Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 14706

1 Tuesday, 22 February 2000

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.37 a.m.

5 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours.

6 Case number IT-95-14/2-T. The Prosecutor versus Dario

7 Kordic and Mario Cerkez.

8 JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Nice.

9 MR. NICE: Two preliminary matters. The

10 amended tape transcript is available for distribution.

11 I'll perhaps distribute it to the Chamber now or at the

12 break.

13 I spoke yesterday of a note I had prepared on

14 authorities -- not on authorities, on procedures in

15 Germany, Austria, United Kingdom, Japan, and

16 Australia. I didn't, in the event, distribute it. I

17 certainly don't desire to go through it, but it is

18 available, if the Chamber would find it helpful to

19 have. It's about seven sides, I think.

20 JUDGE MAY: Yes. If you would like to hand

21 it in.

22 [redacted]

23 [redacted]

24 [redacted]

25 [redacted]

Page 14707

1 [redacted]

2 [redacted]

3 [redacted]

4 [redacted]

5 [redacted]

6 [redacted]

7 [redacted]

8 [redacted]

9 [redacted]

10 [redacted]

11 [redacted]

12 [redacted]

13 In asking him to deal with it, I make it

14 clear that the application is one which reflects the

15 common sense and doesn't reflect, perhaps, the

16 sometimes arbitrary and artificial rules of exclusion

17 that the common law pursues, and it's an application

18 that has the complete backing, of course, of the entire

19 team.

20 I'm reminded that perhaps I've erred in

21 mentioning names in public. Not withstanding the

22 disinclination of witnesses to come to the Tribunal, I

23 suppose it's preferable not to use their names, if it's

24 avoidable.

25 JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Lopez-Terres.

Page 14708

1 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: [Interpretation]

2 Mr. President, Your Honours, we saw yesterday that a

3 chamber of a tribunal like ours cannot be deprived of

4 evidence because a witness does not wish to come. We

5 have seen the hypothesis of a witness who cannot come

6 for a good reason, because he has died. Today we are

7 dealing with another case of a witness who cannot

8 appear because he will not appear.

9 The hypothesis that we're addressing today

10 raises two problems. [redacted]

11 [redacted]

12 [redacted]

13 [redacted]

14 [redacted]

15 [redacted]

16 [redacted]

17 [redacted]

18 [redacted]

19 [redacted]

20 [redacted]

21 [redacted] Our Rules envisage various

22 possibilities that a witness can be found in contempt

23 of court. The text does not specify how such an

24 unwilling witness can be forced to appear before this

25 Tribunal, but in our view, it is quite possible to do

Page 14709

1 so.

2 Be that as it may, in this case, and in this

3 stage of the proceedings, in view of the rather long

4 delays by the Australian authorities, after you issued

5 this order on the 22nd of November -- there was a

6 notification on the 24th of January -- it does not

7 appear opportune or desirable that measures of coercion

8 be taken against this witness, and it is damaging for

9 the image of the Tribunal, but that is a reality that

10 we have to face up to at this stage of our

11 proceedings.

12 Beyond this question of the image, authority,

13 and effectiveness of the orders issued by the Trial

14 Chamber, the witness having given a negative answer and

15 showing thereby what importance he attaches to those

16 orders, and by this negative attitude, there is at

17 least a technical, if not a legal impossibility of us

18 making him come, we must nevertheless draw consequences

19 regarding the administration of the evidence that this

20 witness should have brought before you.

21 We treat this witness as other persons having

22 a common origin. Both having been members of the Vitez

23 Brigade, we wanted these two witnesses to appear so

24 that your Chamber could take into consideration the

25 evidence that they have provided during the

Page 14710

1 investigation.

2 The specific situation, which has already

3 been described by Mr. Nice, relating to these

4 witnesses, we do not have the reports of their

5 interviews collected by the investigators of the

6 Tribunal. We have reports of interviews made by the

7 authorities in Bosnia, the reports, the official

8 reports, according to the accepted terminology in the

9 region, taken in July 1993, in the course of which

10 these two individuals, after having been interviewed by

11 the military security of the Bosnian army, provided

12 information and explained what their role had been

13 within the Vitez Brigade before their arrest.

14 We do not have any reports of investigators

15 of the Tribunals, but we do have those official reports

16 drawn up by the military security officers of Bosnia.

17 As regards the first witness, the one who was

18 notified of an order to appear in Australia, this one

19 not only provided those statements to the military

20 authorities, but was also interrogated by the

21 investigators of that same service. And that

22 interrogation was filmed at the time.

23 In the course of that interrogation in the

24 prison in which he was detained, the person explains

25 the circumstances under which he was arrested, which

Page 14711

1 unit he belonged to, that is the Vitez Brigade, who was

2 his battalion commander, Karlo Grabovac, a name that

3 you've already heard mentioned, and then he gave

4 explanations for the reasons why he -- a human ear was

5 found on him when he was captured.

6 The video film shows by zoom this human organ

7 on a table, quite a horrifying scene. The individual

8 explained, and this also appears in the videotape and

9 the official report drawn up at the time, that before

10 going to the front with his comrade, he was promised,

11 like other members of his unit, compensation if he

12 brought trophies of a particular nature, in this case a

13 human organ, an ear, or a finger. Obviously, the

14 compensation would be higher if they were able to show

15 that it was taken from a living person or from a

16 corpse. And all this is indicated in the report.

17 The information given by these two witnesses

18 is information which we consider must be taken into

19 consideration by your Chamber. This is information

20 that has already been at least partially revealed to

21 your Chamber during the testimony of the ECMM monitor,

22 Mr. Morsink, who produced a report drawn up at the time

23 by the ECMM, where reference was made to this

24 compensation paid for human organs, or parts of human

25 bodies by HVO soldiers.

Page 14712

1 Therefore, you have already partially been

2 informed of this by another source, and we hope that

3 the witnesses will come and confirm this here in The

4 Hague. And that is why we put both of them on our list

5 of witnesses. Of course, these are special witnesses,

6 because these two witnesses belonged to a unit under

7 the command of the accused, Mario Cerkez, and it is not

8 surprising, in view of the statements made at the time,

9 that later on they changed their mind and refused to

10 respond to your orders.

11 And this was officially conveyed to us in

12 January last year for the first witness, and the other

13 witness, who still is in Vitez, has made it quite clear

14 that he has no intention to appear before our

15 Tribunal.

16 Is that sufficient reason for you to go

17 without this evidence relating to these facts, and to

18 the participation of these individuals in acts

19 committed in the Vitez area, especially with reference

20 to the promise of compensation made by the accused,

21 Mario Cerkez, in June, 1993? Because it was in June,

22 1993 that these two individuals were arrested by the

23 Bosnian army services in Puticevo, that is a locality

24 near Novi Travnik.

25 We have compiled these elements of

Page 14713

1 information. There is a videotape dated '93 of this

2 witness who is in Australia. This witness was again

3 contacted by our services in April, 1997, in Australia,

4 where he was already a resident. And on that occasion

5 there was another long video interview, in the presence

6 of the Australian authorities. And in the course of

7 that interview, the witness confirmed that he belonged

8 to this brigade. He confirmed that his brigade

9 commander was Mario Cerkez. But as regards the -- what

10 he said about the taking of organs and the ear found in

11 his possession, he denied that initial version,

12 explaining that he was under pressure and under threat

13 of violence that would be committed against him by

14 those who were interrogating him.

15 The report, and this video cassette that we

16 have in our possession, is also at the disposal of your

17 Chamber. Also, there are the statements that we

18 recorded recently, from the time when we realised that

19 it was highly improbable that these two witnesses would

20 appear in The Hague, we considered it opportune to go

21 and identify and interview people who might have met or

22 heard them at the time, in June or July, 1993, when the

23 official reports that I referred to a moment ago were

24 drawn up.

25 We were able to contact two of those people.

Page 14714

1 One was an investigator of the security service in

2 Zenica. The other was the warden of the prison in

3 Zenica, where these two persons were detained. And

4 these two people provided statements in which they

5 explained how these two witnesses were questioned, and

6 denied that any violence was committed against those

7 two persons. Those two persons, if necessary, can be

8 called to appear before the Tribunal to describe, once

9 again, the circumstances under which those two

10 witnesses were questioned in 1993, and the

11 circumstances under which the ear was found on one of

12 the two witnesses.

13 We have prepared, for the benefit of the

14 Chamber, a small dossier containing all the elements

15 which we consider to be relevant to evaluate the

16 importance of this evidence, the official reports I

17 have mentioned. The videotapes of 1993 and 1997, the

18 videos are quite readily available. And when one sees

19 the first video, there is nothing especially suspicious

20 regarding the statements made by the first witness.

21 Also, there are no traces of any abuse during

22 the interrogation. So it might be useful for your

23 Chamber to see these two videos.

24 The two reports of interviews taken by

25 investigators in January last year have also been

Page 14715

1 attached, as well as certain documents which show that

2 these two witnesses were members of the brigade, of

3 which the accused, Mario Cerkez, was the commander.

4 We find ourself in a rather specific

5 situation, because we do not have the records as we had

6 in the cases we were discussing yesterday. But the

7 records are not the only evidence that the Chamber

8 should take into account. Rule 89 envisages a variety

9 of evidence. And of course it does envisage the

10 possibility of the Defence making its views known and

11 its criticism known. It is up to your Chamber to make

12 a decision and to review all this evidence, which we

13 consider to be relevant under Rule 89.

14 Mr. Nice has already said that the admission

15 of this evidence is no particular problem in the civil

16 law system. Where there is a freedom in the

17 administration of evidence, the Chamber admits the

18 documents, admits the depositions and testimonies, all

19 the evidence are subject to its consideration, and are

20 then weighed by the Chamber as regards its probative

21 value and the weight to be attached to them.

22 The evidence, as I have quickly reviewed it,

23 have been compiled to form a small file for your kind

24 attention, and we would like to ask you to be kind

25 enough to receive that file.

Page 14716

1 The system that I am familiar with, such a

2 document would be prepared by the Prosecutor containing

3 all the information, would be submitted to the Trial

4 Chamber. When the Trial Chamber takes into

5 consideration that -- and is convinced that everything

6 has been done to bring the witness here, as is the case

7 now, the Trial Chamber would take into consideration

8 all that evidence, counting on the good faith of the

9 Prosecutor that they had done everything possible to

10 have the witness appear, noting that the witness being

11 an unwilling witness. The Chamber would nonetheless

12 take into consideration all the evidence relating to

13 that witness and draw the necessary legal conclusions

14 from it.

15 I have tried to provide some clarification.

16 And I would like to ask you, once again, to admit as

17 evidence the information relating to the two witnesses

18 that we had planned to call and which we regret to say

19 will not be able to appear before you.

20 JUDGE MAY: [redacted]

21 [redacted]

22 [redacted]

23 [redacted]

24 In the case of the next four, are there any

25 submissions to be made in relation to them?

Page 14717

1 MR. NICE: I'm not sure that there are any

2 submissions, although there is a certain amount of

3 up-to-date information that I can provide.

4 Number five, I believe to be still

5 unwilling.

6 Number six, I think is now willing via

7 video-link. And so I will be making a video-link

8 application in due course, probably at the end of this

9 procedural part of the case.

10 Number seven is apparently now willing to

11 come. And both these witnesses reveal the force of the

12 Tribunal's orders. And I am happy to see that they are

13 being responded to.

14 Number eight is a witness in respect of whom

15 the Chamber has a report on his ill health. He's a

16 combination of unwilling and sick. It may be that he

17 would be a potential candidate for a video-link, but

18 not in the same place as number six, because number six

19 would be in Bosnia, and number eight would be in

20 Croatia.

21 The only ruling I think I would want at the

22 moment, pending discovering whether he is now willing,

23 in light of the subpoena to give evidence via

24 video-link -- any ruling I want at the moment is

25 whether the Chamber is satisfied on the report on his

Page 14718

1 ill health that he is indeed unable to travel

2 to The Hague. That's one of his defences to giving

3 evidence. Because if not, I will have to go and get

4 further medical evidence.

5 And in relation to paragraph C or Section C

6 generally, our argument is that where every step is

7 taken to bring a witness to Court and, through no fault

8 of the Prosecution, the witness is not available to

9 Court, even by reason of his or her own inclination,

10 then it is still appropriate to read the witness's

11 statement as the best available material that that

12 witness could provide.

13 The Chamber should know that even in relation

14 to, for example, number five, we will attempt to get an

15 affidavit from that witness, or formal statement. And

16 I am going to ensure that that's done today or

17 tomorrow, if I can. Notwithstanding her latest

18 indication of disinclination to come here.

19 There is, of course, a slight oddity about

20 getting an affidavit from a witness who denies the

21 authority of the Court's subpoena. But nevertheless,

22 if an affidavit or formal statement can be taken, then

23 that's better than not. The whole issue of contempt is

24 for the Court's own initiative, I think, and not

25 particularly from ours, we're not concerned about that,

Page 14719

1 at least not at this stage.

2 Where the witness is unwilling, as number 5

3 is, this witness has put the witness's judgement of

4 risk above the judgement of either the OTP or the

5 Court. Alternatively, the witness is simply being

6 difficult for reasons known to the witness.

7 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Nice, I'm going to interrupt

8 you so that I can understand the position.

9 We've got applications in respect of 3 and 4,

10 on which we're going to rule.

11 MR. NICE: Yes.

12 JUDGE MAY: Now, are you asking for any

13 orders in respect of 5, 6, 7, and 8?

14 MR. NICE: No. Well, in respect of -- no,

15 because I've got outstanding action in respect of 5.

16 Nothing there. In respect of 8, my only application at

17 the moment is to know whether the Court is satisfied on

18 the report that ill-health is established. Contingent

19 on that, I will take my next steps in relation to that

20 witness. And, of course, if a videolink is not

21 possible, then I shall apply to have that witness's

22 statement read, whether or not endorsed by an

23 affidavit, on the grounds that he is sick.

24 JUDGE MAY: I'm not sure whether it's for us

25 to say whether he's too sick to come or not. I mean,

Page 14720

1 we can deal with that in the context of an application

2 to read his statement. It might be one of the matters

3 we'd have to consider. But perhaps the simplest thing

4 is to consider the position and --

5 MR. NICE: Yes. The report on his health was

6 provided by the security --


8 MR. NICE: -- and, I think, as it were,

9 directed to you. If the Court was not satisfied of his

10 ill-health, then it might, I suppose -- no, I don't

11 think it would issue a further subpoena, it's already

12 issued this subpoena.

13 JUDGE MAY: Very well. We will consider the

14 position.

15 MR. NICE: Then Category D requires no action

16 because the various subpoenas are being issued --

17 JUDGE MAY: Well, we will consider the

18 position. They are applied for.

19 MR. NICE: I didn't mean to jump the gun

20 there.

21 JUDGE MAY: We will consider those, and it

22 may be necessary to have a hearing. The matter which I

23 have in mind is that the matter of time --

24 MR. NICE: Yes.

25 JUDGE MAY: -- which we are now up against.

Page 14721

1 MR. NICE: Yes, certainly.

2 JUDGE MAY: But we will consider those

3 today.

4 MR. NICE: Thank you very much.

5 JUDGE MAY: Category E.

6 MR. NICE: Category E, the information of

7 their ill-health is only recent. I am putting in hand

8 today steps to provide evidence of their ill-health,

9 and I will make an appropriate application in due

10 course. The application, if the evidence of ill-health

11 is sufficient, will be the simple one, that where

12 witnesses are unable to attend court through good

13 reason of ill-health, most systems, if not all, have a

14 regime for permitting the adduction of some forms of

15 statement, and we would say that the principles

16 applying here would justify the reading of those

17 statements. Of course, in relation to each of them, I

18 will attempt to obtain affidavit-type statements, if

19 possible.

20 And I can add parenthetically that the good

21 news is that despite the months or years of

22 difficulties that we've had, now that the court in

23 Bosnia is involved, it appears to be both working

24 efficiently and, this is only informally communicated,

25 happy to be involved. So that's good news.

Page 14722

1 Category F --

2 JUDGE MAY: Just dealing with Category E, we

3 will, I hope, be able to deal with those these week, as

4 opposed to leaving the matter to later, so that we can

5 rule on all these matters as expeditiously as we can.

6 MR. NICE: Yes, of course.

7 JUDGE MAY: Now, Category F, the position is

8 that they are also unwilling, but they are put in a

9 different category to the earlier unwilling witnesses.

10 MR. NICE: Yes.

11 JUDGE MAY: But nonetheless, roughly the same

12 principles may apply. So it may be convenient to deal

13 with those together with the earlier category,

14 Category B.

15 MR. NICE: Yes. Well, so far as 15 is

16 concerned, I've distributed just this morning the short

17 ex parte document containing information that I'd like

18 the Chamber to consider in relation to him.

19 Even apart from what is contained in the ex

20 parte notice, or information, the very nature of the

21 evidence he's capable of giving makes it unsurprising

22 that he might be unwilling. On his account, not only

23 did he see one of his companions murdered, but he was

24 with the third member of the group, taken away by

25 associates of the man he said was the murderer, beaten,

Page 14723

1 and left effectively for dead. He lives in an area

2 where there is still considerable presence of

3 associates of the man he says was the murderer, and it

4 is not at all surprising that he has the fears

5 expressed.

6 The Chamber will know that his position has

7 been somewhat variable, and that not withstanding our

8 acceptance that his fears are quite possibly

9 well-founded, we continue to approach him in order both

10 to see if he could be satisfied with measures of

11 protection for which we could ask and, indeed, to see

12 if he's going to be prepared to provide an affidavit;

13 although, if his fears are justified, then an affidavit

14 might be no better than giving evidence.

15 But subject to any change of mind by him,

16 subject to the provision of an affidavit, we would say

17 that this matches many of the provisions currently

18 operating in other countries where witnesses who are

19 kept away by fear can have former statements read.

20 Now, the statement of this witness, of

21 course, is direct evidence of a killing by one of the

22 defendants. The Chamber will want to remind itself of

23 the way this evidence has been touched on so far.

24 First, there was evidence from the very first witness

25 in the case, initially to the effect that the crime

Page 14724

1 scene was a suspicious crime scene and he didn't

2 believe it to be a genuine crime scene, going to

3 suggest that the killer was not the man named as the

4 killer but someone else. In cross-examination, it

5 emerged that there were accounts coming to him of who

6 the true killer was. Further evidence to the same

7 effect came from Dr. Mujezinovic and from another

8 witness, a woman with whom with witness, witness number

9 15, was originally expected to attend at court. He

10 failed to attend right at the last minute. That female

11 witness gave an account, as the Chamber may recall, of

12 what witness 15 had said to her, and it would, in our

13 respectful submission, be surprising, and perhaps

14 almost illogical, not to at least take the best version

15 of witness 15's account that will be available to the

16 Chamber, and depending on his attitude, the best

17 account will either be his witness statement as it

18 presently is or possibly his witness statement

19 confirmed by a statement made at the local court.

20 The Chamber will remember that the evidence

21 of this killing, which is not specifically charged,

22 goes to the attitude and response of the defendant

23 concerned to the law at the time, and is by way of

24 general but important background. So adduction of this

25 evidence in one form or another doesn't offend any of

Page 14725

1 the particular rules of exclusion in the European law

2 which we were referred very generally yesterday.

3 Our submission is that the absence of the

4 witness, if he remains unwilling to attend, is

5 understandable and justified and that it is entirely

6 appropriate to take the best version of his evidence,

7 as that may turn out to be in due course.

8 As to 16, the Chamber --

9 JUDGE MAY: Before you leave 15 --

10 MR. NICE: Yes.

11 JUDGE MAY: -- you referred to a document

12 handed in in relation to him. I've got the witness

13 statement.

14 MR. NICE: We filed it this morning. It may

15 be on your legal officer's desk. The usher knows where

16 it is because we gave it to him this morning. It's

17 only one side.

18 The Chamber will remember that I was

19 concerned about the additional information coming to

20 me, and that I made it clear that although I would

21 serve material ex parte, I would, of course, understand

22 whatever decision the Chamber made about making that

23 further information more generally available; although

24 if it is to be made more generally available, most

25 certainly in a private session.

Page 14726

1 JUDGE MAY: It's somewhere in the Registry.

2 Let's have a copy.

3 MR. NICE: I'll have further copies done, and

4 we'll make those copies available to you informally, as

5 soon as may be.

6 JUDGE MAY: Well, we'll need the copies

7 before we can consider it.

8 MR. NICE: Certainly. So far as witness 16

9 is concerned, he's a witness whose evidence has been

10 available to the Chamber, and, as we know, would be

11 able to give very wide evidence on the conflict

12 generally. But he gives evidence of a particular

13 meeting with the first defendant, and it's only on that

14 topic that we wanted his evidence. He gives the

15 fullest account of the circumstances in which

16 Mr. Kordic was to be found at the Tisovac headquarters;

17 of his wearing uniform, including, as this witness

18 says, insignia; and he gives an account of Mr. Kordic's

19 reaction to the interview that the witness wanted to

20 have with him; and he gives an account of something

21 that Mr. Kordic thereafter said about not wanting to

22 share somebody else's fate.

23 It's plainly potentially helpful evidence.

24 It's plainly understandable why the witness may not be

25 willing to attend. I am aware that there are other

Page 14727

1 reasons why he's not willing to attend as well, all

2 linked to the ethnic divisions, I think, at the time

3 and continuing. And the Chamber has formed the view

4 that his failure to respond to the subpoena is not

5 unjustified.

6 Again, this is not evidence that is evidence

7 on which alone any conviction of anything could be

8 returned; it's a piece of evidence, in the large jigsaw

9 of evidence that cases like this involve, its adduction

10 would not offend the law of this institution or the law

11 of the European Convention, and we would say again, as

12 with number 15, that it would be right for the Chamber

13 to have the best version of that witness's evidence

14 that may be available, which, at this stage, is his

15 statement.

16 It may be, I don't know, it may be that we

17 can obtain from the place where he presently lives an

18 affidavit, or something in the form of an affidavit.

19 But again, he may take the view, as may witness 15,

20 that an affidavit is no better in terms of risk than

21 giving evidence in person.

22 So those are the applications I make for F.

23 In relation to Category G, by way of

24 information, I can simply tell the Court that number 17

25 and 20 have already been dealt with by the local court;

Page 14728

1 number 18 lives in another country, and it may not be

2 possible to get an affidavit between now and the close

3 of the case, but if it is, I will provide one; numbers

4 21, 22, and 23 are being dealt with today by the Court,

5 as I understand it; number 24 is also still in the

6 process of being dealt with, and I hope soon to be

7 dealt with conclusively.

8 I think that's all I have to say about those

9 witnesses. The document in relation to witness 15 is

10 being photocopied. Yes. That's all I have to say.

11 JUDGE MAY: It may be helpful to have 16's

12 statement. We have got a copy of that. I have no

13 doubt we have --

14 MR. NICE: Certainly. I think mine, in fact,

15 is unmarked. And I can rip that out and make it

16 available straightaway. It's not unmarked, but it's

17 only got odd highlights on it. And I'll mark the

18 page. It's a long statement. I'll hand it in and I'll

19 mark the page where he deals with meeting the first

20 defendant.

21 JUDGE MAY: Thank you. Yes. So the matters

22 we'll rule on now are three and four and 15 and 16.

23 And we are asked to make a ruling in relation to number

24 eight, about whether he is too sick to travel or not.

25 But that's something we'll have to consider. But we'll

Page 14729

1 hear submissions that the Defence want to make on those

2 matters.

3 MR. SAYERS: Let me just say generally,

4 Mr. President, starting out, that the first time we saw

5 this list, of course, was yesterday afternoon. The

6 Court's well aware, I'm sure, of the reading

7 obligations that have been imposed on us over the last

8 two weeks. This is another 24 witness statements, and

9 series of statements that we would have to consume.

10 And I have to confess, we simply have not had the time;

11 preparing, as we were, for cross-examination of two

12 witnesses today and other matters.

13 With respect to witnesses three and four, I

14 have absolutely no idea what the Prosecution is talking

15 about or the flow of dialogue that's apparently been

16 occurring between the Court and the Prosecution

17 regarding these witnesses, as well as 15 and 16.

18 JUDGE MAY: There is no mystery about this.

19 This is where applications have been made for

20 subpoenas, and the response is what you've heard, that

21 these witnesses are unwilling to come. So you can take

22 it on that basis.

23 MR. SAYERS: Well, in terms of the witnesses

24 being unwilling to come, if they are unwilling to come,

25 they are unwilling to come. They shouldn't be

Page 14730

1 permitted to testify. It's simply an open invitation

2 to trample into the ground the defendant's fundamental

3 rights under Article 21 of the Tribunal Statute, and to

4 eliminate, at the request of the Prosecution, the right

5 to cross-examine enshrined in Rule 85. And, as a

6 matter of principle, that's our position.

7 I can certainly see in some situations of

8 exceptional circumstances, such as the death of a

9 witness, where the witness statement bears on

10 peripheral rather than central matters, an exception

11 being made under those circumstances. But coming from

12 where I come from, the notion of the Prosecution in a

13 criminal case offering an unsworn statement that's

14 never been tested by cross-examination, would never be

15 admitted in any court in which I practice.

16 JUDGE MAY: There is no exception to the

17 hearsay rule, in favour of a witness kept away by fear

18 or anything of that sort?

19 MR. SAYERS: In terms of the State practice,

20 Your Honour, in Virginia, absolutely not. In terms of

21 the Federal practice, there are, as the Court's well

22 aware, a series of Federal rules of civil and criminal

23 procedure. In the civil side, the hearsay exceptions

24 are found in Rules 803, where there are, I think, 24

25 separate exceptions to the hearsay rule. The ones that

Page 14731

1 we are talking about are not -- are not part of those

2 rules. And then Rule 804, which deals with situations

3 of unavailability and death. But I do not believe that

4 simply because, for example, Mr. -- witness number 3,

5 for example. I mean, I really do not have any idea

6 what the situation is with respect to this witness, but

7 apparently he was at one point willing, another point

8 unwilling.

9 We would simply suggest to the Court that if

10 he can't be bothered to come to the Court, then his

11 witness statement shouldn't be considered

12 in evidence --

13 JUDGE MAY: Supposing he says, for the

14 moment, that he is in fear of coming. And supposing a

15 totally different fact, but in a national jurisdiction,

16 a criminal keeps a witness away. I mean, not an

17 uncommon practice these days, certainly in some

18 countries, is to intimidate its witnesses.

19 Now, as a matter of principle, what should a

20 Court do about that?

21 MR. SAYERS: Well, as a matter of principle,

22 Your Honour, these two gentlemen --

23 JUDGE MAY: I am not talking about these two

24 gentlemen. I am talking hypothetically, Mr. Sayers.

25 Supposing criminals, not necessarily the accused in a

Page 14732

1 case, but supposing criminals frighten witnesses, so

2 they say, "I am too frightened to come." What then

3 should a Court do about it?

4 MR. SAYERS: As a matter of principle,

5 Mr. President, we would respectfully submit that what

6 the Court should and must do is to provide some means

7 where the defendant's confrontation rights are

8 respected. After all, obviously the Prosecution should

9 be free to go around collecting bits and pieces of

10 apparently peripheral evidence, and central evidence in

11 some respects, certainly. With respect to witness

12 number 3, I guess the evidence could be said to be

13 somewhat important to one of the defendants. But

14 it's -- the defendants do have confrontation rights,

15 and those are central rights. In fact, they are

16 arguably some of the only rights that criminal

17 defendants have in a tribunal like the International

18 Tribunal. The confrontation rights, we think, have

19 been pretty effectively exercised here.

20 And there is another point that I would like

21 to make with respect to the use of witness statements

22 untested by cross-examination. And that's the

23 situation that we have seen with Dr. Mujezinovic and

24 others. Dr. Mujezinovic, for example, specifically

25 pointed out errors in a witness statement to an

Page 14733

1 investigator. And those errors were never corrected.

2 And that's a real problem. But under

3 cross-examination, he pointed out those errors and so

4 the Court was apprised of his various versions of what

5 the truth would be.

6 I don't know why the Prosecution is bending

7 over backwards to attempt to deprive the defendants in

8 this case of their confrontation rights. What's wrong

9 with a deposition under Rule 71? Certainly the Rules

10 provide for it. It could be done under a pseudonym, in

11 a foreign country, and then the deposition could be

12 admitted under seal in this case. There would be no

13 way that the evidence would get out to the world at

14 large, or no way in which the particular declarant, I

15 think, would be justified in any fears for his

16 testimony. If everything --

17 THE INTERPRETER: Slow down, Mr. Sayers.

18 Please.

19 MR. SAYERS: -- so-to-speak. Even though

20 that course is obviously fraught with its own problems,

21 in light of the obligation of the Tribunal to ensure a

22 fair and public trial for each of the defendants.

23 So that's the matter in principle. These

24 people are available to be cross-examined. They are

25 available to be confronted. Why not adopt a procedure,

Page 14734

1 if they are genuinely unwilling, and the Court is

2 genuinely satisfied that their concerns are real and

3 justified, why not impose a regime where the defendants

4 do have confrontation rights, rather than straining and

5 stretching for in some way which deprives the defendant

6 of those confrontation rights? And those are, as I

7 said before, and I am not going to repeat myself, but

8 those are precious rights. We hold them as precious.

9 And as a matter of principle, they shouldn't be

10 discarded blithely in 24 separate instances, in

11 addition, I might point out, to the 25 or so transcript

12 witnesses, whose transcripts have already been admitted

13 without particular rights of confrontation for either

14 one -- either defendant.

15 I don't have a total count -- I think it's 95

16 witnesses who have testified so far. As far as we can

17 gather, it looks like there are going to be something

18 like 110 witnesses who testify live in this case. If

19 you add to that, 25 witnesses who have not testified

20 live, and 24 witnesses whose statements or what have

21 you will be admitted in some other fashion, that's

22 fully 50 per cent, or nearly 50 per cent of the

23 witnesses who will have given evidence in this case,

24 will not have been exposed to cross-examination. The

25 defendant will never have the right to see them, let

Page 14735

1 alone confront them and test the veracity of their

2 story.

3 And that's a really significant issue. I

4 would respectfully represent to the Trial Chamber, it's

5 one which genuinely concerns us.

6 It's --

7 JUDGE MAY: It's not your concerns which we

8 want to hear. It's your submissions. I meant to tell

9 Mr. Lopez-Terres the same thing, when he said we had

10 to -- the Trial Chamber must consider something or

11 other. It's not for counsel to put it that way. With

12 respect, it's your submissions we want. Anyway, your

13 submission is that this is a matter of concern.

14 MR. SAYERS: And with respect to the first

15 witness -- the third witness, rather, we understand

16 that he has actually recanted the first statement,

17 which the Prosecution wants to have admitted into

18 evidence.

19 Surely, under no system of justice, would a

20 recanted statement, untested by cross-examination, be

21 admitted into evidence. That's our submission, and I'm

22 sure that Mr. Kovacic will have more to say on that.

23 With respect to the only other witness that

24 apparently concerns us, witness 16, we are uninformed.

25 We simply have no information regarding the

Page 14736

1 circumstances under which this witness does not want to

2 testify, or would be excused from testifying. But,

3 clearly, he is available to be deposed under Rule 71,

4 if that's deemed to be appropriate. And if he doesn't

5 want to come to Court, or can't be bothered to come to

6 Court, whatever the situation is, then clearly, in

7 order to protect the confrontation rights that are

8 enshrined in the Rules and in the Statute, then we

9 should be permitted to have some opportunity to

10 confront and cross-examine him.

11 Thank you.

12 MR. KOVACIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

13 [Interpretation] If I may, I should like first to

14 pronounce myself on the Category B. That is witnesses

15 three and four. But, to make it quite clear, we

16 naturally object to these witnesses, and I shall

17 explain why. Even though I do not think it is

18 particularly legally relevant, but I think the

19 Prosecution went into recounting the case. And I must

20 also touch upon that. And then also address the legal

21 elements, which I believe the Court must have in mind,

22 and which are against the admission of such

23 statements.

24 As for the facts mentioned by the

25 Prosecution, I do not think it transpired quite

Page 14737

1 clearly, from what they said, that witness 3 and

2 witness 4 had been detained in the military police

3 prison of the BH army for a whole year. They were

4 among the last to be released by the BH army at the

5 time when the Washington Accords were signed. And

6 there, they made statements, according to them, not

7 under duress, but under torture, and this was confirmed

8 by witness 3, who then stated before the Australian

9 authorities and said why and how he told the military

10 police of the BH army all that they wanted to hear.

11 Under the law which was in force in the

12 territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina at the time of the

13 event, which is the Criminal Proceedings Act, both

14 statements which those witnesses gave to the

15 investigation authorities are completely wrongful.

16 Firstly, they were interrogated as prisoners

17 of war; that is, running counter to international

18 conventions, because prisoners of war could not be

19 interrogated on the subjects they were interrogated;

20 secondly, or alternatively, if they were not prisoners

21 of war, if they were simply civilian, it means then,

22 under the then Criminal Proceedings Act, that witness 3

23 could not have been interviewed because he was

24 underage, and under no conditions, with no exceptions,

25 could his statement be used in a possible criminal

Page 14738

1 case.

2 So I'm talking about a criminal case which

3 could have been started against that witness, or either

4 the accused in that hypothetical case, before the

5 Bosnian authorities, pursuant to the then legislation,

6 or today's legislation. As he was a minor, he would

7 have had to be interviewed by a special judge for

8 minors.

9 In the law, and I'm not going now to quote

10 various articles, and so forth -- but we do, of course,

11 bring those quotes, those articles from the law -- but

12 their law envisages absolutely no exceptions under

13 which such a statement could be used in criminal

14 proceedings. And, as I said, in Australia, he

15 explained what was the weight, how trustworthy was that

16 statement.

17 Now, the question arises as to what does the

18 term "unwilling witness" mean, or "hostile." Not even

19 hypothetically. Can we talk here about decisions of a

20 witness based on the ethnic division which we have in

21 this case? The two witnesses, 3 and 4, are Croats by

22 ethnicity, and witness 3 is in Australia, he lives in

23 Australia, which is a democratic country; a country

24 where various instruments of power, no doubt, work; in

25 a country where a court can issue an order to bring

Page 14739

1 such a witness under custody. So the question of

2 whether one is willing or unwilling does not arise in

3 this particular case.

4 I'm not going to infer from that that the

5 Prosecution does not really want this witness to come,

6 because he's happier with papers which cannot be

7 subject to cross-examination.

8 But whatever the legal system we are talking

9 about, first, a witness is called. If the witness

10 refuses, then every system provides for some other

11 instrument which courts have at their disposal, for

12 instance, if one issues an order, a subpoena, and then

13 you have also some enforcement authority.

14 Let us look at Bosnia, and I'm referring to

15 witness 4. The Federation of Bosnia-Herzegovina

16 unquestionably cooperates with this Tribunal; there are

17 countless examples of this, and there is no need to

18 talk about this. There are authorities there who work

19 and who are willing to comply with the orders of the

20 Tribunal, and moreover, there are also international

21 forces who brought even the accused, not only

22 witnesses, to this Tribunal.

23 So we cannot draw a sign of equality -- and

24 this is the initial thesis of the Prosecution -- we

25 cannot draw a sign of equality between dead and

Page 14740

1 unwilling witnesses, unless the witness himself or

2 herself comes to the court and says, "I don't want to

3 testify," and there again, there are instruments which

4 can be used to make them do so.

5 Meanwhile, although you must give us some

6 reasonable time, but yesterday after the session, we

7 requested medical documentation for the witness who is

8 in Bosnia, that is, witness 4. So far, I have obtained

9 only some indirect information that this person is

10 unaccountable and has been unaccountable since he was

11 released from Zenica. I have asked my assistants to

12 get this documentation. I believe that some documents

13 have been found, and we shall get it tonight, at least

14 something will be faxed to us. Of course, I do not

15 know whether that is true or not. But I have

16 information about both, that they have suffered

17 significant psychological, mental damage after their

18 stay in Zenica.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm not sure whether you

20 offered this explanation, but could you say how the

21 courts in Bosnia-Herzegovina, or in Croatia, would view

22 the admission of a statement of a witness who was

23 unwilling to come to court.

24 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Under the

25 Criminal Proceedings Act, which was in effect at the

Page 14741

1 time in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Croatia --- and as you

2 already know, both these republics took over the laws

3 of the former Federation, and recently a new Criminal

4 Proceedings Act was adopted in Croatia. I have not had

5 time to study it, but my colleague, perhaps, can. But

6 under the then laws, there was absolutely no exception

7 under which a statement made to the police could be

8 used as evidence in a criminal case, there was not a

9 single exception to that rule.

10 The only exception was when a statement had

11 been made before an investigating magistrate, an

12 investigating judge. So it is a statement made under

13 oath, under a threat, in case of false testimony,

14 because that was also a criminal offence; that is, the

15 investigator had to caution the witness that false

16 testimony is a criminal offence under this or that

17 article of the law, and punishable by 3 to 5 years of

18 penal solitude. And after that, the judge takes the

19 statement, and there is a clause in the law which says

20 that a witness can, of course, change the record,

21 object to various parts of it, so on and so forth --

22 let me not go into that -- and subsequently, when the

23 hearing begins, that is, when it comes before the trial

24 chamber, this witness must again appear before the

25 court, as a rule.

Page 14742

1 Now, in that particular case, there is an

2 exception, when this statement given to the

3 investigating judge may be read. The provisions are

4 very restrictive in this regard, and my colleague, who

5 is really an expert on the procedural law, if a witness

6 has died in the meantime or -- but he is not even

7 sure. That is very restrictive. But I'm referring

8 only to a statement made before an investigating

9 judge.

10 As for a statement which this same witness,

11 or any other witness, or the accused, made before the

12 police or, rather, the investigating authorities,

13 before the case has reached the judge, this statement

14 not only may not be read, but this same judge, that is,

15 the investigating judge, was bound to single out that

16 file, seal it, and keep it separately from the rest of

17 the file; that is, it could not be read.

18 These statements made to the police could be

19 used only by the investigating judge by way of

20 preparation for the first statement, for the first

21 interrogation of the accused, for the first interview

22 of the accused, for the first questioning of the

23 accused, by the investigating authorities. And after

24 that, the investigating judge had to seal it, put it

25 away, and nobody else could see it.

Page 14743

1 So under the domestic legislation, and we can

2 bring it, of course, under the domestic legislation in

3 Bosnia-Herzegovina, because this is what is relevant

4 here, there was no other mechanism according to which a

5 statement of an unwilling witness could be read in the

6 course of the main hearing.

7 The category, as defined here, "Unwilling

8 Witnesses," did not exist in the law, because the law

9 had a mechanism whereby measures could be used to

10 ensure the presence of a witness before the court. So

11 first was the summons, and the second was a subpoena

12 or, rather, bringing a witness under custody. If a

13 witness would refuse, then the court would order the

14 police to bring in the witness for a particular

15 hearing.

16 Now, also with regard to witnesses 3 and 4,

17 just for your information, if the whole story were

18 built on such indirect positions -- as are those of the

19 Prosecutor, I must say, even though it might not be

20 legally relevant; but it has to do with facts we're

21 dealing with -- and that is, in Bosnia, especially in

22 Central Bosnia, in 1993, and I did examine witnesses

23 about this, not a single body without an ear had been

24 found.

25 So, my question is: Whence the ear, if there

Page 14744

1 is no corpse? But we continue working on it and

2 perhaps we shall find something.

3 Another relevant point to my mind is -- I

4 believe we saw here, and Mr. Sayers already mentioned

5 it, but we heard a series of witnesses, not one or two,

6 but quite a large number, and I am not quoting figures

7 at random, of who did not say anything that has not

8 been found in the statements given to investigators or

9 the Bosnian police services during the war.

10 Not only that, quite a number of witnesses

11 have said things which contradicted the statements

12 given earlier to investigators. And those statements

13 have proven highly unreliable and not safe ground for

14 any conclusions. This relates particularly to the

15 statements given to the commission for war crimes in

16 Bosnia or different military authorities or police

17 authorities.

18 As for witness 15, which, in Prosecutor's

19 words, has reason not to be willing to come or, rather,

20 justifiably unwilling, and this is again a category

21 which I really cannot endorse. Our learned friends

22 from the Prosecution quoted other corroborative

23 statements, but they omitted to mention certain things,

24 needless to say. Such as, for instance, that one of

25 the statements made here before the Court and the

Page 14745

1 document which was adduced with that witness, and he

2 was an intelligence officer of the Bosnian army in

3 which he said that war criminals from the area, and he

4 mentioned war criminals from the area of Vitez. In the

5 document he is accused of the murder in question.

6 The person who was also mentioned, also a

7 witness. That is the case 30 May '92. That was in the

8 hotel, in Vitez Hotel. And that is why that exhibit

9 was adduced, that is, the investigation on site,

10 immediately after the crime.

11 Now, in that record, and I really don't

12 remember, five or seven policemen, by the civilian,

13 military policemen, HVO and BiH army, that is both

14 parties, because we are talking about May '92. And

15 nobody ever, except for the witness whom we heard here,

16 that is one of the policemen, expressed ever any doubts

17 regarding that particular incident. So rumours started

18 sometimes, and then the witness said here, and then

19 after the investigation rumours started that somebody

20 else must have killed that victim. And this is, I

21 believe, what the statement of number 15 is all about.

22 In other words, we have quite a lot of evidence about

23 it.

24 The Defence will already produce some

25 evidence -- if witness [redacted] would come, we would

Page 14746

1 be very happy to see him here, because we should indeed

2 like to cross-examine him. And if he cannot come, then

3 his statement may not be read. I think that the

4 witness is accessible and available, because, after

5 all, there are tools and means which can be used to

6 bring him.

7 If the Court wishes to hear some more

8 detailed -- I really do not want to quote all of the

9 articles, but if you wish to receive any more detailed

10 information about the Criminal Proceedings Act in

11 Bosnia-Herzegovina, in Croatia, in '92, '93, I know

12 that Mr. Naumovski is quite ready to explain the

13 legislation in greater detail. Or give us a bit more

14 time -- a little more time and we shall prepare it in a

15 day or two.

16 We object to this primarily because we are

17 losing the right to cross-examine and important matters

18 are at stake. And therefore we object against the

19 introduction of the statements they made to the

20 investigating authorities or different other

21 authorities. And we are absolutely not willing, not

22 ready to waive our rights to cross-examine them.

23 Perhaps I was not sufficiently methodical,

24 sufficiently systematic in presenting our case in this

25 particular case, but we were not quite ready for it.

Page 14747

1 We really expected to see two witnesses, so there was a

2 lot of documents to study, and we are getting ready for

3 those two witnesses, but did not expect this

4 discussion.

5 Witness 5, I am afraid, I mentioned his

6 name. This, I hope, will be struck out from the

7 transcript.

8 MR. NICE: Can I just make a couple of points

9 on behalf of both myself and Mr. Lopez-Terres.

10 Nearly all these witnesses were listed as

11 witnesses for whom we wanted affidavits and so on in

12 our updated overview. Confrontation rights are to be

13 contrasted, as Mr. Lopez-Terres explained yesterday,

14 with other methods for attacking the credibility of a

15 witness, or the believability of a witness. There is

16 no question of our bending over backwards to put in

17 written statements. We are taking whatever steps we

18 can to get the material before the court in a proper

19 and most timely way.

20 Depositions simply aren't available for one

21 reason or another, so far as the witnesses in Category

22 B or Category F are concerned. It's not a

23 possibility. If somebody is not cooperating at all, as

24 in Category B, or frightened, as in Category F, then

25 depositions simply aren't a possibility.

Page 14748

1 The general point on the law of other

2 countries that's being made has to be contrasted with

3 the fact and reality that this institution doesn't have

4 investigating judges. That's not the system it

5 introduced.

6 The Chamber will note that all written

7 statements are topped and tailed, begun and ended with

8 assertions as to the truth. Those statements go as far

9 as it's possible within the rules to go, to become a

10 statement by oath, which is of course why Judge Jorda

11 took the view, in dealing with one of these statements

12 that we dealt with yesterday, that it was indeed a

13 statement on oath.

14 Dealing with Mr. Kovacic's points about

15 Australia's powers. The Chamber knows that in relation

16 to all these witnesses, we have taken the process of

17 coercion to the end of the line. And we can do no

18 more. That indeed makes us rather parallel, the

19 Chamber may think, with the example he gave for Bosnia,

20 of police bringing in a person for questioning, in

21 relation, for example, to Category B. That's exactly

22 what we have attempted, but his attitude, and the

23 Australian's response, and of course the decision of

24 this Chamber, means that we haven't been able to do

25 that.

Page 14749

1 As to whether the person being under age is

2 significant in wartime. The fact is that it's our

3 rules that apply and, as Mr. Lopez-Terres reminds me,

4 in relation to that particular witness, when the

5 suggestion is that what he said may be unreliable, of

6 course he wasn't just saying that he admitted things,

7 which is perhaps what happens when forced by

8 interrogators. He was actually giving a coherent

9 account of responsibility lying elsewhere. And the

10 Chamber reminds itself, perhaps, that the investigators

11 taking those interviews are available to be called to

12 explain the propriety of them, and indeed to explain

13 the finding of the ear.

14 Finally, so far as 15 and 16 are concerned,

15 the Chamber will recognise that -- I hope, that we

16 probably applied a stiffer test for the witnesses than

17 we might have done, for only in respect of the one

18 witness did we ourselves say, we think these expressed

19 fears are so potentially realistic that we shouldn't

20 attempt coercion. And once we made that judgement,

21 that was the position we morally had to take. We

22 couldn't say, "We think he is justified in the fears

23 that he has," and then ask the Court to rule. Because

24 the Court had indicated, in relation to number 16, that

25 that wasn't the way it wanted it done. We made the

Page 14750

1 decision, and there is only, in respect to the one

2 witness at the end, that we've been taken to that

3 position. And the Chamber may think that it's an

4 entirely responsible and understandable position to

5 take, particularly in light of its own ruling in

6 relation to number 16.

7 I can't help you further, I don't think.

8 JUDGE MAY: Thank you. We'll consider these

9 matters now. We'll sit again at half past 11.00,

10 unless you hear to the contrary.

11 MR. NICE: The statement, you have one

12 coming. I have simply put a tag beside the relevant

13 passage. There are some more coming, so that I'll have

14 them -- if the usher makes himself available, they can

15 be brought to Your Honours.

16 JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let me have that. Very

17 well. We'll adjourn now.

18 --- Recess taken at 10.55 a.m.

19 --- On resuming at 11.48 a.m.

20 JUDGE MAY: I will give the Trial Chamber's

21 ruling in relation to the material which was sought to

22 be admitted.

23 The four witnesses whose statements the

24 Prosecution seek to adduce are described as "unwilling

25 witnesses." In one way or another, they have refused

Page 14751

1 to come to give evidence. They are, therefore, in a

2 different category from the witnesses with whom we

3 dealt yesterday, who were dead. These witnesses are

4 available but have refused, for one reason or another,

5 to come.

6 We make no general ruling about witnesses in

7 such a category; it is not necessary to do so at this

8 stage, save to say this, that it seems to us that such

9 witness statements from such witnesses may be

10 admissible under Rule 89(C). If, for instance, a

11 witness is genuinely in fear and is kept away,

12 intimidated, because of the actions of an accused or on

13 behalf of an accused, a Trial Chamber may then admit

14 such evidence. But it will depend on the circumstances

15 of each case and it will depend on the probative nature

16 of the evidence.

17 I turn to deal with the four witnesses with

18 whom we've been dealing this morning. Numbers 3 and 4

19 on the Prosecution's list, described as

20 "unwilling/hostile," these two witnesses have simply

21 refused to come, there's no good reason for their

22 absence, and that in itself may be a ground for

23 excluding their evidence. If a witness is simply not

24 prepared to come, then the Trial Chamber should think

25 long and hard about admitting that evidence.

Page 14752

1 The circumstances of this case, they also

2 need to be mentioned. These statements were made, and

3 filmed in one case, while, at least in one case, the

4 witness was in detention and being interrogated by the

5 authorities of the opposite side. One of the witnesses

6 has since retracted his statement, and it's now alleged

7 that these statements were obtained under duress and,

8 indeed, torture. Now, there may or may not be any

9 truth in that, we're not going to rule, but that casts

10 doubt, or must cast doubt upon the reliability of the

11 statements, and in those circumstances, to admit the

12 statement without any proper cross-examination may be

13 to admit totally unreliable evidence.

14 For those reasons, the circumstances of the

15 refusal and the circumstances in which these statements

16 were taken, the statements are not admitted, nor, of

17 course, is any film attached to them.

18 Numbers 15 and 16 are in a different

19 category. They are described as "justified unwilling,"

20 which may not be a very elegant way of putting it, but

21 probably sums up the position; namely, those who may

22 have good reason not to give evidence.

23 In fact, in relation to number 16, the Trial

24 Chamber had indicated on another occasion that it

25 accepted that this witness was in fear.

Page 14753

1 In the case of number 15, we have seen

2 material which, it is suggested, has put the witness in

3 fear. We are not satisfied, in his case, that he is in

4 fear. That would be sufficient to exclude his

5 statement. But dealing with it, he gives direct

6 evidence implicating one of the accused in a murder,

7 and it is the view of the Trial Chamber that such

8 evidence should not be admitted without

9 cross-examination and, in particular, in this case.

10 Given that the Trial Chamber is not satisfied

11 as to the reasons for his not coming and are not

12 satisfied as to the correctness of admitting such

13 evidence without cross-examination, it will be

14 excluded.

15 Number 16 is in a different position, as I

16 said. It was accepted that he was genuinely in fear.

17 However, having looked at the evidence that he was to

18 give, the Trial Chamber is of the view that it is

19 cumulative, there's been much evidence on the topic on

20 which the Prosecution sought to rely in his case, and

21 it's therefore not sufficiently probative to admit it

22 in these circumstances without cross-examination.

23 Accordingly, the statements of all four will

24 be excluded.

25 MR. NICE: Let me now turn to the matters of

Page 14754

1 the map. There are some further administrative matters

2 that I'll deal with, but it's probably better if I deal

3 with them at the end of the day, when I may have more

4 information about the position on outstanding

5 affidavits and matters of that sort, to bring the

6 Chamber up to date.

7 Mr. Lopez-Terres is going to deal with the

8 map, or maps. There is a -- I'll go back. The maps

9 were responsive to an inquiry of the Trial Chamber

10 before the summer recess, and, indeed, the inquiry was,

11 I think, both as to front-line positions and

12 deployments.

13 The witness has prepared a report which has

14 been served on the Chamber, and I'm not sure if the

15 Chamber has got it in enough copies for each member of

16 the Chamber to read it at the moment.

17 JUDGE MAY: I've got a summary. Is the

18 report this other binder that we now have?

19 MR. NICE: No, the report is 13 pages. The

20 very substantial binder you have is simply the

21 supporting material, in case questions of detail are to

22 be raised. And subject to one or two reservations,

23 it's probably a document or an exhibit best produced as

24 a single exhibit, supporting the witness's report.

25 There is one reservation. We can come to that later.

Page 14755

1 But if the Chamber's had an opportunity to,

2 and has read the 13-page report of the witness, then it

3 would be my submission that, through Mr. Lopez-Terres,

4 the most efficient and swift method of dealing with the

5 evidence would be to get the witness to give first his

6 explanation of the three maps. There are two on the

7 board already, and there is another one which is on the

8 floor, which will have to take its place with some

9 overlays in due course. And then, perhaps, to move

10 summarily through the contents of the report.

11 But I think that the maps are things that he

12 can speak of himself, without going through the process

13 of formal examination-in-chief. He can simply present

14 the maps to you. And I think you'll find that quite

15 helpful.

16 It may be there are some technical objections

17 by the Defence and, in one way or another, I think I'll

18 hand over to Mr. Lopez-Terres.

19 JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Sayers.

20 MR. SAYERS: Mr. President, we do have

21 several objections relating to the actual report. In

22 principle, however, I do not believe we have any

23 objection to the witness testifying as to his

24 understanding of the front lines and the actual troop

25 dispositions. And that was the precise request upon

Page 14756

1 which the Trial Chamber made of the Prosecution, which

2 would be of assistance, given the plethora of maps

3 which confessedly are rather confusing in this case.

4 It would be useful to have in one place a statement of

5 where the front lines were, at specific points in time,

6 and where the brigades of the various opposing forces

7 were.

8 And, accordingly, I want to make it

9 absolutely clear that we do not object to that in

10 principle. It's the report that I would like to

11 address to the Trial Chamber's attention. And one of

12 the problems that we have with it, is that it's based

13 partially upon inadmissible materials and other

14 materials, such as, for example, footnote 1, was two

15 maps from, apparently, the Armija, BiH. We only

16 received these about 15 minutes ago, as a matter of

17 fact. And a significant quantity of the conclusions,

18 apparently, in the report are based upon this.

19 I'll be frank with the Trial Chamber, that

20 I've not had an opportunity to evaluate these in any

21 detail. And the scale of them is such that apparently

22 there are two tables on one of these maps. That's

23 referred to in footnote 1. They are absolutely

24 illegible, but apparently they supposedly contain an

25 evaluation, at least from the ABiH side, of the

Page 14757

1 relative strength of the opposing forces.

2 That's one problem that we have.

3 Another problem is that there was no request

4 made for a 13-page written report. Frankly, this

5 report tiptoes, on more than one occasion, into the

6 area of expert testimony, and there has not been a

7 compliance with Rule 94 bis. Putting that aside for a

8 moment, the report is also based, if you take a look at

9 footnotes 41 and 62 of the report, upon a witness

10 statement of a witness who has not testified before

11 this Tribunal, from Zepce, and whose statement was not

12 included in the Zepce binder. Which is, we would

13 respectfully represent, one more continuing effort to

14 sneak witness statements into evidence in this case.

15 Equally significant, and I address the

16 Court's attention to footnotes 38, 58, 60, and 67,

17 there are portions of General Blaskic's testimony that

18 have been consulted and relied upon in coming up with

19 the conclusions that are contained in this report.

20 In addition, it doesn't stop there. If you

21 take a look at footnote 49, on page 7 of the report,

22 there is reliance placed upon testimony from other

23 witnesses in the Blaskic case, who have testified in

24 this case, but not on that point. Mr. McLeod being the

25 case in point.

Page 14758

1 Similarly, if you take a look at footnote 71,

2 I believe I am correct in saying that there are

3 exhibits that were introduced in the Blaskic case, such

4 as, for example, a letter written to trial counsel in

5 the Blaskic case, Mr. Nobilo, introduced as exhibit

6 Defence 440(a) in that case, but not, I believe,

7 introduced into evidence in this case. And there are

8 many other materials that have not been supplied.

9 And there are just a couple of other points

10 that I would like to bring to the Trial Chamber's

11 attention. This report actually goes significantly

12 beyond a description of the front lines and an

13 explanation of the deployments of the various units of

14 the Central Bosnia operative zone, and the 3rd Corps,

15 which is what was requested. There are analyses, for

16 example, of the HVO intentions to establish front lines

17 based upon three orders issued by General, or then

18 Colonel Blaskic, on April the 17th, 1993. And it's not

19 apparent from the report, and it's not apparent to me,

20 why it was felt necessary to include that explanation

21 or analysis of what the apparent intentions of the HVO

22 were with respect to the matter of front lines on that

23 day.

24 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Sayers, I am going to stop

25 you. It seems sensible to do this: To hear the

Page 14759

1 witness as to the maps, which apparently he's going to

2 address first, and then, if we want to hear any more,

3 we'll consider it, and hear your objections.

4 MR. SAYERS: Thank you very much indeed,

5 Mr. President.

6 MR. KOVACIC: Your Honour, if I may

7 contribute to this. I am sharing the opinion of my

8 learned colleague, Mr. Sayers. I would just like to

9 inform also -- to inform also the Chamber that there

10 were discussions between, as we informed the Chamber

11 earlier, you will remember, between the Prosecution

12 desk and Defence, both Defences. We did exchange some

13 written proposals and comments, and then we met. And

14 some limited progress was done towards the idea to

15 narrow the disputed issues.

16 However, a lot of that remains open, which I

17 would like also to stress, that there is one thing

18 which also should be somehow at least clearly stated,

19 and I guess also decided by the Chamber. It is the

20 principal issue, whether this material produced in

21 front of us, and I am referring to both maps and the

22 report, should be based exclusively on the exhibits

23 already tendered in this case, or is it -- or whether

24 we can allow to have also the exhibits used which are

25 not tendered in this case. I don't have any particular

Page 14760

1 opinion, whether that would be allowed or not, but at

2 least it should be clearly stated.

3 So whatever will be produced today, it is not

4 based only on the exhibits already tendered in this

5 case.

6 So we should be aware of that. And besides,

7 there -- some of the details which my colleague

8 mentioned, I would like to mention just one. And of

9 course it would be raised during the cross, but just as

10 an example of methodology which was used. One of --

11 most important parts of this presentation for my client

12 is the positions of the brigades on 17 April.

13 According to the Blaskic orders, there were three of

14 them on that date. However, there is no particular

15 presentation on the position of the brigade on the

16 16th, which is really the critical day, when conflict

17 started. And, of course, that could be raised, but it

18 was simply omitted.

19 Thank you, Your Honour.

20 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Kovacic, I suggest that -- as

21 I said before, that the witness gives his evidence

22 about the maps and we'll see how we get on. And if it

23 becomes necessary, we'll have to give some rulings.

24 But at least at the moment he must be entitled to

25 produce his maps, and then you can ask him how he came

Page 14761

1 to those conclusions, if there are matters in dispute.

2 MR. KOVACIC: That would help. Your Honour,

3 if I may, we don't know now whether the report will be

4 admitted as separate evidence or only his presentation

5 and the maps --

6 JUDGE MAY: We are going to hear his evidence

7 about the maps. We are then going to consider whether

8 it's necessary to have the report.

9 MR. KOVACIC: Thank you, sir.

10 JUDGE MAY: Yes. Mr. Lopez-Terres.

11 [The witness entered court]

12 JUDGE MAY: Yes, let the witness take the

13 declaration.

14 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will

15 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the

16 truth.


18 JUDGE MAY: Yes, thank you. Take a seat.

19 Examined by Mr. Lopez-Terres:

20 Q. You are Mr. Jon Elford, and you are 29 years

21 old?

22 A. Yes. My full name, Jonathan Elford.

23 Q. You are working as a military analyst with

24 the Office of the Prosecutor in this Tribunal?

25 A. That's right, yes.

Page 14762

1 Q. You have been exercising these duties since

2 October 1997.

3 A. For the Tribunal, yes, for the last few

4 years.

5 Q. Could you tell us, in a few words, what the

6 duties of a military analyst consist of?

7 A. The normal duties -- I was really given some

8 form of direction, a task to carry out, which normally

9 would be something in the line of producing reports on

10 military-based subjects, analysing a military action or

11 an organisation and chain of commands. The analyst

12 would then, using all the available information, make

13 an analysis of the information and produce or refine a

14 report based on that.

15 Q. You belong to a group of some 15 analysts

16 working for the Office of the Prosecutor.

17 A. That's right, yes.

18 Q. Mr. Elford, since last summer, you were asked

19 to work on maps, at the request of the Office of the

20 Prosecutor, within the framework of the Kordic trial.

21 This request was, in fact, in response to a question by

22 the Chamber on the 3rd of August, 1999, when the

23 Chamber requested that a map be presented on which

24 certain information would appear regarding the

25 deployment of forces in the region, the BiH forces, the

Page 14763

1 HVO forces, and the army of Republika Srpska.

2 You personally worked on those maps, you

3 produced those maps. There is a map of Central Bosnia

4 for April 1993, another map for the month of July, and

5 finally, you also worked on a map for the Vitez region

6 on which you made three transparencies to show us the

7 situation. Is that correct?

8 A. That's correct. The deployment shown relates

9 to the HVO and the ABiH, with a VRS front line shown as

10 well.

11 Q. Within these maps, you will explain to us in

12 detail in a few minutes the confrontation lines in

13 different colours, as well as a listing of various

14 combat units both for the BiH army and the HVO forces.

15 A. Yes, that's true.

16 Q. I should like to ask you if you would be kind

17 enough to begin and explain the first map that you

18 worked on, commenting on the various indications or

19 signs appearing on that map.

20 JUDGE MAY: Do we have an exhibit number,

21 Mr. Lopez-Terres, for the first map?

22 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: [Interpretation] This map,

23 dated April, as well as the map for July, is marked

24 Z2612.2A and Z2612.2B.

25 Q. Please continue.

Page 14764

1 A. I'll, first of all, explain the map.

2 This is a 1:100.000 scale map of Central

3 Bosnia, which I believe has already been presented as

4 an exhibit in the trial. So 1:100.000 scale means that

5 one centimetre on the map is equivalent to one

6 kilometre on the map. The map shows information on the

7 terrain of the area, road systems, and towns or

8 villages in the area, but it's also been overprinted

9 with obstruction information, which relates to overhead

10 obstacles such as pylons and electricity cables, which

11 are actually not part of this presentation.

12 I'll move on to the actual information

13 shown. The first line which is on the map for April

14 1993 was the VRS front line, and this line is shown in

15 red, following this area [indicates], the front line

16 around the Sarajevo area [indicates], and then the

17 northern area [indicates]. This front line was made up

18 basically from UNPROFOR traces which were made at the

19 time, and then also with comparison to ABiH maps which

20 were made after the events. They were quite

21 consistent, there was a fair amount of consistency

22 between the two of them. Really, this front line

23 remained relatively stable for the entire period we're

24 looking at, and so it's been used again for the second

25 map, for July onwards.

Page 14765

1 The other information shown then is the HVO

2 and ABiH actual brigade-sized units and the corps

3 headquarters, and what is shown is the brigade

4 headquarters and not the whole area that the brigade

5 actually covered. So a brigade would be able to cover

6 an area away from its headquarters.

7 If I go through, first of all, the HVO

8 brigades, the first one marked is number 1, and that is

9 the headquarters of the Central Bosnia Operative Zone;

10 below that, number 2, is the Viteska Brigade, which

11 operated in the Vitez area; number 3, the Nikola

12 Subic-Zrinjski Brigade, operating in Busovaca; and

13 number 4, the Stjepan Tomasevic Brigade, in Novi

14 Travnik.

15 Then in the Travnik area. Number 5, the

16 Travnicka Brigade, and outside Travnik, the Frankopan

17 Brigade; number 7 on the map is the Jure Francetic

18 Brigade, which is the HVO brigade for the Zenica area;

19 number 8, the 111th Brigade in the Zepce area. And

20 then I move down to the Bobovac Brigade in Vares; the

21 Kotromanic Brigade in Kakanj; the Ban Josip Jelacic

22 Brigade in Kiseljak. Then in Bugojno, the Eugen

23 Kvaternik Brigade, and in Gornji Vakuf, the Dr. Ante

24 Starcevic Brigade.

25 In the same way, the ABiH brigades have also

Page 14766

1 been plotted on the map. So if I go through those in

2 order, all based in the Zenica area, were the

3 headquarters of the 3rd Corps ABiH, the 301st Brigade,

4 the 303rd, the 314th, and then the 7th Brigade ABiH.

5 In the Travnik area, this part of the map [indicates],

6 we had the 306th Brigade, the 312th, and also the 17th

7 Brigade.

8 If I move across the map to Novi Travnik

9 [indicates] is the location of the 308th Brigade; and

10 then following the map around, in Bugojno was the 307th

11 Brigade; Gornji Vakuf, the 317th Brigade; move to the

12 north of the map, in Zavidovici, the 318th Brigade; in

13 Zepce, the 319th Brigade. Based just to the west of

14 Kakanj, we have the 305th Brigade; in Kakanj itself, is

15 number 13, the 309th Brigade; Kacuni, outside Busovaca,

16 was the 333rd Brigade; in Visoko were the 302nd

17 Brigade; and then in Breza was the 304th Brigade. Back

18 to the brigade for the Vitez area, based in Poculica,

19 is the 325th Brigade.

20 And those are the brigade-sized units for the

21 area which have been plotted on the map.

22 Q. You did not mark on this map certain units of

23 a smaller size than brigades. They were units that

24 were referred to in the course of this trial, so could

25 you comment on them?

Page 14767

1 A. That is correct. Basically, to avoid

2 cluttering the map, we kept it to brigade-sized units.

3 But also for the HVO, there are other smaller-sized

4 units, which I mentioned in the report, which were the

5 Vitezovi special forces unit which operated within the

6 Vitez pocket; the Tvrtko II special forces unit, which

7 was based in Nova Bila, which again is in an area north

8 of Vitez; the 4th Battalion of the military police,

9 which was a military police unit for the HVO for the

10 Central Bosnia area; and then it also mentions the

11 Ludvig Pavlovic Brigade and the Ante Bruno Busic

12 Brigade, which operated in this area sometime in early

13 1993.

14 Q. These two last units that you mentioned came

15 from Herzegovina, didn't they?

16 A. That's right. They were deployed in Central

17 Bosnia in approximately January 1993. We've seen this

18 from orders of General Blaskic at the time to these

19 units.

20 Q. You acted in the same way, a little later,

21 for the year 1993, and then you drew a second map on

22 which you indicated again the confrontation lines, and

23 also the units that were deployed. The number of those

24 units was modified, as compared to those you have just

25 told us about.

Page 14768

1 A. The second map, then, shows the HVO front

2 lines and pockets that develops after April '93, and

3 also shows the changes in brigades of the various sides

4 after different actions occurred up until that time

5 period.

6 Q. Would it be possible now to present the

7 central map for Central Bosnia -- the second map.

8 Could you tell us the main changes that occurred

9 between the month of April and the period beginning

10 with July, 1993.

11 A. Yes. First of all, I show that the lines

12 that developed -- the first one is the front line that

13 developed around the Vitez pocket. The pocket also

14 developed in the Kiseljak area, and also another HVO

15 area -- pocket within the Vares area, which lasts to

16 about November '93.

17 In June, '93 a front line developed between

18 the ABiH and the HVO in the Zepce area, which is

19 shown. And also a split develops and a front line came

20 between the HVO and the ABiH in the Gornji Vakuf area,

21 which is shown to the side. The conflict for this

22 started in July, and the information comes from BritBat

23 reports from early August '93, for the Gornji Vakuf

24 area.

25 The main changes we saw within the brigades:

Page 14769

1 In the Zenica area, the Jure Francetic Brigade was

2 driven out of the Zenica area, and the remnants of the

3 brigade moved into the Vitez pocket.

4 In the same way in Travnik, the Travnicka

5 Brigade and the Frankopan Brigade were pushed out of

6 Travnik, and the elements left over, reformed in the

7 north of the Vitez pocket.

8 In Zepce, the ABiH 319th Brigade was

9 destroyed by the HVO in the Zepce area.

10 Moving south of the map. In Bugogno, the HVO

11 Brigade was pushed out and destroyed in Bugogno. And

12 the same occurred in Kakanj with the Kotromanic

13 Brigade. It was destroyed by the ABiH in the Kakanj

14 area, and the remnants moved into the Vares pockets.

15 And those were the principal changes on the map.

16 Q. This new definition of front lines involved

17 redeployment of units that were destroyed. Could you

18 give us some information about the way in which these

19 units that were defeated on the ground were absorbed

20 into other units.

21 A. Yes. Well, on the HVO side, the

22 Frankopan/Travnicka Brigade were reduced in number, but

23 still seemed to operate as a complete unit, but in the

24 northern area of the Vitez pocket. As mentioned, Jure

25 Francetic Brigade, the elements would then seem to have

Page 14770

1 been deployed within HVO units within the whole of

2 Vitez pocket, but in limited numbers. And as

3 mentioned, the remaining elements of the Kotromanic

4 Brigade deployed into the Vares pocket.

5 Q. It is shown on the two maps that you have

6 described that the confrontation lines with the Serbs

7 were frozen; they didn't change during that period, in

8 other words.

9 A. When I say "frozen," they were relatively

10 stable, but there was movement along those front

11 lines. And there was also the same in the Vitez

12 pockets and to some extent in the Kiseljak area. The

13 main activity in the -- against -- in the Serb area was

14 in the area to the west of Travnik, where, for example,

15 the Kamenjas feature was lost to the VRS, and then the

16 ABiH had to retake that feature. And then, from a

17 later date into '93, then continued attacks from the

18 ABiH against the VRS in that area.

19 Other changes were, really, a normal backward

20 and forward movement, but no major changes to the line

21 itself.

22 Q. According to information at your disposal,

23 was there any evolution regarding the participation of

24 HVO forces on the front line against the Serbs, side by

25 side with the Bosnian army?

Page 14771

1 A. Going back to January '93, from then we

2 appeared to have seen documents which show a reduction

3 in the forces, the HVO forces on the front line in that

4 area. Then BritBat reports show HVO troops in this

5 area mentioned before up until around June '93. At

6 this point, that seems the last time they were seen on

7 that front line, and BritBat reported that the HVO

8 withdrew, the VRS took their positions, and the ABiH

9 had to retake them at a later date.

10 Q. You have shown us the list of units and their

11 deployment. It is necessary, on the basis of the

12 figures and the headquarters, to give us some

13 indication as to the importance, the size and strength

14 of those units. Can you give us some figures regarding

15 the personnel manning those units?

16 A. Yes. We have figures available for all of

17 the units shown on the map. And then we have some for

18 the smaller size units which were not shown on the

19 map. Do you want me to run through those?

20 MR. SAYERS: If I may, Mr. President. That's

21 where we object. This is the predicate to a force

22 ratio analysis that's contained in the report, and it's

23 the subject of expert opinion testimony, I think, from

24 a wide variety of sources, some ABiH, some HVO, some

25 other.

Page 14772

1 JUDGE MAY: Let the witness take a seat while

2 this is argued.

3 Mr. Lopez-Terres, would you like to tell us

4 what it is that you propose to call, the evidence you

5 propose to call, and how you propose to deal with it,

6 and then we'll hear the objection.

7 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: [Interpretation] It appears

8 quite necessary to know where the forces were deployed,

9 but it seemed to us, in the Office of the Prosecutor,

10 that such a presentation would be absolutely incomplete

11 if beyond the lines and behind the front lines no

12 information was given to the Chamber regarding the

13 personnel who were on those front lines, the number and

14 strength of those units, the number of combatants on

15 the ground, the type of weapons they had, the type of

16 formations that they had. And this type of

17 information, which is usually information studied by

18 military analysts, we thought was of particular

19 relevance -- of particular relevance for assessing the

20 events that took place in Central Bosnia. The

21 confrontation lines are certainly necessary, something

22 necessary, but it is also necessary to know who held

23 those lines, how those lines were held, what were the

24 effectives in place. That is the type of information

25 that Mr. Elford compiled, and all the sources that he

Page 14773

1 used to give us those descriptions are referred to in

2 the binder. And also as footnotes at the bottom of his

3 report, all the sources can be verified.

4 JUDGE MAY: The objection is taken.

5 Apparently, one of the objections is that it's based --

6 the report is partly based on information which is not

7 available, or has not been made available in this

8 case. For instance, evidence given in the Blaskic

9 case.

10 What do you say in answer to that?

11 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: [Interpretation] The

12 documents on which Mr. Elford worked, and which -- a

13 part of the binder provided to you, have been produced

14 for the Defence, and have been translated. These are

15 documents with the Office of the Prosecutor, intended

16 to produce within the case -- the Kordic/Cerkez case.

17 They were communicated to the Defence. They have had

18 access to them. And the best proof is that Mr. Sayers

19 was able to comment on various points contained in

20 those documents. Everything has been disclosed to the

21 Defence.

22 JUDGE MAY: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Sayers.

23 MR. SAYERS: Mr. President, Mr. Elford has

24 provided the Court, apparently, with precisely that

25 which the Court requested, which is a map that shows

Page 14774

1 the front-line dispositions at two separate dates, and

2 pertinent brigade positions on those dates.

3 Going further into an analysis of the various

4 troop strengths requires Mr. Elford to go straight into

5 the area of expert testimony, and to give his views on

6 the force of a variety of documents, which often

7 contain conflicting numbers, as far as we can see, from

8 looking at the footnotes in his report. That is expert

9 testimony, and we've heard from a lot of military

10 experts or a lot of military figures in this case who

11 have given a wide variety of testimony, and their own

12 views on troop dispositions and strengths.

13 But, more importantly, Mr. Elford's footnotes

14 refer to a wide variety of documents that are not

15 exhibits in this case. And he refers to General

16 Blaskic's testimony in the Blaskic case on some issues

17 that could be contentious, and, for that reason alone,

18 I think that he ventures into dangerous territory when

19 he does so. But, generally speaking, we simply do not

20 see the need for expert testimony of the type that he

21 proposes to give in his force ratio analysis, and which

22 goes beyond that which the Trial Chamber's asked for,

23 and which Mr. Elford has provided in an easily

24 understandable, easily digestible and graphic way.

25 Thank you.

Page 14775

1 MR. KOVACIC: I join that opinion, Your

2 Honour.

3 JUDGE MAY: We'll consider the matter

4 [Trial Chamber confers]

5 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: [Interpretation]

6 Mr. President, I am sorry to interrupt you while you

7 are deliberating. But could I, perhaps, say something

8 in addition to what I said, which I believe you ought

9 to know.

10 The report was based and that the source on

11 which it was based was communicated before your Chamber

12 took the decision which you did last week on the

13 possibility or non-possibility to use the testimony --

14 the evidence in the case of Colonel Blaskic.

15 And this explains why there are some

16 fragments, but very limited, which at the time were

17 picked out by Mr. Elford to underpin the comments that

18 he had to make. These fragments come from the

19 transcript of General Blaskic's case, however, this is

20 not the principal source of Mr. Elford's evidence.

21 They simply corroborate, confirm the information that

22 he already had available to him.

23 And I hear the Defence -- I don't understand

24 why the Defence wants to create a certain confusion and

25 to say Mr. Elford is an expert. He is not an expert in

Page 14776

1 the sense of '94. He is a military analyst, he is a

2 military analyst who works for the Prosecutor's office

3 and he comments on the information that is at his

4 disposal. That information comes from different

5 sources, as you were able to see from the documents.

6 There are documents which come from the HVO, some come

7 from the Bosnian army, some come from international

8 organisations, or from the UNPROFOR forces deployed

9 there at the time. And this is one of the sources

10 which are highly verifiable, if nothing else. And I

11 simply needed to repeat that to the Prosecutor's

12 office, it seems necessary in addition to comments on

13 the maps, that we believe that it is very necessary to

14 show the Chamber what was the strength of various -- of

15 various units, because it will help towards a better

16 understanding to what was happening. It doesn't really

17 matter whether they were in Zenica are Kiseljak. This

18 is interesting, of course, but it does not suffice,

19 unless we really know how strong were these brigades,

20 how well were they armed, and what was the kind of

21 training that men who belonged -- who belonged to these

22 brigades had.

23 [Trial Chamber confers]

24 JUDGE MAY: We think this is testimony which

25 we ought to admit. It is, or may be potentially useful

Page 14777

1 evidence. It goes beyond what the Chamber asks for,

2 but that doesn't matter. A party is able to produce

3 its own evidence. It is evidence which makes the maps

4 clearer, clarifies the position. The witness can, of

5 course, be cross-examined as to the sources of his

6 evidence, and, more significantly, that the Defence can

7 always refute and contradict the evidence by calling

8 evidence of their own, if they do wish to do so. But

9 otherwise, I think its probative value exceeds any

10 problems which, it may be said, exist in relation to

11 it.

12 We shall admit it.

13 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: [Interpretation]

14 Q. Mr. Elford, we can now continue.

15 Could you now turn to other maps with which

16 you worked and which, more specifically, show the area

17 of Vitez.

18 A. It will take a few minutes to put up the

19 Vitez maps.

20 Q. Then Mr. Usher will help you.

21 Right. Oh, excuse me.

22 [Trial Chamber confers]

23 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: [Interpretation]

24 Q. Mr. Elford, you did the following: This is a

25 map of the Vitez area, or, if you like, the Lasva

Page 14778

1 Valley, and this time, you used overlays in order to

2 show the formations, as to where they were deployed

3 during different periods of time, as of the 17th of

4 April, 1993, to begin with, this is the first overlay,

5 and then in May 1993, and finally, for the period

6 following July 1993, which is the third overlay that

7 you made.

8 A. That is correct. There are three overlays.

9 The first two really build up the information that's

10 produced on the final overlay.

11 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: [Interpretation] I should

12 like to draw the attention of the Chamber to the fact

13 that for practical reasons, we were able to reproduce

14 these overlays in A4 formats, and we're tendering them

15 as Exhibits Z2612.10, Z2612.11, and Z2612.12.

16 Q. Could you tell us about the first overlay,

17 which refers to the 17th of April, 1993?

18 A. Yes. If I can explain the map again, first

19 of all. This is a 1:50.000 map, which has then been

20 blown up to twice the size. There are one or two

21 differences from the A4-size map, which you've been

22 given, because the A4-size map was taken from a

23 1:100.000 map, so it's more compact, and also I think

24 the line colours are different, although the lines

25 remain the same.

Page 14779

1 First of all, to explain, this map then is --

2 I've called it the intended front line, the intended

3 HVO front line in the Vitez area, and from using orders

4 from Colonel Blaskic at the time, we've shown how the

5 HVO front line developed, and the areas that they

6 intended to defend at the time.

7 The first line I've drawn on is an order

8 issued at 0400 hours, on the 17th of April, 1993, and

9 it's shown in black. To explain that one, the first

10 one is really an order to defend access roads from

11 Poculica and Preocica, from this area here [indicates]

12 and there [indicates], which is why the black line has

13 been drawn to the south of those areas, showing how the

14 HVO would intend to defend attacks from that direction

15 [indicates] and that direction [indicates].

16 Also mentioned on that order was to maintain

17 a blockade of Veceriska, which we've indicated here

18 [indicates], and also to seize that area, and Kruscica

19 and Vranjska, which is shown in the black, to the south

20 of Vitez.

21 That order was preceded by one on the 16th of

22 April, which was a more limited focus, just focusing on

23 the blockade at Kruscica and Vranjska

24 The next line, shown in blue, is based on an

25 order of 1850 [sic] hours, again, on the 17th of April,

Page 14780

1 1993, and this orders the Viteska Brigade to form a

2 defence line on the Kuber feature, which is this area

3 here [indicates], to the north-east of Vitez, in

4 coordination with the Nikola Subic-Zrinjski Brigade

5 from Busovaca, and also elements of the 4th Battalion

6 of the military police. This feature is important for

7 the defence of Nadioci, which is to the south of it,

8 and also Kaonik, an area in the responsibility of the

9 Nikola Subic-Zrinjski Brigade.

10 The third order formalises these orders, the

11 preceding ones, and gives lines on which the Viteska

12 Brigade was preparing defensive positions. This was

13 ordered at 2210 hours, on the 17th of April. The first

14 line is from Zabilje, through Jardol, to Krcevina; the

15 second line really backs up the lines along the Kuber

16 feature; and the third line is through the Kruscica

17 area, and that's really how the defensive lines built

18 up in the area.

19 The green line shown is the actual ABiH front

20 line, and the main points to note on that is that it

21 came down around the Stari Bila feature, which shows

22 that the defence line in that area was an intended

23 defence line, and the HVO were not actually able to

24 take the Stari Bila feature and Grbavica until

25 September 1993.

Page 14781

1 That's the information for the first

2 overlay.

3 Q. Only a rectification for the transcript, a

4 correction. It was that the second order of the 17th

5 of April was issued at 1850; however, it was 1815,

6 wasn't it? Quarter past six.

7 A. Yes, 1815 is shown, yes.

8 Q. You referred to those three orders of the

9 17th of April, and one also which was taken at night,

10 on the 15th of April, by Colonel Blaskic. And that

11 order of the 16th of April, it was around 1.00 in the

12 morning, and that one was quite different from the one

13 of the 17th that you just spoke about.

14 A. That is the order of -- the order to blockade

15 the Kruscica area, which was limited to the area to the

16 south of Vitez.

17 Q. And those three orders of the 17th of April,

18 and the one of the 16th of April, are in the

19 documentation that you could identify, and they are all

20 in the binders that you submitted.

21 A. That's correct.

22 Q. Could we now move on to the second overlay,

23 which covers May 1993?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Could you tell us, what is the meaning of

Page 14782

1 these different markings that you put here, and also

2 the source of the information on the basis of which you

3 made those markings?

4 A. Yes. This report is based on a report

5 produced in May 1993 by the Vitez Defence Office and

6 was a report on the organisation of the Viteska

7 Brigade. What is said is that the brigade was now

8 organised on a sector or territorial basis, and so this

9 map shows the actual sectors and the areas --

10 MR. KOVACIC: Your Honour, I'm sorry, but

11 it's better to clear that -- I presume that was a

12 mistake. The Defence Office, at least it was in the

13 translation, the Defence Office. We're talking about

14 the Defence Office, not the brigade; right?

15 A. The Vitez Defence Office.

16 JUDGE MAY: Yes. Well, you can clear that up

17 in cross-examination, Mr. Kovacic.

18 MR. KOVACIC: Thank you.

19 A. And this --

20 JUDGE MAY: Yes.

21 A. -- it's not so much showing the front lines,

22 but it shows the areas which the sectors had, and these

23 sectors are also referred to in military orders of the

24 Viteska Brigade.

25 To show the first sector, sector 1, which

Page 14783

1 covered the area of Zabilje, Ograde, through to Jardol,

2 Divjak, and also Veliki Mosunj and Mali Mosunj; sector

3 2, the area of Krcevina, Krizancevo Selo, and

4 Dubravica, in this area [indicates]; sector 3 is the

5 area covering Santici, Nadioci, and Ahmici; sector 4

6 then covered the Kruscica area; and the final sector,

7 sector 5, covered the Zaselje and the Donji and Gornji

8 Veceriska area, which is shown there [indicates].

9 It's really -- although administrative

10 organisation shows how the brigade was started to be

11 organised -- being organised at the time.

12 Also shown on this one, ABiH front lines

13 which were still developing. So the area, ABiH front

14 lines to the north of Vitez; Krusica area to the south;

15 and then across from Novi Travnik. And that's the

16 information shown on this map.

17 Q. This reorganisation by sector, did it mean a

18 significant change as to the organisation which existed

19 in April, 1993?

20 A. What it shows and what it moves onto is the

21 subdivision of the brigade into four battalions. And,

22 really, that was achieved as the brigade increased in

23 size was able to subdivide.

24 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Lopez-Terres, when you come

25 to a convenient moment, we'll adjourn.

Page 14784

1 Would that be the most convenient as any?

2 Perhaps I could just clear that with the

3 witness. The numbers, the Roman numbers that we have,

4 is that the battalion, Mr. Elford?

5 A. Those are the --

6 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, for

7 Mr. Elford. Microphone is not switched on.

8 A. The numbers given are the sector numbers.

9 The battalion numbers will be shown on the next, the

10 final map of the Vitez area.

11 JUDGE MAY: Thank you. Very well. We'll

12 adjourn now. Half past 2.00.

13 --- Luncheon recess taken at 1.00 p.m.













Page 14785

1 --- On resuming at 2.38 p.m.

2 JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Lopez-Terres.

3 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: [Interpretation]

4 Q. Mr. Elford, before we end the examination,

5 you have given us explanations and comments on the

6 maps, on May 1993, and the division into sectors of the

7 region.

8 I should now like you to tell us which would

9 be your comments on the map that you drew for the month

10 of July 1993, and the third overlay.

11 A. Yes. The final overlay really shows the HVO

12 front line as it was from about July 1993 onwards, and

13 also it shows an estimation of the split of the Viteska

14 Brigade into the battalions and the areas held by those

15 battalions.

16 This line, as you can see, is very similar to

17 the lines demonstrated by the orders in the preceding

18 charts. So the HVO lines were given in black, and we

19 then show -- the HVO battalion divisions are shown by

20 dotted lines within the Vitez pocket.

21 So if we look at the areas held by the

22 battalions, the 1st Battalion, commanded by Ante

23 Bertovic, was initially responsible for the sectors 2

24 and 3, which are mentioned on the previous chart, and

25 this was based in Dubravica. So its area of

Page 14786

1 responsibility included Krcevine, the area to the south

2 of Sivrino Selo, Pirici, Ahmici, and Nadioci.

3 To the north of this was the 2nd Battalion,

4 commanded by Zarko Zaric, and its area of

5 responsibility included Nova Bila, Zabilje, and the

6 Jardol area, this area [indicates].

7 The 3rd battalion was commanded by Karlo

8 Grabovac, and its area of responsibility included

9 Rijeka and Kruscica, in this area [indicates].

10 The 4th Battalion was commanded by Ivica

11 Drmic, and its area of responsibility included Zabilje,

12 and then Gornji and Donji Veceriska.

13 The green line shows the ABiH front line, but

14 I think the most important line to note is the black

15 HVO positions, which, perhaps, show the extent of the

16 positions held by the HVO. I can't really show the

17 changes of time on the focus of the ABiH attack and the

18 various attacks which changed over time.

19 What's also shown, as well as the area of

20 responsibility of the Viteska Brigade in the centre, is

21 the Nikola Subic-Zrinjski Brigade area to the south of

22 Vitez, in the Busovaca area; the area of the Stjepan

23 Tomasevic Brigade in Novi Travnik; and then also

24 included in this area is the positions held by the

25 Frankopan, and also remnants of the Travnicka Brigade.

Page 14787

1 And that's really the information shown on

2 this map.

3 Q. Thank you for this last explanation. I think

4 that you may be seated for the moment.

5 In the body of your report, as we mentioned

6 this morning, you indicated certain information

7 regarding the strength of the various brigades which

8 were deployed on the ground. You spoke about 18

9 brigades of the Bosnian army first, which was then

10 reduced to 17 in July 1993. You also spoke about 12

11 HVO brigades in the month of April, which was reduced

12 to nine in July.

13 You gave certain figures, and I would like to

14 ask you to go back to those figures appearing in your

15 report, to take them one after another, and to

16 indicate, if possible, what was the source of your

17 information. Of course, you will be confirming the

18 figures appearing in the report.

19 A. Yes. The primary source for these figures,

20 which I'll read out, first of all, for the ABiH, came

21 from ABiH sources, and then these were compared against

22 also reports produced by the HVO, including an

23 assessment produced by Colonel Blaskic. I'll go

24 through these in perhaps the order they appeared on the

25 map.

Page 14788

1 We have the 301st Mechanised Brigade, which

2 was based in Vitez, and the figures I give are for

3 April 1993, and this had approximately 1.800 men; the

4 303rd Brigade was based in Zenica, and this brigade had

5 approximately 1.400 men; the 304th Brigade, based again

6 in Zenica, had approximately 1.800 men; the 7th Muslim

7 Brigade, which had its headquarters in Zenica, had

8 approximately 1.100 men in April 1993; the 306th

9 Mountain Brigade had approximately 1.320 men; the 312th

10 Motorised Brigade had approximately 2.500 men; the 17th

11 Brigade, which was headquartered in Travnik, had

12 approximately 900 men in April 1993; the 308th Brigade

13 had approximately 1.520 men; based in the Vitez area

14 was the 325th Brigade and had 1.150 men; the 333rd

15 Mountain Brigade had approximately 1.450 men; also

16 shown on the map was the 305th Brigade, which was based

17 in Biljesevo -- and at that time, it appears to be

18 reformed, originally based in Jajce, then moved to

19 Gornji Vakuf, and then the remnants were moved to

20 Biljesevo -- and the figures vary from between 50 and

21 up to 400 men in this period.

22 It is not clear when this brigade reached

23 full strength, but then later in 1993, it was deployed

24 around Central Bosnia, once it reached full strength.

25 The 309th brigade was based in Kakanj, and in

Page 14789

1 April '93 had approximately 2.500 men.

2 Also shown on the map were the 302nd and the

3 304th Brigade. They were based in Visoko, and the

4 304th based in Breza. But we don't have figures for

5 those brigades.

6 Also mentioned in the Sitrep by Colonel

7 Blaskic, but not shown on the map, the ABiH Patriotic

8 League and the Green Legion, which we don't have

9 figures for these units, and the reports available

10 suggest they are actually the forerunners of some ABiH

11 units and were later subsumed into these units.

12 Also shown on the map, 307th Brigade based in

13 Bugogno, which had approximately 2.500 men in April

14 '93. 307th in Gornji Vakuf, approximately 2.000. The

15 318th in Vidovici in April had approximately 8.100

16 men. And the 319th Mountain Brigade based in Zepce,

17 which in this period had approximately 1.540 men.

18 Q. Could you please tell us now about the HVO

19 units.

20 A. -- figures for the units, which was shown on

21 the Central Bosnia disposition map. The initial

22 figures I'll give were taken from an ABiH source April

23 '93. Then they are also compared with HVO reports

24 from -- also from May '93, one from August, and then a

25 report which dates from about October to November '93,

Page 14790

1 late in '93. And they were used for comparison.

2 So the figure for April '93 is approximately

3 1.300 men. And this figure climbed throughout the

4 summer of '92. The highest source quoted came to 2.700

5 men, but sources from after that period, from August,

6 give a lower figure closer to 2.000.

7 The 2nd Tomasevic Brigade, based in Novi

8 Travnik, had approximately 1.200 men in April '93. The

9 Travnicka brigade --

10 Q. Just a moment, please. The first brigade you

11 were referring to, you didn't mention its name. You

12 were talking about the Viteska Brigade; were you not?

13 A. Yes, the first figure I gave for the HVO was

14 for the Viteska Brigade.

15 Just finish on the Travnicka brigade, which

16 had approximately 980 men in April '93. Initially

17 based in Dolac, close to Travnik, was the Frankopan

18 Brigade, which in April had approximately 1.680 men.

19 This figure was reduced when it was forced from the

20 Travnik area.

21 The Nikola Subic-Zrinski Brigade, based in

22 Busovaca, approximately 1.500 men in April '93.

23 The Jure Francetic Brigade, formed in Zenica

24 area, and in April -- the start of April it had

25 approximately 8.120, although this was dramatically

Page 14791

1 reduced after it was forced from the Zenica area. And

2 the figures for August '93 are close to 500 men.

3 The Kotromanic brigade based in Kakanj

4 initially had 950 men in April '93, and in June this

5 brigade, as I mentioned before, was pushed out of the

6 area and the remnants moved to the Vares pocket.

7 Bobovac Brigade was based in the Vares pocket

8 until November '93, and approximately 2.200 men.

9 The 111th Brigade in the Zepce area, sources

10 quoted up to 3.200. And Ban Josip Jelacic Brigade,

11 which operated in the Kiseljak pockets, at

12 approximately 1.600 men.

13 For the last three brigades, we weren't able

14 to compare all the figures with HVO figures, because

15 the reports quoted difficulties in our communications

16 to get the figures for those brigades.

17 Also shown on the map were the Eugen

18 Kvarternik brigade in Bugogno, which had approximately

19 1.200 men. They were driven from the town in July

20 '93. And Ante Starcevic Brigade, based in Gornji

21 Vakuf, approximately 1.000 men in April '93.

22 I have some figures for the other units,

23 which I mentioned before, which are not shown on the

24 map. These were from a variety of sources.

25 Vitezovi special forces units, which had up

Page 14792

1 to approximately 180 men. And that figure was given in

2 testimony during this trial.

3 Also mentioned the Tvrtko special forces

4 units, and that was listed in the HVO assessment of

5 having approximately 50 men.

6 The 4th battalion military police, throughout

7 Central Bosnia operational zone, and we have a listing

8 for that which gives a listing of 450 men.

9 Also mentioned, Ludvig Pavlovic Brigade, and

10 the Anto Bertovic Brigade. Ludvig Pavlovic reports 50

11 members of the brigade being sent to Central Bosnia

12 from Herzegovina. The Anto Bertovic Brigade had

13 elements based initially in Novi Travnik and then in

14 Gornji Vakuf and Zepce. And we know that the unit in

15 Zepce had between 100 and 130 men, which is probably a

16 similar number in the Gornji Vakuf area.

17 And that's all the brigades that were shown

18 on the map and the -- of the units in the area.

19 Q. I should like to focus for a moment on the

20 special units that you mentioned. The Vitezovi, you

21 indicated that their number could have reached up to

22 180 men. You said that this figure was derived from

23 testimony in this trial. You also examined a document

24 issued by that same unit, the Vitezovi in February

25 1994, and which refers to a figure variating between

Page 14793

1 120 and 140 men. Is that right?

2 A. That's correct, yes.

3 Q. I would like to indicate to the Chamber that

4 this document has already been admitted, and it carries

5 the number Z1380.

6 As regards a unit that was referred to

7 sometimes, that was called after its leader, the Zuti

8 unit. Was this an autonomous unit or did it belong to

9 a brigade?

10 A. From BritBat reports, said that it was part

11 of the Frankopan Brigade.

12 Q. You also learnt of your document signed by

13 Colonel Blaskic, introduced through a witness, Exhibit

14 Z1260.1, according to which the head of this unit,

15 Zarko Andric, was promoted in July 1993. And it says

16 in this document that he was the commander of a special

17 unit of the Frankopan Brigade. Is that the unit we are

18 talking about?

19 A. Yes, that was the BritBat assessment, that

20 was part of the Frankopan Brigade.

21 Q. Very briefly, on the last unit, the unit

22 called Maturice. Was that an autonomous special unit,

23 or did it belong to a brigade as well?

24 A. What I read, I believed that belonged to the

25 brigade based in Kiseljak, which is Ban Josip Jelacic.

Page 14794

1 Q. I should now like us to look for a moment at

2 the Vitez Brigade, more particularly. You told us that

3 you started several reports, which allowed you to set a

4 number to the strength of that brigade. And in your

5 report you said that there was an active component, or

6 a permanent component of this brigade. Could you give

7 us some indications and some information about this

8 permanent, active part of the unit?

9 A. Well, this active part that I mentioned, were

10 the members who were members of the HVO before the

11 Viteska Brigade was formed. The Viteska Brigade was

12 formed from a battalion of the Stjepan Tomasevic

13 Brigade and was based, I've seen a listing, based on

14 the people who were active members at the time. And

15 these active members were referred to in other reports

16 as being the first members of the brigade. I've seen

17 documents showing them being based in areas around the

18 brigade area of responsibility. And these are the

19 people who had been members of the brigade before. The

20 remainder were mobilised for the brigade to reach a

21 stronger strength.

22 Q. The documents that you are speaking about, I

23 am thinking about -- are you thinking about a list

24 which is Z505? I believe that's the number.

25 A. Which was the listing of the original members

Page 14795

1 of the brigade.

2 Q. Yes, that's right.

3 A. Yes. So that that --

4 Q. The second battalion, at the time the second

5 battalion of the Stjepan Tomasevic Brigade, which was

6 the active part?

7 A. Yes. These were the people who were members

8 of the brigade before the large scale mobilisations of

9 April '93.

10 Q. You also produced a document on which we see

11 the strength of that first battalion with the locations

12 where they were deployed; that is, in the case file

13 that you prepared. I think it is Z354, I think -- 534,

14 I believe it was.

15 A. This is a document that showed the original

16 companies of the brigade and the locations that they

17 showed, with approximately 90 to 100 men in each

18 company, which brings it close to that strength of

19 about 300 men.

20 Q. Do you have that document in front of you?

21 A. I just have to find it in the binder.

22 Q. If possible, since, in any case, this

23 document was already given to the Defence, would it be

24 possible for you to indicate the locations that were

25 targeted as those in which permanent and active members

Page 14796

1 of that brigade were set up?

2 This is Z653, I believe. I can give you my

3 copy, if you like.

4 A. I don't have an annotated document.

5 Q. I think that the document referred to your

6 footnote, number 74.

7 A. This is the document that showed the initial

8 companies. If I run through the areas, the 1st Company

9 had approximately 92 men --

10 Q. Continue.

11 A. -- for the areas of Nadioci --

12 JUDGE MAY: Just a moment. There's an

13 objection.

14 Yes, Mr. Kovacic.

15 MR. KOVACIC: No objection. Can it be placed

16 on the ELMO so we know what document we're talking

17 about, because there are some similar documents.

18 A. The 1st Company, Nadioci, Santici, and

19 Dubravica area, also in Poculica.

20 If we move down to the 2nd Company, which is

21 the area -- which is the 2nd Battalion area, Veliki and

22 Mali Mosunj, Jardol, Zabilje, and also in the Bila

23 area.

24 If we move down to the 3rd Company, in

25 Zaselje and the Gornji Veceriska area, and then also in

Page 14797

1 Krcevine area, covering the Stari Vitez area and the

2 central areas of Vitez, and also Gacice.


4 Q. The document is dated 14 April 1993; is that

5 correct? Is that correct? I think the usher has moved

6 it away a little bit too quickly. Is that the correct

7 date? The date is the 14th of April, 1993; is that

8 correct? Is that right? This document is the 14th of

9 April. I'm simply asking you to tell us the date of

10 the document.

11 A. That is correct, yes.

12 Q. The 14th of April.

13 On the document, you saw several names that

14 you've already mentioned as being those of future

15 battalion commanders, particularly that of Ivica

16 Drmic.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Thank you. We can take the document away

19 now.

20 Starting with that information about

21 personnel deployed on the front lines, what conclusions

22 do you draw from that, Mr. Elford, in respect of the

23 distribution of the forces?

24 A. We can see that the initial active components

25 were distributed in various areas around the area of

Page 14798

1 responsibility of the Viteska Brigade, and these areas

2 became areas where battalions were based as more men

3 were mobilised.

4 Q. In more general terms, and in view of all of

5 the information that you've presented in your report,

6 especially in respect of all of the brigades you spoke

7 about, what conclusions do you also draw in respect of

8 the distribution of forces? Some of these forces had

9 advantages over the others; is that correct?

10 A. Yes. I said initially, just for a comparison

11 of figures, you can see that there are larger ABiH

12 forces than HVO in the area. But we couldn't give a

13 very accurate assessment of that because as well as

14 taking into account the number of men involved in a

15 conflict, you needed to look at, amongst other things,

16 the equipment that they held, what their defenses were

17 like, what the morale and motivation of the men were

18 like.

19 Q. In the compilation of documents which you

20 prepared, you gave information which would lead one to

21 believe that the supplies of ammunition into Vitez were

22 relatively large throughout the conflict.

23 A. Yes. For the time period we were looking at,

24 up until July, we saw evidence of resupply, and also

25 manufacture of ammunition within the Vitez area. That

Page 14799

1 was particularly seen in the report of the Vitez

2 Defence Office, their assessment of the situation, in

3 September 1993, which refers to the production of

4 various munitions.

5 Also within the binder is one of the BritBat

6 reports, and it mentions the fact that the ABiH made

7 attempts to attack and cut the HVO supply routes

8 through Central Bosnia in June 1993, which suggests

9 that up until that time period, there had been a supply

10 route through to the Vitez area.

11 Then later on, looking at the BritBat

12 summaries, there are also various mentions of

13 helicopter resupplies, and this was particularly after

14 this period in June 1993. And we know that in

15 September 1993, the HVO were able to launch a

16 successful attack on the Stari Bila and Grbavica

17 feature, which suggested that they had the resources to

18 do that.

19 Q. You've just spoken about helicopter

20 resupplies. In the compilation which you produced,

21 there is a document about this, which is a milinfosum.

22 This is document Z1130.1, and the footnote is 71. It's

23 Z1130.1. These were eight helicopters. Could you tell

24 us what kind of helicopters these were, and what is the

25 transport capacity of this type of helicopter?

Page 14800

1 A. The report you're referring to included

2 the -- it's a report that concluded the information on

3 the Vares pocket. What the other reports mention is

4 that HIP helicopters were used, several variations,

5 which really have a capacity of up to 4.000

6 kilogrammes, which are attack/assault helicopters, but

7 also used for transport, transportation.

8 Q. These MI-8 helicopters were really transport

9 helicopters, is that true, rather than attack

10 helicopters or assault helicopters; is that correct?

11 A. In all that was mentioned, yes. The BritBat

12 reports refer purely to helicopters being used for

13 transport rather than referring to any helicopter

14 attacks.

15 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: [Interpretation] I would

16 like to say for the Trial Chamber, once again, that all

17 the references Mr. Elford mentions in his report are

18 easy to verify. The documents were attached in the

19 binder which was given to you, and to that binder, the

20 documents which were given to the Defence were also

21 indicated, given at the time when all disclosure was

22 made. For convenience sake, these documents could be

23 put together in the binder, because they refer more

24 specifically to the theme that Mr. Elford mentioned

25 this morning and this afternoon.

Page 14801

1 Q. Last point before we finish, Mr. Elford. As

2 regards the observations that you're making in respect

3 of the ratio which you established between the forces

4 on the ground, the conclusion that is at the bottom of

5 your report, are you also confirming that today?

6 A. The conclusion -- basically, we had to speak

7 in general terms because we had figures for the actual

8 members of the battalions and brigades, but less

9 information or confirmatory information on equipment

10 types and actual availabilities.

11 The conclusion -- what I said was where the

12 commanders were able to manoeuvre forces to create an

13 advantage, that's the places where we see that brigades

14 were destroyed. So in the Travnik area, where the ABiH

15 had a large advantage of men, were able to manoeuvre

16 men, they were able to push the Travnicka Brigade and

17 Frankopan Brigades out of that area. The same can be

18 seen in Kakanj, where the Kotromanic Brigade was pushed

19 out of that area by large ABiH forces. Whereas in

20 Zepce, we see that it's the HVO who were able to

21 manoeuvre forces to push the 319th Brigade from that

22 position. Whereas on the whole for the Vitez pocket,

23 because of the fact that it didn't fall over that

24 period of time shows that either the ABiH were unable

25 to manoeuvre such forces to secure a victory, or

Page 14802

1 perhaps shows that the forces in the area were more

2 balanced, and that's why they were unable to do that.

3 Q. Thank you very much. I have no further

4 questions, Mr. President.

5 Cross-examined by Mr. Sayers:

6 Q. Thank you, Mr. President. And good

7 afternoon, Mr. Elford. Sorry, the ELMO equipment is

8 between us.

9 We have not been provided with a curriculum

10 vitae, so I would like to find out a little bit about

11 your educational background.

12 Where were you educated, sir?

13 A. Start from a university?

14 Q. Yes.

15 A. The first degree at university was a

16 bachelors honour's degree in international relations

17 from the University of Keele in the United Kingdom.

18 Subsequent to that I took a master's degree in security

19 studies, which is again at the University of Keele in

20 the United Kingdom.

21 Q. Security studies you said?

22 A. Security studies. What used to be more

23 strategic studies, geophysical relationships between

24 states, the application of force. And study what areas

25 have been in conflict between states.

Page 14803

1 Q. And when did you go to Keele University to

2 acquire these two degrees?

3 A. I completed the first degree in June '92, and

4 the masters degree was finished in June '95.

5 Q. '95?

6 A. Awarded in June '95. So that completes the

7 degree in '94.

8 Q. And you went to work for the Prosecution, I

9 take it, in 1997. Is that what you said?

10 A. That's correct.

11 Q. And between 1995 and 1997, what is it that

12 you did for a living?

13 A. During that period I was mobilised by the

14 British army and spent the whole period producing

15 reports that related to the former Yugoslavia. And

16 that included a six-month tour with UNPROFOR, from

17 August '95 until January '96, based in Central Bosnia

18 area.

19 Q. Were you affiliated with a military

20 intelligence cell?

21 A. The people I worked with were -- were based

22 on a linguist working with highly linguistic ability.

23 So driving with them.

24 Q. You weren't actually involved in performing

25 military analysis during that --

Page 14804

1 A. During that period, we would look at the

2 information gained by them and produce -- provide an

3 analysis of that. And then that would be passed on.

4 Q. Did that include analysis of battalion

5 dispositions, brigade dispositions, force ratios,

6 things of that variety?

7 A. During the period we are looking at, '95, it

8 was more -- with intentions rather than dispositions

9 brigades, because at that time people knew them as well

10 as they needed to know. So that there wasn't further

11 research.

12 Q. All right. So would it be fair to say that

13 while you were attached to the British army, you didn't

14 actually prepare any studies of the type that you've

15 prepared for purposes of this case?

16 A. At the time period I worked in, was from '95

17 onwards, so we are dealing with current information

18 there.

19 Q. But the point I am making is that you were

20 never asked to, and you never did, prepare documents

21 along these lines which analysed the disposition of

22 brigades, their headquarters, force strengths,

23 equipment available to the warring factions, did you,

24 sir?

25 A. Not during this period.

Page 14805

1 Q. Now, it's true say, isn't it, that in April

2 of 1993 there was a very significant conflict that

3 erupted all over the Lasva Valley. Broadly speaking,

4 in the area of the Vitez-Busovaca pocket that you've

5 identified in later maps; is that right?

6 A. That's correct, yes.

7 Q. And the front lines were actually moving

8 quite a lot during that period, weren't they?

9 A. I said the front lines were quite fluid, yes.

10 Q. In fact, for any particular day in April, it

11 would be extraordinarily difficult to determine exactly

12 where the front lines were, because they were so

13 fluid. Wouldn't you agree with that?

14 A. Yes, it's difficult to work out where they

15 were.

16 Q. Now, the first map that you prepared, I

17 believe, unless my notes are wrong, Exhibit Z2612.2 A.

18 That only shows the front lines between -- actually, it

19 only shows the front lines between the Bosnian Serb

20 lines, the red lines that you identified, and then all

21 of the interior space, if you like, is really

22 undifferentiated space occupied by both Croats and

23 Muslims; is that right?

24 A. Essentially, yes.

25 Q. And then, for one reason or another, in April

Page 14806

1 of 1993, the Croats and the Muslims within that

2 enclosed area got to fighting among themselves, didn't

3 they?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And your map only shows the reputed ABiH

6 headquarters locations, with a flag to indicate the

7 brigade headquarters; is that right?

8 A. On the map -- asked for brigade areas, so we

9 had to show -- it's really brigade locations. But with

10 the understanding that the brigade would operate in a

11 wider area.

12 Q. All right. I wonder if I could just ask the

13 usher to put -- let us see Exhibit 2612.2 A, the first

14 map. Thank you.

15 Now, let me just take one example,

16 Mr. Elford, of one of the brigades under the command of

17 the 3rd Corps. And I believe -- let me digress for

18 just a minute. All of the green boxes, I think,

19 represent the headquarter locations of the various

20 brigades that you have concluded were directly

21 subordinated in the command and control chain to the

22 3rd Corps headquarters in Zenica; is that right?

23 A. Showing brigades, HQ's, or perhaps, in a way,

24 general locations, yes.

25 Q. But all within the command and control of the

Page 14807

1 3rd Corps headquartered in Zenica; is that right?

2 A. Most of the elements are 3rd Corps. 302nd,

3 304th, in the Visoko and Breza area, and possibly

4 attached to the 1st Corps, but for practical purposes,

5 because the 1st Corps headquarters were in Sarajevo,

6 coming under some authority of the 3rd Corps.

7 Q. So, effectively, each of the green boxes

8 represents brigade headquarters that were subordinated

9 in the chain of command to the 3rd Corps; is that

10 right?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. All right. And that includes, in the chain

13 of flags in Zenica, the 7th Muslim Brigade, correct?

14 A. Yes, 7th brigade was operating within the

15 area, this corps.

16 Q. And was directly subordinated to the command

17 of the 3rd Corps headquarters in Zenica, wasn't it,

18 under General Enver Hadzihasanovic; correct?

19 A. Yes. Really, I've shown the brigades

20 operating in this area, yes.

21 Q. Now, to get back to the question I was going

22 to ask you. Let's take a look around April the 16th

23 and 17th, 1993, for example. If we just take the 303rd

24 Mountain Brigade as an example. You've shown the

25 headquarters of that brigade in Zenica, but it's true

Page 14808

1 that significant numbers of the forces attached to that

2 brigade were actually fighting in the Putis, Jelinak,

3 Loncari area on those days; isn't that right?

4 A. From what I've seen, elements were in this

5 area.

6 Q. Could you just point out for the Trial

7 Chamber exactly where that would be, Putis, Jelinak and

8 Loncari.

9 A. [indicates] The area of the Kuber feature.

10 Q. That's the Kuber feature, isn't it?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. All right. And that's just immediately to

13 the east of Ahmici; is that right?

14 A. It's north-east.

15 Q. North-east. All right, sir. Let me just ask

16 you a few questions upon the sources of materials that

17 you have reviewed and upon which you have relied.

18 First and foremost, I take it, you've looked

19 at libraries of milinfosums for the pertinent BritBat

20 units, Operation Grapple 1, the Cheshires, Operation

21 Grapple 2, the 1st Battalion of the Prince of Wales own

22 Regiment of Yorkshire, and Operation Grapple 3, the

23 Coldstream Guards; is that right?

24 A. Yes, the BritBat reports come from all those.

25 Q. And since you were relying on these records,

Page 14809

1 especially since you were relying on them to make

2 conclusions over a long period of time, you had to make

3 sure that the records that you were relying upon were

4 full and complete; is that right?

5 A. Yes. And more comparing the information

6 there from other sources as well.

7 Q. Right. And you've reviewed European

8 Community Monitoring reports as well, I take it?

9 A. The reports have been available to us, but

10 the majority were based on the BritBat reports.

11 Q. All right. But just to -- a final question

12 on this. You had all of the pertinent milinfosums for

13 all of the pertinent periods, for the Cheshires, the

14 Prince of Wales Own and the Coldstream Guards; is that

15 right?

16 A. I've reviewed everything we had in house.

17 Q. Now, turning to your report, sir. The first

18 footnote refers to ABiH maps.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And there were two of them. And we've just

21 been provided with a copy of them at 11.35 today. I

22 take it, that these are reduced versions of the

23 original maps?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And that the tables that appear on the first

Page 14810

1 map, for example, are actually legible, because --

2 A. Yeah, the tables appear in A-4 size, so that

3 gives an indication of the scale of the original.

4 Q. And this is a map that comes from the Armija

5 BiH; is that correct?

6 A. That's correct.

7 Q. I take it, sir, that in arriving at your

8 decision concerning troop dispositions, brigade

9 headquarters, troop strength, and so forth, it would be

10 hard to imagine a source that's better to rely upon

11 than contemporaneous maps drawn by one of the warring

12 factions themselves; isn't that correct?

13 A. Yes, it was used to back up the other

14 information.

15 Q. Right. And this first map that you've

16 provided us with in reduced form, Z2802, actually

17 shows, if I might point out here, as I read the legend

18 on the bottom left-hand side, HVO forces manning the

19 front lines, It looks to the west of Travnik or

20 north-west of Travnik, and front lines to the

21 south-east of Novi Travnik; is that correct?

22 A. Yes. I mentioned before that the latest

23 reports we had some HVO units on the front lines in

24 June '93, which is after the period of the map.

25 Q. Yes, sir. I heard you say that. And this

Page 14811

1 map, Z2802, that comes from the ABiH itself, actually

2 confirms that. It shows HVO forces shoulder to

3 shoulder, if you like, with ABiH forces on the front

4 lines in the Travnik, Novi Travnik area, the front

5 lines with the Bosnian Serb army. And you would agree

6 with that, wouldn't you?

7 A. [Nods].

8 Q. Let me ask you this, sir. Have you actually

9 seen any other maps generated by the Armija of the BiH

10 other than these two?

11 A. Those are the primary ones which I have seen

12 of the maps, yes.

13 Q. Since you have referred in your testimony to

14 General Blaskic's trial testimony in the Blaskic case

15 and some of the exhibits in that case, I wonder if I

16 could just show you a map that we have, that appears to

17 be a Bosnian ABiH map, and ask you whether you've

18 consulted this in reaching your opinions.

19 Mr. President, these -- I have three versions

20 of the -- three copies of this map for the Trial

21 Chamber. I believe that the Prosecution already has a

22 copy, but we have an additional one, if it's

23 necessary. And I would just like the usher to put this

24 up on the board, if that's possible. Thank you. Thank

25 you very much. If we could just get an exhibit number

Page 14812

1 for this.

2 THE REGISTRAR: Number will be D189/1.

3 JUDGE MAY: Before you do, where do you say

4 you got it from, Mr. Sayers?

5 MR. SAYERS: This was Exhibit 77 in the

6 Blaskic case -- sorry, 77 in the Aleksovski case, and

7 Exhibit D196 in the Blaskic case. This was introduced

8 in open session, albeit with a confidential witness.

9 So I'm not --

10 JUDGE MAY: Very well.


12 Q. Let me just ask you, Mr. Elford. Would you

13 just take a second or two to cast your eyes over this

14 map. It comes, as I said, from the ABiH. And I would

15 just like to ask you if you've seen this one before.

16 Sorry, you may want to take your pointer,

17 because I have a couple of questions in connection with

18 this map.

19 First of all, have you seen it before?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. All right. As you can see, this shows ABiH

22 troop dispositions as of December 1992 to January

23 1993. And in blue, sir, I think you'll agree with me

24 that ABiH troop dispositions are shown; correct?

25 A. That is correct.

Page 14813

1 Q. Now, if you'd go to the area just west of

2 Vitez -- just east of Vitez, I'm sorry, as you travel

3 down the main supply route through Dubravica, and just

4 before you get to Nadioci --

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. -- do you see a blue circle there showing the

7 presence of ABiH forces in the area of Ahmici? And if

8 you do, could you just point that out to us all,

9 please.

10 A. [Indicates]

11 Q. Yes. So would that lead you to conclude, as

12 a military analyst, that the Armija BiH, in December of

13 1992 and January of 1993, had forces present in village

14 of Ahmici, or in that area, at that time?

15 A. There is something in that area shown, but no

16 indication of how many or what size or, in fact, who

17 they were subordinated to.

18 Q. And there's no indication of the size of

19 units or the number of troops present in any of those

20 units on any of this map, is there, sir?

21 A. Not at all.

22 Q. All right. Now, let me just ask you, have

23 you ever seen any documents at all that would suggest

24 that the units apparently stationed in Ahmici were ever

25 withdrawn by the Armija BiH from January 1993 to April

Page 14814

1 the 16th, 1993?

2 A. I haven't actually studied that area for this

3 time period.

4 Q. All right. One final document in this line

5 of questions that I'd like to show to you is the next

6 exhibit I would like to have marked, which is an order

7 dated April the 16th, 1993, an order to the 303rd

8 Mountain Brigade, signed by General Enver

9 Hadzihasanovic.

10 THE REGISTRAR: This document will be marked

11 D190/1.

12 MR. SAYERS: Thank you.

13 Q. Mr. Elford, we're going to have a copy of

14 this order put on the ELMO. There's a French version

15 of it in the back; the Croatian version is attached to

16 it. It's a fairly short order.

17 But it's an order dated April the 16th, 1993

18 to move out and to occupy positions, and as you can see

19 from the introductory language in the order, this is to

20 prevent surprises and attacks against the army of the

21 Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. What I'm interested in

22 is paragraph 1.

23 MR. SAYERS: I wonder if we could zoom in on

24 paragraph 1, please. Thank you.

25 Q. Now, the order here is to the commander of

Page 14815

1 the 303rd Brigade, to be prepared to provide assistance

2 to "our forces in the village of Putis, Jelinak,

3 Loncari, Nadioci, and Ahmici, and in the event of an

4 attack launched by the enemy, forcefully to repel it";

5 do you see that?

6 A. I see that line, yes.

7 Q. And that would lead you, as a military

8 analyst, to conclude that, in fact, the 3rd Corps had

9 under its command forces that were located in those

10 five villages; isn't that right, sir?

11 A. It says to provide assistance to those

12 villages, yes.

13 Q. And the question was, as a military analyst,

14 you would conclude that the 3rd Corps actually had

15 forces under its control and command in those five

16 named villages, and to which the 303rd Mountain Brigade

17 was ordered to provide assistance, if necessary, if

18 attacked; correct?

19 A. Yes, provide assistance to those areas.

20 MR. SAYERS: I'm through with that exhibit.

21 Thank you.

22 Q. One final question along these lines. Have

23 you been shown, or have you considered a statement of a

24 former TO commander in Ahmici by the name of Fuad

25 Berbic, which has been marked as Exhibit D13/2 in this

Page 14816

1 case?

2 A. I've seen elements from the report. I'm not

3 sure if I've read the whole transcript through.

4 Q. Were you aware that, in fact -- and there's

5 no need to put this on the ELMO, but I'm reading from

6 page 5 of the report, which is already in evidence --

7 that the level of alertness of the forces in Ahmici, on

8 the 15th of April, was increased by 50 per cent? Were

9 you aware of that?

10 A. I'm aware of that statement. I'm not sure if

11 I've -- I've probably seen other evidence which might

12 confirm or deny that.

13 Q. Were you aware that it was at the initiative

14 of the former TO commander in Ahmici, Mr. Fuad Berbic,

15 that trenches and a number of dug-outs had been dug,

16 and stricter discipline, alertness, and

17 combat-readiness enforced there?

18 JUDGE MAY: Is this to try and establish that

19 Ahmici was defended? Is this the idea? Is this the

20 purpose of these questions?

21 MR. SAYERS: The purpose of the questions is

22 to show that according to the ABiH records, Your

23 Honour, it appears that there was a unit, or forces in

24 Ahmici; that the village was, in fact, defended. Yes.

25 JUDGE MAY: And yet the result was what we

Page 14817

1 know about it.

2 MR. SAYERS: The result was, I regret to say,

3 what we know about it.

4 JUDGE MAY: A massacre.

5 MR. SAYERS: Yes, sir.

6 Q. But the point I'm making, sir, is that those

7 would lead you, as a military analyst, to conclude that

8 this village was not, in fact, completely undefended,

9 was it?

10 JUDGE MAY: Can you say, Mr. Elford? Before

11 you answer that question, you've merely been shown some

12 documents. Can you go any further than say that the

13 documents demonstrate that various orders were made?

14 What actually happened is presumably a matter for

15 evidence elsewhere.

16 A. It shows orders were made. Personally, I

17 haven't studied the action in Ahmici per se, and really

18 my study of the brigade dispositions has been purely

19 brigade dispositions, the headquarters locations, and

20 general areas of activity.

21 Q. All right. So let's turn to a different

22 subject. Your conclusions regarding ABiH troop

23 dispositions.

24 In terms of the analysis that you made of the

25 numbers of soldiers that were included in the various

Page 14818

1 ABiH brigades, I think that one of the principal

2 sources upon which you relied is contained at footnote

3 5 of your report; is that right?

4 A. Yes. Footnote 5 is a 3rd Corps report which

5 was produced to us after the event. Yes.

6 Q. All right. Now, I don't have any English

7 translation or a French translation of this report, and

8 I wonder, was one ever provided to you?

9 A. I've seen draft translations which shows that

10 the titling of the table is within the box.

11 Q. And I take it, sir, that you don't speak

12 Croatian yourself, do you?

13 A. No.

14 Q. Now, would you just turn to tab 5 of your

15 footnotes, this particular document upon which you

16 placed considerable reliance. What is the date of this

17 document, sir?

18 A. The document, as I said, was dated after the

19 events, in 1997.

20 Q. The date of the document is the 11th of July,

21 1997, isn't it?

22 A. That's correct.

23 Q. And that's four years, of course, after the

24 events at issue; right?

25 A. Yes.

Page 14819

1 Q. What steps did you take to ensure that the

2 numbers reflected on this report generated years later

3 were actually accurate?

4 A. Yes. We then compared them to available HVO

5 documentation, and I've also had testimony from other

6 cases where similar numbers -- numbering were used to

7 see how they matched up.

8 Q. All right. Did you consider the ABiH

9 brigades that were present in Kiseljak, Kresevo, and

10 Fojnica?

11 A. The starting point for the brigades were the

12 brigades which were shown from various BritBat

13 milinfosums and also HVO reports as being present there

14 at the time. I'm aware of other brigades, such as the

15 310th, which formed up in Fojnica, but I haven't seen

16 anything that said they were there in July 1993. They

17 were formed after the events. Similarly, other

18 brigades, such as the 27th Brigade, were in formation

19 as of July 1993, but the reports show that they weren't

20 effective until August of 1993, and so they haven't

21 been included.

22 Q. Did you decide to include TO units in your

23 troop disposition maps?

24 A. It was hard to show -- find any figures for

25 those, and perhaps with the assumption that they

Page 14820

1 perhaps were included within the other figures, there

2 might be additional numbers with those.

3 Q. You simply don't know, though, do you?

4 A. We didn't have figures for those, no.

5 Q. Right. Which means that you do not know

6 whether the TO units should be considered in addition

7 to the soldiers shown in the formal brigades or not;

8 isn't that right?

9 A. I thought, from what I read, that they

10 became -- or were subsumed into the other units. But

11 as for actual figures, we're not sure.

12 Q. You've talked about the special forces and

13 other units on the HVO side. What about on the ABiH

14 side, sir? How about the Black Swan special forces,

15 for example, the so-called Crni Labudovi? Did you ever

16 consider those?

17 A. I haven't seen reports on the Black Swans

18 being in the area consistently throughout the period.

19 Some of the earliest reports of the Black Swans I had

20 were in the Fojnica area, after June, after the time

21 period, and because they weren't mentioned in some of

22 the earlier HVO reports, then I wasn't sure if there

23 was a perception that they were in that time period.

24 Q. All right. Let's turn to one of the

25 component brigades that you identified, the 7th Muslim

Page 14821

1 Brigade. That was headquartered in Zenica, wasn't it?

2 A. Headquartered there, but operated over a

3 wider area.

4 Q. Right. That was actually known as a rapid

5 reaction unit, wasn't it?

6 A. I described it as a manoeuvre unit.

7 Q. What does a manoeuvre unit do?

8 A. Basically it would be used by the superior

9 commander to manoeuvre troops, to try and create

10 advantage in another area, either to stop an attack or

11 to give it an added advantage in another area.

12 Q. So an army commander would generally use this

13 rapid reaction force as shock troops, if you like, on

14 the front line of an area in which his forces were

15 engaged in offensive operations; isn't that right?

16 A. I'm not sure if they would be used as shock

17 troops, but definitely to provide extra troops.

18 Q. And you were aware that the 7th Muslim

19 Brigade was actually used as the principal offensive

20 component during the summer offensive launched by the

21 ABiH in the Travnik area; isn't that right? And, for

22 that matter, in the Kakanj area, in the same month.

23 A. Yes. I believe that elements of the 7th

24 Brigade were used in various locations throughout that

25 period.

Page 14822

1 Q. Mr. Elford, we've heard a lot of loose talk

2 about so-called Mujahedin in this case, but frankly,

3 the Mujahedin and the 7th Muslim Brigade are one and

4 the same, aren't they?

5 If you just turn to footnote 12 of your

6 report, it was a milinfosum dated the 27th of June,

7 1993, from the Prince of Wales Own, and at page 3 of

8 that milinfosum, right at the end, has a comment from

9 the military intelligence cell of the Prince of Wales

10 Own Regiment, which concludes that "We now believe the

11 7th Muslim Mountain Brigade and the Mujahedin to be one

12 and the same," and comments would be appreciated. That

13 was the conclusion of the BritBat, as far as you're

14 aware, isn't it?

15 A. That was the BritBat conclusion, and really I

16 didn't see -- I wasn't sure on numbering or if there

17 were any separate Mujahedin elements, and I've always

18 referred to the 7th Brigade as the 7th Muslim Brigade.

19 Q. All right, sir. The next question that I

20 have concerns one of your footnotes, footnote 46, and

21 this appears to be an order issued by General

22 Hadzihasanovic, basically reorganising the forces under

23 his command; would that be fair to say? Let me give

24 you a minute to turn to that. It's footnote 46.

25 A. Yes.

Page 14823

1 Q. I beg your pardon?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. It's page 6, I think, footnote 46, and

4 there's a reference to an order forming operative

5 groups within 3rd Corps?

6 A. Yes, that was the one that showed the

7 operative groups and mentioned the brigades in them.

8 Q. All right. And as I understand it, the 3rd

9 Corps organised itself into, it looks like, three

10 separate operative groups; is that right? The Lasva

11 operative group --

12 A. Four, I think.

13 Q. Four groups?

14 A. Lasva, the Zepce west, Bosnia and Bosanska

15 Krajina.

16 Q. The Bosanska Krajina operative group

17 consisted of the Muslim 7th Mountain Brigade, the

18 Krajina 17th Mountain Brigade and the Jajce 305th

19 Mountain Brigade, along with the 27th Motorised

20 Brigade; correct?

21 A. Yes. The reference for the 27th Motorised

22 Brigade, it appears from ABiH documents that it was

23 written down to be formed in an early period in '93.

24 But when we look at the BritBats and other reports, it

25 appears that it wasn't actually active until later in

Page 14824

1 '93, in about --

2 Q. Later --

3 A. Approximately August '93. The best reports,

4 its formation coming through from June, July.

5 Q. All right. I wonder if I could just show you

6 one document that might help jog your memory on this.

7 It's a milinfosum dated July the 10th, 1993, which

8 would have been within the time period covered by your

9 maps. Right?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. All right. From the Prince of Wales Own,

12 it's already been marked as Exhibit D121/1, and I

13 wonder if I could get the usher just to show you a copy

14 of it.

15 If you just turn to page 2 -- sorry, 3,

16 Mr. Elford, paragraph 10. There's a description of a

17 meeting between the commanding officer of BritBat and

18 Mehmed Alagic, who was the commander of the Bosanska

19 Krajina. And this revealed that General Alagic was in

20 command of approximately 12.000 BiH troops. Do you see

21 that?

22 A. I see that.

23 Q. All right. Did you take that into account in

24 conducting your force ratio analysis, sir, the 12.000

25 troops that were under General Alagic's command in the

Page 14825

1 Bosanska Krajina operative group?

2 A. -- we looked at the brigades, first of all,

3 and so taking that figure into account, but primarily

4 used the other sources.

5 Q. All right. And you could see from looking at

6 that document, I take it, that the strategic objective

7 of the Bosanska Krajina command was to capture the

8 remaining Croat enclaves of Vitez and Busovaca. Do you

9 see that?

10 A. Yes. The command was also used against the

11 Serbs in the -- to the west of Travnik.

12 Q. And the military activity that you monitored,

13 that was conducted by the Bosanska Krajina operative

14 group, was certainly consistent, in your view, with

15 that objective, to capture the Vitez-Busovaca enclave;

16 was it not?

17 A. Yeah, I stated that they operated throughout

18 the area.

19 Q. All right. Thank you. I am finished with

20 that document.

21 You gave some testimony, sir, regarding the

22 Green Legion. Do you remember that? And you

23 discounted the presence of Green Legion units

24 separately from ABiH units, and that was based

25 exclusively upon General Blaskic's trial testimony,

Page 14826

1 wasn't it? If you look at footnote 33 of your report.

2 A. It didn't have a figure for these units, and

3 I had to find out why I couldn't find anything on it

4 that gave any indication that they had been subsumed

5 into other units. Also mentioned, the Green Legion or

6 Patriotic League in the area of Zepce and the 319th

7 Brigade. I know that later on in time, after the 319th

8 had been pushed out of the Zepce area, it appeared to

9 use the nickname the Green Berries Green Legion, so

10 that added weight to the fact that they had been

11 subsumed into other units.

12 Q. Are you familiar with a special forces

13 detachment known as the El Mujahedin unit?

14 A. It's unclear to me whether that is a separate

15 unit, whether it is part of, as we mentioned before,

16 the Muslim brigade. But I have heard that terminology,

17 but never separate numbers for it.

18 Q. Very well. Were you aware that the El

19 Mujahedin unit actually consisted of about 1.000

20 soldiers?

21 A. I don't think I saw documentation showing it

22 as a separate unit of that size.

23 Q. Very well. Now, totting up the brigade

24 strength available to the 3rd Corps, just a numerical

25 calculation, an addition. It may be my mathematics are

Page 14827

1 faulty, but I came up with the number 25.680, and that

2 did not include detachments of the 302nd Brigade and

3 304th Brigade. Is that approximately your view of the

4 forces under the command, one way or another, of the

5 3rd Corps in the middle and latter half of 1993?

6 A. I figure, yeah, perhaps up to 30.000.

7 Q. And on page 6 of your report you specifically

8 addressed yourself to the question of subordination of

9 these units. And I believe that your conclusion was

10 that all of them, including the units which we've

11 discussed today, were subordinate to the 3rd Corps

12 command in Zenica. Right?

13 A. To this time period, because the ABiH corps

14 make-up changed over time, with additional corps being

15 formed. And also the areas of control of the corps

16 boundaries changing.

17 Q. All right. Let me turn your attention to one

18 other item. And this comes from one of the documents

19 that you referred to in your direct examination. And

20 it's footnote 71 of your report concerning ABiH troop

21 dispositions and front line determinations in the area

22 of Vares.

23 A. Yes. I have the report.

24 Q. I wonder if the usher could put a copy of the

25 last page of this on the ELMO. It's Exhibit Z1130.1.

Page 14828

1 Actually, I believe it's just been admitted today. Let

2 me give you my copy. It's probably the easiest thing

3 to do.

4 This is a milinfosum, number 155, from the

5 Prince of Wales own Regiment of Yorkshire, dated

6 September 30th, 1993. As far as you are aware, sir,

7 was the information contained in this milinfosum

8 accurate and reliable?

9 A. The information on Vares, I think -- I

10 believe came to them from another agency, from ECMMs,

11 who had been given the information from the commander,

12 the chief of staff of that brigade. When it's held up

13 to the map, it's roughly consistent and shows most of

14 the area, and the area where the BiH were to the south

15 of Stupni Do and also Jakovici.

16 Q. The trace actually does show an ABiH unit in

17 Stupni Do, doesn't it, surrounded, albeit, by HVO

18 forces?

19 A. Well, it says BiH. I think it's referring to

20 Bosnian Muslims within the village. I can't say it

21 refers to a military force.

22 Q. Are you aware that there were military forces

23 in Stupni Do?

24 A. I know --

25 Q. Sorry?

Page 14829

1 A. I know there were Bosnian Muslims within the

2 town -- to say whether they were military forces or

3 not.

4 Q. You weren't aware that there were at least 35

5 men of fighting age who manned defensive positions in

6 that village, and were under the command of people who

7 have testified before this Tribunal?

8 A. I haven't looked at the exact figures for

9 Stupni Do as part of this study, no.

10 Q. All right. Now, sir, in analysing the troop

11 strength of the HVO units in Central Bosnia, you

12 included two brigades that were not under the command

13 of the Central Bosnia operative zone, didn't you?

14 A. That is correct.

15 Q. -- Brigade and the Dr. Ante Starcevic

16 Brigade?

17 A. Yes. I showed the brigades for Bugogno and

18 for Gornji Vakuf, which -- because they are the

19 brigades on the map. We weren't showing the

20 operational zone boundaries.

21 Q. You would agree, though, that the Eugen

22 Kvaternik Brigade and the Dr. Ante Starcevic Brigade

23 were both under the command of Colonel Siljeg in the

24 north-west Hercegovinia operative zone?

25 A. I think at the time they had become part of

Page 14830

1 the north-west Bosnia operative zone, yes.

2 Q. Soldiers in those brigades were not available

3 to fight in the Vitez-Busovaca area, Vares, Kiseljak,

4 or Zepce, were they, as far as you know?

5 A. Well, in January '93, then there is evidence

6 of supplies moving between them, and, as I mentioned

7 before, the land supplies, but I don't believe it's a

8 period we are talking about. From April onwards they

9 were involved in Central Bosnia.

10 Q. Right.

11 A. It's shown there to show that the ABiH units

12 had responsibility against HVO units from a different

13 operative zone.

14 Q. And basically the ABiH obliterated the Eugen

15 Kvaternik Brigade in July and August and September of

16 1993 in Bugogno, correct?

17 A. Yeah, in a short period of time, yes.

18 Q. Similarly, the Dr. Ante Starcevic Brigade was

19 decimated by the ABiH in the same time period in Gornji

20 Vakuf; is that right?

21 A. It was forced from some positions in the

22 town, but they were able to receive support from

23 Hercegovinia itself.

24 Q. Now, I was a little -- maybe this is my

25 fault, but I didn't understand the sources upon which

Page 14831

1 you based your estimates of HVO troop strength. I

2 thought you said that one of the sources was the

3 assessment on the opposing side, the ABiH. Is that

4 correct?

5 A. -- an ABiH assessment, and then we also had

6 HVO assessments which gave a comparative figure, but

7 for a different time period.

8 Q. All right. The only HVO source that I could

9 find was the special assessment that Colonel Blaskic

10 actually filled out sometime in the late summer of

11 1993, and I believe that's footnote 64 of your

12 materials. I'm sorry to make you go back and forth

13 between your source materials, Mr. Elford, but this is

14 a somewhat significant point.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. With me? All right. If you could turn to

17 page 20 of that report. It actually contains an

18 assessment or a survey of troop strength, doesn't it?

19 A. That's correct.

20 Q. All right. Now, comparing the figures that

21 you've arrived at in your formal report here, you say

22 for the Viteska Brigade a troop strength of 2.700 in

23 July of 1993, but Colonel Blaskic's records say that

24 the troop strength is actually considerably lower than

25 that at 2172; correct?

Page 14832

1 A. Yes. I said earlier on that the highest

2 reported figure was 2.700, but for August, and also

3 again in the later period, it was a figure somewhere

4 about 2.000.

5 Q. All right. The troop strength estimates

6 contained on page 20 of Colonel Blaskic's 1993 troop

7 strength assessment basically give an evaluation of the

8 troop strength of the Viteska Brigade, the Travnicka

9 Brigade, Frankopan, Stjepan Tomasevic, Nikola

10 Subic-Zrinjski, Jure Francetic, Vitezovi, and the 4th

11 Battalion of the military police, don't they?

12 A. That's correct.

13 Q. All right. And according to Colonel

14 Blaskic's assessment, the 4th Battalion of the military

15 police contained only 150 soldiers, not 450, as you

16 stated in your report; is that right?

17 A. The figure of 450 is throughout Central

18 Bosnia and included elements in places such as Zepce,

19 Kiseljak. So I think this figure is purely for the

20 Vitez pocket itself.

21 Q. By the way, there's no question that the 4th

22 Battalion of the military police was under the command

23 and control of the Central Bosnia Operative Zone

24 generally, and Colonel Blaskic particularly, is there?

25 A. I haven't put a great deal of study into that

Page 14833

1 part of it, but that appears ...

2 Q. As a military analyst, you would conclude

3 that that is the case, wouldn't you?

4 A. I think that's one for -- for the -- it's

5 something which came up within other trials which I

6 haven't looked at yet.

7 Q. How about the Vitezovi? There's a figure of

8 75 mentioned in Colonel Blaskic's report. Do you have

9 any reason to conclude that that figure is not

10 accurate?

11 A. That's why I gave the figure up to the high

12 figure of 180, which came out in court testimony.

13 Q. All right. Well, totting up the figures in

14 your -- excluding the Edvard Kvaternik Brigade and the

15 Dr. Ante Starcevic Brigade, totting up the figures that

16 you've given in your report for troop strengths, I come

17 up with a number of about 10.513.

18 Let me just put it to you, you can do the

19 mathematics yourself, but the contemporaneous estimate

20 given by Colonel Blaskic is actually 6.820. Does that

21 sound out of line to you?

22 A. The figure 10.000 sounds -- that figure

23 sounds within line, yes.

24 Q. All right. Just two matters of detail. You

25 dealt with members of the Ludvig Pavlovic detachment

Page 14834

1 and stated that they came from Herzegovina, apparently,

2 but that conclusion was based only upon General

3 Blaskic's testimony, wasn't it?

4 A. And also in witness testimony to the

5 arrival -- I mean, we're not clear on the time period

6 they stayed for. But from January of 1993, it appears

7 that they were in the area.

8 Q. Right. But you have no information that any

9 members of the Ludvig Pavlovic Brigade or the Bruno

10 Busic Brigade were in Central Bosnia in April of 1993,

11 do you, sir?

12 A. Well, the Ludvig Pavlovic and Bruno Busic,

13 there were elements in Novi Travnik, then also in

14 Gornji Vakuf. We're not sure if that's the same

15 elements or not that moved to Gornji Vakuf.

16 Q. But you don't know how many.

17 A. No.

18 Q. Did you have occasion to determine who the

19 brigade commanders were in the performance of your

20 duties at all, or was that something that you did not

21 pay attention to?

22 A. I've come across them, but I haven't

23 committed them to memory because they were not part of

24 the report that we've given.

25 Q. Now, sir, looking at pages 7 and 8 of your

Page 14835

1 report, it looks to me as if the HVO suffered fairly

2 serious attrition in seven of the eleven brigades;

3 would you agree with that?

4 A. Perhaps if I say the --

5 Q. Let's go through them one by one.

6 A. Looking at the figures we were given for

7 April 1993, the assessment we had was for later in

8 1993, and that was -- you see that the Travnik Brigade

9 has some variation; the Frankopan, there is a large

10 variation, and we know that is the brigade that was

11 forced out of the --

12 Q. Let's just take them one by one, if we can do

13 so, in short order. The Edvard Kvaternik Brigade, it's

14 not the Eugen Kvaternik, it's actually the Edvard

15 Kvaternik Brigade, isn't it? Is that right?

16 A. Yes. I've seen both spellings, both

17 variations.

18 Q. This brigade, as we know, was basically

19 eliminated in the fighting around Bugojno, in the late

20 summer of 1993; would you agree with that?

21 A. Pushed from Bugojno, and then the remnants

22 were moved from the Central Bosnia area.

23 Q. When you say "pushed," is that a military

24 euphemism for defeated?

25 A. Defeated by the ABiH, yes.

Page 14836

1 Q. The Travnicka Brigade was also pushed or

2 defeated in Travnik, in June of 1993, wasn't it?

3 A. Yes. It moved in reduced strength to the

4 Vitez pocket.

5 Q. In other words, the stragglers that were left

6 after the military defeat moved into the area of

7 responsibility of the Viteska Brigade and tried to

8 reform.

9 A. I don't know if "stragglers" is the right

10 terminology, because looking at the Blaskic figures for

11 later in the year, we see a figure of 870, so that's a

12 reduction of just over a hundred, whereas for the other

13 brigades, it was a larger reduction.

14 Q. All right. Now, the Kotromanic Brigade in

15 Kakanj was basically defeated in the middle of June of

16 1993, simultaneously with the defeats of the Travnicka

17 and Frankopan Brigades; would you agree with that?

18 A. That's correct.

19 Q. The Jure Francetic Brigade in Zenica was

20 basically eliminated, all but a couple of hundred

21 soldiers, in April of 1993, wasn't it?

22 A. That's correct. Reduced to approximately

23 about 400 troops, is the figure given.

24 Q. And the Bobovac Brigade, sir, in Vares was

25 basically defeated in early November of 1993 and

Page 14837

1 ejected from the town; right?

2 A. That's correct.

3 Q. Just a few questions about the Zepce forces,

4 sir. The front lines in Zepce were actually pretty

5 much around the town of Zepce itself, weren't they?

6 A. Sorry. The front line that has been shown?

7 Yes. Basically, a line to the south of Zepce that cut

8 off the ABiH positions to the north of it, and

9 [indiscernible] Zavidovici.

10 Q. You mentioned the towns of Zepce and the town

11 of Zavidovici, just about four or five kilometres to

12 the north-east, I think. Zavidovici was an ABiH

13 enclave, if you like, wasn't it?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And Zepce was an HVO enclave; right?

16 A. There's a Muslim brigade based in the town as

17 well, so I am unclear about the time.

18 Q. I was referring to after the defeat of the --

19 the Muslim Brigade in Zepce became a Croat enclave

20 essentially, didn't it, or an HVO enclave.

21 A. That was not part of this report, but from

22 what I've seen, I'm not quite sure we've got an

23 enclosed enclave. But we know that the Muslim brigades

24 to the north of that town were cut off by the Muslim

25 Brigades -- by the HVO.

Page 14838

1 Q. In your report, sir, at page 9, paragraph 30,

2 you make the contention that Colonel Blaskic's

3 assessment that we've referred to in footnote 66 of

4 your report, his assessment of artillery strength did

5 not include the weapons holdings of the HVO Mixed

6 Artillery division. But could you take a look at page

7 24, sir, of his report -- his special assessment.

8 You'll see that in paragraph 6 of that special

9 assessment, he, in fact, does include the mixed

10 artillery division, doesn't he?

11 A. The actual ratio of forces, further back,

12 that divides it by area, and those figures actually tie

13 in with the brigade figures.

14 Q. Could you just tell us how many, for example,

15 the total number of 203-millimetre shells that were

16 available to the Central Bosnia Operative Zone,

17 according to General Blaskic's -- or Colonel Blaskic's

18 special assessment in the summer of 1993.

19 A. It states that there was one artillery piece

20 with one shell.

21 Q. One shell. All right. And the

22 120-millimetre units, the 120-millimetre mortars, how

23 many shells did the Central Bosnia Operative Zone have

24 in total for that, for that piece? It was none, wasn't

25 it?

Page 14839

1 A. The mortar?

2 Q. Yes.

3 A. 120-millimetre, yes.

4 Q. No shells, right?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. In connection with the testimony that you

7 gave regarding ammunition supplies, could I just ask

8 you to take a look at one of the last documents that

9 I'd like to have marked here as an exhibit. That's a

10 milinfosum from the Prince of Wales Own Regiment,

11 number 92, dated July the 30th, 1993?

12 THE REGISTRAR: The document will be marked

13 D191/1.


15 Q. Mr. Elford, the paragraph I'd like you to

16 review is number 2, under "Vitez." Just one

17 preliminary question.

18 You were aware that there was an explosives

19 factory located in Vitez itself, that manufactured the

20 explosive components of an artillery shell; correct?

21 A. I was aware of that.

22 Q. But the factory did not actually manufacture

23 the shell itself, the hard casing, or the detonators,

24 did it?

25 A. No, the explosives factory.

Page 14840

1 Q. Now, this milinfosum contains the comment

2 that while supplies of explosive are relatively

3 plentiful, the level of general munitions is running

4 down due to the inability of resupplying the area, but

5 necessity is the mother of invention. Fuses can always

6 be brought in on the periodic helicopter flights into

7 the area.

8 Did you consider this document when you came

9 up with your conclusions that, in 1993, artillery

10 ammunition was plentiful, in your view?

11 A. Is plentiful the word I used? I said there

12 were problems with supply, but equipment supplies were

13 available. That's what I said for the whole thing,

14 concluding the force ratio is -- you need to know the

15 exact figures, and the exact figures aren't available.

16 But what I had also looked at was reports from the

17 Defence Office, which gave -- reports about the

18 production of supplies during that period, and they

19 talk about numbers of rocket launchers completed,

20 numbers of shells completed, also gun powder produced

21 for the Republic of Croatia, which suggests that there

22 was some form of construction going on, some form of

23 resupply.

24 Q. Mr. Elford, though, you would agree with me

25 that there were actual figures available for the latter

Page 14841

1 half of 1993, and they came from no less of an

2 authority than Colonel Blaskic himself, in his special

3 assessment that you relied upon in your report; right?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Have you any information to lead you to

6 conclude that the recitation of shells available per

7 gun, arranged by brigade, are inaccurate?

8 A. What is not given, though, was any levels

9 of -- any equipment holding. Yes, we take the figures

10 as being accurate, but I don't know what other supplies

11 there were or what form of replenishment there was.

12 Q. So what you're saying is you have no reason

13 to believe that Colonel Blaskic's figures are

14 inaccurate, but that there may be other figures that

15 should be taken into account. You just don't know what

16 they are.

17 A. I believe there are other figures to take

18 into account, yes.

19 [Trial Chamber confers]

20 JUDGE MAY: Now, Mr. Sayers, have you got

21 very much more, please.

22 MR. SAYERS: About two minutes, Your Honour.

23 JUDGE MAY: Very well.


25 Q. Sir, in your report, at page 10, you make

Page 14842

1 some observations regarding the fighting that occurred

2 at Krizancevo Selo, just before Christmas 1993 --

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. -- and you conclude that there were no

5 casualties there. But let me just ask you whether

6 you've read the testimony of Colonel Williams in this

7 case, or Witness Z that described about 60 or 70 HVO

8 dead during the fighting, just before Christmas of that

9 year?

10 A. It's not clear if this report was referring

11 to what's been described as the massacre at Krizancevo

12 Selo. I take it it's referring to a particular attack

13 on a particular day. I'm not sure if that is the same

14 one. And the report said that the attack was stopped,

15 and this was achieved because of the result of

16 artillery support.

17 Q. So you're not saying that the HVO did not

18 suffer 60 to 70 casualties at Krizancevo Selo

19 immediately before Christmas of 1993.

20 A. I haven't referred to that in this report.

21 Q. Very well.

22 And my final question is, as far as you're

23 aware, there were no HV units or detachments deployed

24 anywhere in the Busovaca/Vitez pocket, Kiseljak pocket,

25 Vares pocket, or Zepce pocket, were there?

Page 14843

1 A. I haven't studied -- I don't know if there

2 were enough to record -- looking at brigade-sized units

3 to start off, I haven't seen reports of anything of

4 that size, no.

5 Q. Or any battalions of HV forces located in any

6 of those pockets, as far as you're aware, were there?

7 A. Not that I've seen in preparing this report.

8 MR. SAYERS: Thank you very much, indeed,

9 Mr. President. That concludes my questioning.

10 JUDGE MAY: Thank you.

11 Mr. Kovacic, we're going to have to adjourn

12 now because we have some ex parte matters to deal

13 with.

14 How long do you anticipate being with this

15 witness?

16 MR. KOVACIC: I guess within one hour or so,

17 I will be done. It's difficult to say, Your Honour,

18 because within that --

19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for

20 Mr. Kovacic.

21 MR. KOVACIC: I guess not more than one

22 hour. I'm sure it will be even a little bit less than

23 that, because my colleague took several of my

24 questions.

25 JUDGE MAY: Very well.

Page 14844

1 MR. NICE: Can I detain you for a couple of

2 minutes, just to deal with a couple of administrative

3 matters, bearing in mind that we're not meeting

4 tomorrow.

5 JUDGE MAY: Yes. As far as Mr. Elford is

6 concerned, would you be back, please, on Thursday

7 morning, half past nine, to conclude your evidence.

8 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.

9 JUDGE MAY: Don't speak to anybody about your

10 evidence meanwhile, of course, until it's over.

11 MR. NICE: Perhaps in order to save time, and

12 as Mr. Elford is collecting himself to withdraw, can I

13 run through the administrative matters which don't

14 concern him.

15 Just as a matter of fact, we only lately

16 discovered that we aren't -- that is, the Prosecution

17 only lately discovered that we're not scheduled to sit

18 next Thursday and Friday, and we are making adjustments

19 to deal with that, so far as we can.

20 JUDGE MAY: Pausing there. It was announced

21 some time ago, but if there is difficulty, because we

22 must finish by the 10th of March, the Trial Chamber

23 will be prepared to sit later on various evenings in

24 order to expedite matters, if that assists.

25 MR. NICE: Thank you. There will be an

Page 14845

1 application for a subpoena that's already been signed,

2 the application, and I'll hand that in this afternoon,

3 and I would be grateful if the Chamber could possibly

4 find time to consider it.

5 The Chamber didn't make, I think, a decision

6 about witness -- the sick witness --

7 JUDGE MAY: Number 8, no.

8 MR. NICE: Yes.

9 JUDGE MAY: We're going to deal with various

10 matters in due course.

11 MR. NICE: Thank you. Can I indicate, by way

12 of advance notice, that in light of changes for

13 witnesses in Bosnia and Zagreb, I'm going to make an

14 application, which is necessarily provisional, for

15 videolink facilities, and I'm going to suggest Monday,

16 week, Sarajevo; Wednesday, week, Zagreb. That, if it's

17 possible, will enable the relevant people to travel

18 over the weekend to be in Sarajevo on the Monday,

19 travel on the Tuesday, be in Zagreb on the Wednesday.

20 The timetable of evidence and applications

21 for this week is that on Thursday, Mr. Spork -- there's

22 a schedule that's associated with his evidence.

23 Perhaps I can have that distributed for the Chamber in

24 advance.

25 We can also on Thursday and Friday deal with

Page 14846

1 the binders for Kiseljak, Vitez, Novi Travnik, and

2 Ahmici.

3 There's the question of outstanding videos

4 that can conveniently be discussed, there are differing

5 views about that.

6 The tape, it seems to me that the time has

7 come when it simply might save time for me to call the

8 language assistant, who has been in a position to

9 listen to the tape and prepare the amended transcript,

10 and I'll seek to do that, as necessary, on Thursday or

11 Friday.

12 The witness whose statement -- the deceased

13 witness whose statement was admitted by order of the

14 Chamber yesterday was taken by an investigator, who is

15 available here -- she's certainly available on

16 Thursday, I'm not so sure about on Friday -- and I

17 accordingly tender her, so that if there's any question

18 of impropriety being alleged in relation to the taking

19 of that statement, that matter can be dealt with. And

20 if the Defence would be good enough to let me know if

21 they want me to call her, I will make appropriate

22 arrangements, subject to restrictions of time.

23 On Friday, it may well be, if we have time,

24 that I'll call the witness who can deal with the

25 production of exhibits generally. The Chamber will

Page 14847

1 remember that there's a big schedule served with

2 various annotations on it, helpfully placed there now

3 by the Defence, but it may be that to take that witness

4 this week, and for him to deal with the generality of

5 matters, would be helpful, although, of course, the

6 parties -- we are certainly available tomorrow to

7 negotiate with the Defence, if that would help matters,

8 as we're not otherwise sitting.

9 And finally, can I inform the Chamber that

10 the transcripts admitted last week have been collected

11 together; they occupy two binders. The process of

12 annotating them will take some time. I think I was

13 regarded as reckless by my colleagues in making the

14 promise I did, but I stand by my promises, especially

15 when they are responsive to a request from His Honour

16 Judge Bennouna.

17 But I simply say, to have them fully

18 annotated and distributed is undoubtedly going to take

19 until the end of next week, I would have thought, at

20 the earliest. We are entirely in the Chamber's hands,

21 if it would rather have the material unannotated in

22 advance. If so, we'll send them out to copying.

23 JUDGE MAY: Well, I think it's best to stick

24 to the annotations, speaking for myself.

25 Yes. Now, we are anxious to get on.

Page 14848

1 MR. KOVACIC: Your Honour, we have been

2 ordered to advise the Court on four witnesses and also

3 some which were put in the category of negotiation with

4 the Prosecution. I am talking about the transcripts.

5 I just wanted to tell you that I am ready to do so. So

6 it is not that we are delaying the issue. We are

7 ready. Whenever you ask, we can provide the answers.

8 JUDGE MAY: Very well.

9 MR. KOVACIC: We can do that tomorrow

10 morning --

11 JUDGE MAY: Well, Thursday. Sometime on

12 Thursday we'll deal with that.

13 MR. KOVACIC: Okay.

14 JUDGE MAY: We are now going to adjourn for

15 quarter of an hour. We shall then sit for what I hope

16 will be a brief ex parte session.

17 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned

18 at 4.28 p.m. for an Ex Parte Hearing








Page 14849