, it may cause us problems when we're writing
13 our briefs.
14 JUDGE KWON: Is there anything to comment upon, Mr. Tieger?
15 MR TIEGER: Well, yeah, there is, Mr. President, because I don't
16 agree and I think the Court is aware that we don't. We asked for a
17 warning at the beginning of the case. We made clear our position on
18 that. We were told, I think, as I recall the events, that a sufficient
19 admonition or a sufficient notification of that position had been made
20 clear to the accused. And finally, I would note that in any event, it
21 certainly is sufficient to say it is the position of the Defence or it is
22 the Defence's case that, which is certainly a basis for cross-examination
23 and impeachment by itself. So for both those reasons I cannot agree with
24 Mr. Robinson, and that's why I rose.
25 JUDGE KWON: But you agree that part of question or statement
1 does not -- do not form part of the evidence in this case, whether --
2 separate from whether the Prosecution can use that bit for the
3 cross-examination of other witnesses.
4 MR TIEGER: You can't -- you can't unring the bell in this way,
5 Mr. President. I don't believe the Prosecution could use it as
6 affirmative evidence in the kind of classical way the Court may be
7 indicating, but to demonstrate the position of the parties, to
8 demonstrate the position of the accused in certain instances to the
9 extent it may be relevant in assessing the evidence, I think it's
10 certainly appropriate to use, and it can play a very significant role in
11 the case, but -- so we may -- it sounds like we don't have a
12 disagreement, but I was concerned about the -- what I would regard as an
13 attempt to ignore completely such assertions in court for all purposes,
14 and I think that would be inaccurate and unfair.
15 JUDGE KWON: Would you like to add anything, Mr. Robinson?
16 MR. ROBINSON: No, Mr. President.
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 JUDGE KWON: Shall we continue?
19 MS. EDGERTON:
20 Q. Mr. Kapetina, now, you're now saying that you actually weren't
21 sure of the date of this meeting, that it could have been on the 4th or
22 on the 5th or any time up to the 10th, but -- and, Mr. Kapetina, in your
23 evidence today at page 56 of the temporary transcript, you said that the
24 meeting was arranged by the secretary, and I had a look, Mr. Kapetina, at
25 Dr. Karadzic's appointment calendar for that period of time, July 1995,
1 part of which you saw at paragraph 4367. And the whole appointment
2 calendar, for the record is P2242.
3 Mr. Kapetina, for the period between the 1st and your meeting on
4 the 13th of July, 1995, your name doesn't appear in Dr. Karadzic's
5 engagement calendar. That's because this meeting where the chairs were
6 knocked over never happened; right?
7 A. That meeting happened, and I noted down exactly what transpired
8 at that meeting. I had a feeling that the president was calling me
9 urgently through the secretary. It's not the kind of appointment that
10 you note down in the appointment book or in the protocol log. The
11 secretary made an urgent call to me and told me to see the president.
12 I told you before it's possible that this was also in the office
13 of the speaker of the Assembly. There was no prior appointment. It was
14 ad hoc. What would have happened if I hadn't been in my office? Then
15 the meeting would have never happened.
16 Q. I have one last question before we go on to another area, a brief
17 area, and it's about the date of this meeting that you keep going back
18 and forth on, Mr. Kapetina.
19 Mr. Kapetina, the evidence in this case is that the attack on
20 Srebrenica didn't commence until 4.00 in the morning on 6 July 1995. All
21 right? And that's the same date as the report to Dr. Karadzic that I
22 showed you when we began this session, D2097. So I want to come back to
23 this, Mr. Kapetina. You keep waffling about the date, but you continue
24 to assert that Dr. Karadzic didn't have contact with the Main Staff. Now
25 hearing the Prosecution's case and the evidence that the date of the
1 attack is on the 6th of July, do you still stand by your statement?
2 A. I emphatically stand by what I wrote in my statement and the
3 evidence I gave in answer to your two questions.
4 Q. Right. Then I just want to go on to one final area from your
5 testimony, and that's - your indulgence for a moment - with respect to
6 paragraph 45 where you talk about the mobilisation by the Ministry of
7 Defence of buses for the army. And you said at paragraph 45 that whether
8 the army was planning to transport its own forces to another theatre of
9 war or for other purposes, the Ministry of Defence didn't have to know
10 this. So I just want to ask you, Mr. Kapetina, that's not what the buses
11 your ministry was mobilising were for, was it? You were mobilising them
12 to remove the non-Serb population from Srebrenica; right?
13 A. I was not at the ministry when that order and that request
14 arrived from the Main Staff. You see that the order was signed on behalf
15 of assistant Kovacevic by his employee. I said in my statement that the
16 responsibility, regardless of the purpose for which the trucks and buses
17 were commandeered, lies with the Ministry of Defence because we are
18 duty-bound to meet the request of the Main Staff and provide the
19 resources regardless of the purpose for which the army is going to use
20 them. That's what I said in my statement. And if I had been at the
21 ministry, since the minister was away, I was the one who would probably
22 have signed this request for mobilisation. But I wasn't there. You see
23 that somebody -- not even the assistant minister signed it. It was some
24 senior employee.
25 Q. My question was whether you agreed that the buses were mobilised
1 to remove the non-Serb population from Srebrenica.
2 A. No dispute. Yes, certainly.
3 Q. When, actually, did you find that out?
4 A. Well, I found out from the media reports, television reports.
5 Q. When, actually, did you find that out?
6 A. I can't give you the exact date, but I learned that from the
7 media reports.
8 Q. So the most senior official in the Ministry of Defence of
9 Republika Srpska whose department was specifically responsible for the
10 implementation of the military request to mobilise buses to remove the
11 non-Serbs from Srebrenica, and you only found out from the news reports
12 and you don't know when. That's your evidence?
13 A. That's precisely my answer to your question. And let me correct
14 you, I was not in charge of mobilisation. It was assistant Kovacevic.
15 At that time, I was a secretary of the Ministry of Defence. I did not
16 have a specific portfolio. I was a secretary in the Ministry of Defence
17 in charge of regulations, statutes, bylaws, whereas there was a specific
18 portfolio called mobilisation and staffing.
19 Let me tell you about other things that I knew and didn't know
20 about. I saw directive number 7 only yesterday. At that time I never
21 knew such texts were drafted.
22 Q. Mr. Kapetina, feel free to tell Dr. Karadzic those things in his
23 redirect examination of you, but my time allotted for your
24 cross-examination is up, so thank you very much.
25 A. Thank you too.
1 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Excellency.
3 Re-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
4 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Kapetina, let's start with the last thing in
5 the cross-examination. Was that the first and the only mobilisation or,
6 rather, commandeering of transport vehicles requested by the Main Staff?
7 A. I believe that requests for additional manpower and assets came
8 from the army every week. It was a continuous job at the Ministry of
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we put this document on the
11 ELMO if it hasn't been uploaded. This is 11 January 1996.
12 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Could you just read these few sentences beginning with "I hereby
15 A. "Immediately mobilise all motor vehicles, socially and privately
16 owned, with a capacity of over 7 tonnes.
17 "2. All motor vehicles of the said carrying capacity must report
18 together with the drivers without delay to the Ministry of Defence of
19 Republika Srpska at the petrol station Podromanija Sokolac to the
21 Q. Does it say for which purpose?
22 A. No.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this
24 document to be MFI'd.
25 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Edgerton.
1 MS. EDGERTON: Absolutely not, Your Honour. It's -- it's --
2 it's -- the witness has just read the document out and absolutely nothing
4 JUDGE KWON: How does it relate to the cross-examination,
5 Mr. Karadzic?
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, it was suggested that a high
7 official of the ministry must have known for what purpose motor vehicles
8 were mobilised in July 1995. We see here that this was a frequent
9 occurrence. The witness said almost once a week. And the purpose is not
10 indicated. It was not the duty of the Main Staff or the ministry to
11 specify the purpose. This follows directly from the suggestion made by
12 Ms. Edgerton.
13 The witness said -- the transcript is incorrect.
14 JUDGE KWON: What is incorrect, Mr. Karadzic?
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It has been corrected.
16 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Edgerton.
17 MS. EDGERTON: I don't think I suggested anything of the sort,
18 Your Honour. All I did was to reference the witness and the Defence to
19 what the question was, which was what -- what the buses were mobilised
20 for. I read out his own evidence at paragraph 45.
21 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, if we look at line 4 of page 75,
22 the question she put was:
23 "Was this the first and only mobilisation or, rather,
24 commandeering of transport vehicles requested by the Main Staff?"
25 So this goes directly to that point.
1 MS. EDGERTON: That's Dr. Karadzic who said that.
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber does not think this is relevant. We'll
4 not admit this.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Then I'm not going to
6 show a couple of more documents that relate to the mobilisation of motor
8 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Mr. Kapetina, do you know how many rooms there are around my
10 office and whether I always received people in the same room, that is to
11 say in my office, rather than any of the adjacent rooms?
12 A. Of course you received people in adjacent rooms. I don't know
13 how many there were exactly at that level, but I know there was a
14 conference room, and sometimes you would receive people in the conference
15 room too.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we now look at D02080 in
17 e-court, please.
18 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation].
19 Q. Can you tell us to whom is this addressed, this interim combat
20 report? Did it reach me?
21 A. As far as I can see, this is addressed to the Main Staff.
22 Q. Thank you. Could you look at the passage in paragraph 2 -- item
23 2, paragraph 3, it says:
24 They ... "carried out the immediate task separating the enclaves
25 of Zepa and Srebrenica and created conditions for extending the attack
1 towards Srebrenica."
2 Were you aware of their immediate task to separate Zepa and
3 Srebrenica, and were we entitled to do that according to the agreement on
4 those two protected areas?
5 A. I did not know about any task that had to do with Srebrenica or
6 the surrounding area. However, as far as I know about the principles of
7 protected areas, I think it was legitimate for the Army of Republika
8 Srpska to have a buffer zone between these two enclaves and the UN
9 protected areas, because it was well known in the area of Zepa, that was
10 a far bigger area, air supplies came of ammunition and weapons and so on
11 and units in both protected areas resorted to that, and I think this was
12 a legitimate activity because they were treated as two separate protected
13 areas not a single one.
14 Q. Thank you. Do you know who stopped our army in 1993, stopped it
15 from entering Srebrenica, and for what reason?
16 JUDGE KWON: Not relevant with respect to this witness.
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Mr. Kapetina, on the day when you saw me and when I complained
19 that I did not have any information, at that point in time did I know
20 that the 28th Division had left Srebrenica and that they would not defend
21 it? Did I inform you about that?
22 A. You did not inform me about anything. You just asked me to, I
23 mean, say whether I had any information and whether I had received
24 anything from the Main Staff or the Drina Corps. At the end you just
25 apologised to me. I mean, because you were arrogant in the way you were
1 addressing me, but it didn't really have to do with me. It had to do
2 with the entire situation and the people who were supposed to be doing
3 their jobs. That is how you had put it.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Excellencies, I wanted to link it
6 up that way because the Defence position is that the assumption was that
7 there would be heavy fighting and -- Srebrenica, I would not have given
8 consent to enter Srebrenica, but that is the way it was.
9 JUDGE KWON: You have the opportunity to testify about it.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
11 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Could you please tell us -- could you please tell us, on page 53
13 you said -- it was suggested to you that military secrets were being
14 revealed to you. Can you tell us which defence and security measures and
15 information should be concealed from the chief inspector of the minister
16 of defence on the ground? Is it a military secret. I mean anything that
17 comes from the ground, is that a secret for the chief inspector?
18 A. Military secrets only have to do with JNA units and information
19 in the army, whereas in the Ministry of Defence the ministry is a
20 civilian organ, a state organ, and state secrets were the most restricted
21 secrets, highly confidential, confidential, and restricted. And then
22 information about personnel capacity within the military, within units,
23 that was military secrets, whereas we in the state organs had state
25 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us about that example -- or, rather,
1 that copy of Atlagic's report, did it stay in the archives of the
2 ministry? All the addressees were referred to, but such matters -- I
3 mean, were copies left at the ministry too?
4 A. Well, I think there were, unless their assessment was at that
5 point in time that it should not be sent to the ministry, but it should
6 be in the ministry.
7 Q. Thank you. It was suggested that there were no legal grounds for
8 establishing a Serb municipality, taking measures, and so on, so could we
9 please have -- could we please have in e-court 1D9735. Now there's an
10 MFI number, 1D1935.
11 JUDGE KWON: Yes?
12 MS. EDGERTON: If I may, I didn't make that suggestion at all.
13 What I asked was for Mr. Kapetina to identify the specific legal and
14 constitutional provisions which permit a political party to establish
15 separate Serbian municipalities. Which he did not.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We'll get to that too.
17 Page 8, please. The page where number 8 is written. Yes.
18 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Now, could you please listen to this. I'm going to read this
20 out. This comes from the Law on National Defence, and you refer to it.
21 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: We cannot find this
23 JUDGE KWON: Where is it?
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's the third paragraph,
25 Excellencies. It's the quotation within the third paragraph. Oh, yes.
1 Oh, I see, we don't have a translation here. All right. So then it's
2 paragraph 3, and then quotation marks.
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
4 MS. EDGERTON: Could Dr. Karadzic put a question rather than
5 reading -- leading the witness by reading a document that we can't read.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, the question is the one that
7 was put by Ms. Edgerton: Where are the legal grounds for papers A and B,
8 legal and constitutional grounds?
9 JUDGE KWON: Why can't you ask the question without showing the
10 document to the witness?
11 [Defence counsel and accused confer]
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. Then I'm going to ask
13 for Variants A and B. P5.
14 JUDGE KWON: I think P5 is a different document. P960.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's all the same, any number.
16 Next page, please.
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Please, the first sentence. Could you take a look at the first
19 sentence. And could we please have the next page in English.
20 Could you tell me what does this sentence stem from, and what is
21 your association in respect of regulations? The first sentence.
22 A. Well, this is an assertion to the effect that the constitutional
23 order of the country is under threat.
24 Q. Thank you. Can we now go back to the previous document. What is
25 envisaged in that kind of situation when the constitutional order of the
1 country is under threat?
2 A. To declare a state of emergency and to implement plans for
3 stopping or eliminating emergencies.
4 Q. 1D9735, page 8, paragraph 3. The quotation there, that is
5 precisely what he said, but we've got it again now.
6 JUDGE KWON: Just a second.
7 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Now --
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
10 MS. EDGERTON: I'm really sorry, Your Honour, but this is not
11 matter arising from the question in cross-examination, which was whether
12 or not the witness can identify, as I said, the provisions that allow for
13 the creation of separate Serb municipal organs. If he can, then
14 Dr. Karadzic can ask him that question and he can answer it now rather
15 than be led through documents in a way that I would submit isn't
16 permissible in redirect.
17 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Robinson.
18 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, I think Dr. Karadzic could show the
19 witness a document and ask him to comment on it as to whether -- how or
20 whether it in fact shows that such a provision was in existence. So I
21 don't think there would be anything improper if he has such documents or
22 if he knows of them to ask the witness to comment on whether or not those
23 documents confirm the existence of the right to do what they purported to
24 do under Variants A and B.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. This is the basis for the question that Madam Edgerton put with
4 regard to municipalities.
5 Can you say on the basis of the constitution how are
6 municipalities created, or, rather, what do municipalities consist of?
7 A. A municipality consists of local communes as basic cells of the
8 society, and the municipality is territorial government.
9 Q. Thank you. Local communes, do they have the right to leave one
10 municipality and join another one or to turn themselves into a separate
11 municipality? How are new municipalities created according to the law?
12 A. On the basis concrete examples that happen in this period I will
13 explain this. Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1992 had 109 municipalities and the
14 city of Sarajevo as a community of several municipalities, and say before
15 that, a year before that, the municipality of Pale separated itself from
16 the city and became a municipality outside the city. So it is sufficient
17 to launch an initiative within the local Assembly and then to create,
18 say, two municipalities out of a single municipality if necessary, and
19 there can be different reasons: Economic development, ethnic structure,
20 joining a different district or city or whatever. There can be many
22 For example, before the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bijeljina was
23 supposed to be divided into two municipalities, Bijeljina and Janja, and
24 the procedure had already started, and we know that the Muslim population
25 there had already asked for a municipality of their own because that
1 would guarantee faster economic development.
2 Q. Thank you. You confirmed during the examination-in-chief and the
3 cross-examination that the local commune has some authority with regard
4 to defence. Can you tell us on the assumption where we have a
5 municipality with five Serb local communes and five Muslim local
6 communes, what are the powers of the five Serb local communes if they
7 assess that the other five municipality -- the other five local communes
8 are threatening the constitutional order?
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
10 MS. EDGERTON: This is over the top I would submit, Your Honours.
11 It's not arising out of the cross-examination.
12 JUDGE KWON: No, Mr. Tieger. Just a second.
13 MR TIEGER: Sure.
14 [Trial Chamber confers]
15 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Tieger, would you like to add anything?
16 MR. TIEGER: I was only going to say in addition it has nothing
17 to do with the Variant A and B document which is why I presume the
18 accused didn't take the witness to the document. So it may have been
19 obvious to the Court based on its own familiarity with it, but we've now
20 strayed beyond the terms of that particular document into some -- a new
21 area. So it wasn't simply that it wasn't triggered by Ms. Edgerton's
22 specific question. It wasn't even triggered by the subject matter.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE KWON: My problem is this: The witness was not able to
25 answer your question, Ms. Edgerton, as to what the basis was with respect
1 to instruction, Variant A and B, and in re-examination for the purpose of
2 refreshing the memory or whatever, Mr. Karadzic was showing some
3 documents, and then can you not hear what the witness would say after
4 having taken a look at the document? Is there --
5 MR. TIEGER: Just -- if I just -- I know you're asking
6 Ms. Edgerton so I apologise, but since I was -- I was on to a particular
7 subject matter. That -- but not if it's no longer about A and B, which
8 is not about the alleged legal basis for the establishment of -- by local
9 communes of new municipalities. It's about, as the Court is aware, some
10 of the other specific matters that -- to which the witness's attention
11 was drawn during the course of the cross-examination. So now
12 Dr. Karadzic is using the cross-examination about the document as a basis
13 for moving into a separate area of interest to him but that did not arise
14 out of cross, pretending somehow it's related to the Variant A and B
15 document when it's not.
16 JUDGE KWON: Actually, what -- we do not know what is cited in
17 this document. We haven't heard about it, whether it's related to it or
19 Mr. Kapetina, could you read out aloud what is contained in the
20 inverted commas in the sentence with the footnote number 2. From "Pod
21 drugim." Yes.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
23 JUDGE KWON: Read please slowly.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "According to the law on All
25 People's Defence, emergency situations are defined as follows: 'For the
1 purposes of this law, other emergency situations shall denote armed or
2 other activity directly threatening the independence of the country, its
3 sovereignty and territorial integrity and the social order established by
4 the constitution of the SFRY.'"
5 That is a quotation from the Law on All People's Defence of
7 JUDGE KWON: Yes. What is your question, Mr. Karadzic?
8 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Mr. Kapetina, can you tell us what is the relation between this
10 quotation and the quotation from A and B on item 1 that you saw at the
12 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Kapetina does not know much about Variant A and
13 B document. How can he say about the relation? So why don't you move
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, Excellencies, Mr. Kapetina's
16 job was to check how preparations were going on including organisations
17 such as SDS. I'm asking him whether this was within the confines of the
18 law or outside the confines the law. That was his job to know. We may
19 ask him is there anything contained in this paper that is not stipulated
20 by the law?
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE KWON: Move on, Mr. Karadzic, to another topic.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have the next page.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Mr. Kapetina, can you tell us is there anything in the
1 regulations that gave the right to Serbian local commune to reorganise
2 themselves or to self-organise themselves in terms of establishing their
3 own municipalities and their own authority?
4 A. We have already established --
5 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. We collapse this document.
6 And your question again, Mr. Karadzic?
7 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. What the Serbian local communes undertook or the Serbian
9 territorial units such as municipalities and local communes, was that
10 stipulated by regulations that govern emergency situations?
11 A. Yes. Not only Serbian local communes but --
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
13 MS. EDGERTON: With respect, Dr. Karadzic keeps going outside of
14 the bounds of the cross-examination, and he's doing it again.
15 JUDGE KWON: We're simply wasting some time.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, Your Excellencies, the
17 question was on what basis the Serb municipalities were established, and
18 I'm asking Mr. Kapetina --
19 JUDGE KWON: Just directly put the question.
20 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. The creation of Serbian municipalities, was that possible under
22 the law and the constitution, particularly in terms of emergency
24 A. In peacetime the procedure of establishing a municipality or the
25 division of municipality was regulated by the law. Under the emergency
1 circumstances, one has to act according to plans and instructions, and an
2 instruction in my view is just part of the plan. Tasks and measures that
3 are contained in an instruction cannot be treated as part of the law or
4 the constitution, because it's a plan, and it needed to be ordered to
5 become an action, but I didn't see any such order. That's why it says
6 that such measures need to be specifically ordered either by the party or
7 by the state, and the party can issue such an order only if it is
8 endorsed by the state, and that's what it says at the end of the
9 instruction, i.e., that none of these measures were ordered and each of
10 these measures required a separate order, and I myself never saw such an
12 Q. So drawing up a plan, does that imply its automatic
14 A. No, it doesn't. It depends on a specific situation. You might
15 draw up a plan that would never materialise. It might just act as a
17 JUDGE KWON: Let's move on.
18 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
19 JUDGE KWON: It's a waste of time.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
21 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Mr. Kapetina, you were asked about the legal foundation, the
23 constitutional foundation of certain procedures. Can you tell us about
24 the rights of those involved in the defence when you have a destroyed
25 legal and constitutional system? Are there any provisions stipulating
1 the rights and obligations under such circumstances, whether you have the
2 country under an occupation or in any other situation where there is no
3 constitutional system in existence?
4 A. The period between January --
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
6 MS. EDGERTON: Same objection, Your Honour. Same objection.
7 Provisions stipulating rights and obligations whether you have a country
8 under occupation. This is far and away outside anything raised in the
10 JUDGE KWON: Unless you have any further topics, I would like you
11 to conclude your re-examination, Mr. Karadzic. It leads us nowhere.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Excellencies. My
13 understanding of disputing the issues raised in cross-examination was
14 that this witness did not confirm the legality and lawfulness of the acts
15 of the Serb side, whereas I claim the opposite and it is contained in his
16 manual as well, and with this I'm going to conclude.
17 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
18 That concludes your evidence, Mr. Kapetina. Thank you for your
19 coming to The Hague to give it. You are now free to go.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you too.
21 [The witness withdrew]
22 JUDGE KWON: Is the next witness ready, Mr. Robinson?
23 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. It would be good if we can
24 start him since he's been waiting a long time today.
25 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
1 MR. ROBINSON: The next witness will be
2 Professor Radovan M. Karadzic.
3 [The witness entered court]
4 JUDGE KWON: Would the witness make the solemn declaration.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
6 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
7 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Professor Karadzic. Please be seated and
8 make yourself comfortable.
9 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
10 WITNESS: RADOVAN KARADZIC
11 [Witness answered through interpreter]
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
13 Examination by Mr. Karadzic:
14 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Professor.
15 A. Good luck to you, President Karadzic.
16 Q. Have you given a statement to my Defence team?
17 A. Yes, I have.
18 Q. In future, I would kindly ask you to pause before answering so
19 that everything can be recorded.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please have 1D9683 in
22 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Can you see your statement on the screen in front of you?
24 A. Yes, I can.
25 Q. Thank you. Have you read and signed this statement?
1 A. Yes, I've read it, and I've signed it.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we please see the last page so
3 that the witness can identify his signature.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, this is my signature.
5 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Thank you. Does this statement faithfully reflect the answers
7 that you gave to the Defence team?
8 A. Yes, it does faithfully reflect what I told the Defence team.
9 Q. Thank you. If I were to put the same questions to you today in
10 this courtroom, would your answers essentially be the same?
11 A. They would be the same. Only in the interests of the truth and
12 nothing but the truth, I might make some additions in terms of additional
14 Q. Thank you.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this
16 statement into evidence under 92 ter Rule.
17 JUDGE KWON: Any objection, Ms. Pack?
18 MS. PACK: No objection.
19 JUDGE KWON: We'll admit this.
20 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D3681, Your Honours. I apologise,
22 JUDGE KWON: Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think it should be 3881. Thank
25 Now I'm going to read a summary of Mr. Radovan M. Karadzic's
1 statement in English.
2 [In English] Radovan Karadzic, son of Marko, was a teacher of
3 literature in Capljina in the former BH until the beginning of the war
4 when he was expelled from the place where he lived and worked. During
5 the period from 1990, Professor Karadzic -- until Professor Karadzic was
6 expelled from Capljina in April 1992, he was the president of the
7 Capljina SDS Municipal Board, president of the Serb Municipal Assembly in
8 Capljina, president of the Capljina Crisis Staff, member of the Serb
9 National Council for Herzegovina. After his arrival in Pale in April
10 1992, president of the Presidency, Karadzic, appointed Professor Karadzic
11 as an advisor for internal politics and party issues. Professor Karadzic
12 was also a member of the SDS Main Board.
13 He knows President Karadzic since he was a child, and he
14 remembers him to be exemplary in every respect. President Karadzic was
15 among the best pupils in school and the most prominent student in his
16 generation and later an excellent doctor. President Karadzic spent his
17 youth and a great deal of his life in Sarajevo, a Muslim-Serbian city.
18 He studied with Muslims and later he worked and lived as their neighbour.
19 Professor Karadzic never heard him saying anything that would indicate
20 intolerance towards the Muslims.
21 The SDS was envisaged to be an entirely democratic and to a great
22 extent decentralised party. President Karadzic did not interfere in
23 personal matters. The local SDS leaders -- leaderships were completely
24 autonomously and democratically elected in the field in local
25 communities, municipalities, and the regional level. In party forums,
1 President Karadzic insisted that decision were not made by out-voting but
2 through finding compromises and solutions which would be supported by a
3 great majority of the present people.
4 One of the main issues the Republika Srpska government was facing
5 concerned the large number of Serbian refugees from the territories under
6 Muslim-Croatian control, their accommodation, medical treatment, and the
7 wounded and the provisions for war hospitals and war orphans.
8 When Alija Izetbegovic became president of BH after the first
9 multi-party elections, some Serbs voiced reservation about him, because a
10 long time before the war he published a document entitled the
11 "Islamic Declaration." Soon after the elections, Muslims and Croats
12 started out-voting the Serbs in the Assembly and in the government, and
13 then in all the organs of local government on the ground.
14 President Karadzic persistently tried to reach an agreement with the SDA,
15 but they rejected it with cynicism and sometimes with arrogance.
16 Izetbegovic and Zulfikarpasic agreed with President Karadzic and
17 Milosevic that the then-BH with Serbia and Montenegro, which would be
18 joined by Macedonia, were to constitute a form of federation.
19 Nevertheless, before the official announcement of the agreement on
20 television, Mr. Zulfikarpasic received a telegram fax in which the
21 Muslims expressed their opposition to any agreement with the Serbs. It
22 came from the SDA party. Zulfikarpasic denounced Izetbegovic for being
23 directly responsible for war in refusing this agreement. The Muslims
24 maintained the same behaviour during all subsequent attempts to reach an
25 agreement during the war. They violated the Cutileiro Plan and all war
1 truces to which President Karadzic agreed. They used tricks and intrigue
2 and accused the Serbs for the incidents they were causing.
3 As Supreme Commander of the VRS, President Karadzic clearly and
4 publicly told the army, its soldiers and officers, and the whole Serbian
5 people in Republika Srpska that all conventions applicable to the conduct
6 of war must be respected. Before the formation of the VRS, the multi --
7 the military units of the Muslims and Croats were already formed and were
8 involved in widespread episodes of violence against the Serbs.
9 The position of President Karadzic about crimes against civilians
10 was clear: Civilian are innocent and no form of force may be applied
11 against them regardless of their ethnicity or religion. When he received
12 information about incidents involving civilians, he condemned them,
13 replaced the officers, and the direct perpetrators were processed. He
14 even issued orders to save Muslim civilians when the conflict between
15 Muslims and Croats broke out. On the order of President Karadzic,
16 thousands of Croat refugees were saved when they crossed over to the
17 Republika Srpska territory. In Republika Srpska they received water,
18 food, medicine, and temporary accommodation, and then the VRS enabled
19 them to cross over to their own desired destination.
20 In the first few years of the war, the Muslims from Bileca and
21 Trebinje were voluntarily in the VRS units, and those who did not want to
22 lived undisturbed in their houses with their families. It was only after
23 receiving secret memos and threats from Alija Izetbegovic that they were
24 persuaded to leave immediately the VRS and the territory where they lived
25 without any problems.
1 On 15th of July, 1995, Professor Karadzic had a meeting with
2 President Karadzic. On that occasion, the liquidation of prisoners in
3 Srebrenica was never mentioned, and Professor Karadzic had the impression
4 that President Karadzic inform -- was informed about the unlawful
5 killings of prisoners of war from Srebrenica.
6 And that is a short summary, and at that moment I will not have
7 questions for Professor Karadzic.
8 JUDGE KWON: Very well. Professor Karadzic, as you have noted,
9 your evidence in chief in this case has been admitted in writing, that
10 is, through your witness statement in lieu of your oral testimony, and
11 you will now be cross-examined by the representative of the Office of the
12 Prosecutor, but given the time, we'll continue tomorrow morning.
13 I'd like to advise you not to discuss with anybody else about
14 your testimony while you are giving testimony here.
15 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
16 JUDGE KWON: Unless there is anything to be raised, the hearing
17 is adjourned. We will continue tomorrow morning at 9.00.
18 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.43 p.m.,
19 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 17th day
20 of July, 2013, at 9.00 a.m.