041001ED

Page 6466

1 Q. Thank you.

2 A. Therefore, the SDS, as a political party, wanted, exclusively

3 wanted, to divide the country.

4 Q. Thank you.

5 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

6 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Karagiannakis, it seems that the matter has been

7 clarified. At the same time, a redaction will be made, in view of the

8 answer.

9 Ms. Loukas, are you ready to cross-examine the witness?

10 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, thank you, Your Honour.

11 Cross-examined by Ms. Loukas:

12 Q. Good morning, Witness 048.

13 A. Good morning.

14 Q. Now, Witness, in view of the fact that there are protective

15 measures in relation to your evidence, could you please let me know if

16 you're about to say something that might reveal your identity, so that we

17 can go into private session. Do you understand?

18 A. I understand.

19 Q. Now, Witness, just in relation to your statement taken in August

20 1999 and November 1999, I wonder if the witness might be supplied with a

21 copy of his statement.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, could you please assist.

23 MS. LOUKAS: I think that's P303B.

24 Q. Now, Witness, I just want to confirm some matters with you there.

25 Firstly, of course, going to paragraph 15, you did not know how the SDS

Page 6467

1 functioned, of course; correct?

2 A. When I say that I do not know how it functioned, I meant the

3 organisation, the internal organisation of the party itself. I know that

4 the SDA had an assembly and Executive Board, as the executive body of that

5 assembly. Now, I don't know if the SDS had the same model. All I know is

6 that they had a president, and a president, and he was Miroslav Vjestica.

7 And I know that there was a narrow body of leaders, the members of which I

8 knew. Now, whether that was called the Executive Board or something else,

9 I really can't say. I don't know.

10 Q. Okay. Now, Witness, I'll be asking you a whole series of

11 questions of this nature, and when you can answer a question yes or no,

12 then please do so. If you need to elaborate, please elaborate. But you

13 may be aware that we are under quite some time constraints at this

14 Tribunal, so if we're going to get through the cross-examination today,

15 then it would be very useful if you could ensure that when you can answer

16 a question yes, please answer it yes; when you can answer a question,

17 please answer it no. If you need to elaborate, please elaborate, but

18 don't feel that you need to elaborate on every answer. Do you understand?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Now, going to paragraph 22 of your statement just in relation to

21 the Crisis Staff, of course, the situation is there that you did not

22 receive any informations about its workings and you do not know who its

23 members were; correct?

24 A. I did not receive information about its workings, but I did know

25 its members, the members of the staff.

Page 6468

1 Q. So when you say in your statement you did not know who its members

2 were, that's incorrect, is it?

3 A. When giving thought to this statement of mine, in actual fact, I

4 did have -- in communicating with Gojko Klickovic, I learnt of the

5 members, but I don't think that's a very relevant matter. So if you were

6 to ask me now or if you are asking me now whether I knew them, I could

7 enumerate at least three members of that staff.

8 Q. Okay. So you're saying that that portion of your statement is

9 incorrect?

10 A. Well, when I was giving the statement, I couldn't remember the

11 members. Now I can remember them.

12 Q. I see. So when you signed the statement and were asked if it was

13 true and accurate, the situation is now that that portion you say is not

14 true and accurate; correct?

15 A. You say it's not true. At this point in time, it is different.

16 So I now say that I can remember part of the staff members, and I can tell

17 you the people that I can remember. But at that point in time, when I was

18 giving the statement, I didn't pay special attention to that and I

19 couldn't remember who the people were who made up the staff. So what I'm

20 saying is that now I do remember who they were.

21 Q. Okay. So you're telling the Trial Chamber that when you gave the

22 statement in 1999, you could not remember, but now, in 2004, you can

23 remember; correct?

24 A. Yes. I do remember now. In 1999, I didn't attach any special

25 attention to the matter, to that point, and I didn't make the effort to

Page 6469

1 remember the members of the staff.

2 Q. So when Ms. Karagiannakis asked you yesterday whether your

3 statements were true and correct on oath, and you said they were, that is

4 in fact -- that now needs to be clarified by the fact that you say that

5 this aspect is not correct?

6 A. Madam, I can withdraw the statement now if you like, that portion

7 of it, and say that paragraph 22 is entirely correct because it's not that

8 important. I was just honest and telling you that now, when I think about

9 it, I do know some of the members that made up the Crisis Staff, because I

10 remembered it subsequently.

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 So 048, what are you saying is not important? Being correct and

14 accurate in your statement, or that this particular portion is not correct

15 and accurate?

16 A. This part of my statement, I didn't attach great importance to it.

17 So if you insist, I can stand by what I said and say that paragraph 22 is

18 completely correct, from the 1999 statement, and we can move on.

19 Q. Now, going to paragraph 23, Witness 048, you've indicated there

20 that Mr. Klickovic indicated to you that he had 5.000 armed men under SDS

21 control. Do you see that portion in paragraph 23?

22 A. Yes. I've found that.

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 6470

1 (redacted)

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You gave Madam Registrar some exercise this

3 morning. Please try to concentrate.

4 MS. LOUKAS: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour.

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 6471

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 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 6485

1 MS. LOUKAS:

2 Q. Do you have that map before you, Witness?

3 A. I owe you an apology. I was thinking of the present-day borders

4 of Bosanska Krupa, which are not identical with the borders and boundaries

5 that you're showing me on the map. In the pre-war Bosanska Krupa area,

6 there were three municipalities. So there was the Bosanska Krupa

7 municipality and the Krupa Na Uni and Buzim municipalities. So the

8 present area does not border on Kladusa, but the previous one did. So I

9 apologise for that.

10 Q. Yes. Thank you, Witness. Now, just going on to Velika Kladusa.

11 You were aware, of course, that there was an election rally in

12 Velika Kladusa in September 1990; correct?

13 A. Yes, I did know about that pre-election campaign.

14 Q. And that, of course, was the SDA rally?

15 A. Yes, that's right.

16 Q. Did you attend?

17 A. Yes, I did.

18 Q. And I think something like 200.000 people attended; correct?

19 A. I can't give you an estimate of the number of people that

20 attended, but there were a large number of people, yes.

21 Q. And you're aware, of course, that there were people there with

22 hundreds of green flags; correct?

23 A. Yes, I do know about that.

24 Q. And that there were people in Arabic dress?

25 A. No, there weren't any people like that. The Muslims in Bosnia

Page 6486

1 have their traditional clothing, which includes the red fez, and that's

2 what people wear to this day in Krajina.

3 Q. Okay. So people were wearing red fezzes, you say.

4 A. Some people, yes. But they were in the minority.

5 Q. And were there some people there with portraits of Saddam Hussein?

6 A. No, there weren't any people with portraits of Saddam Hussein, and

7 Saddam Hussein was no symbol at all for the Bosniaks, no kind of symbol.

8 Q. So if I were to tell you that this information in relation to

9 people in Arabic dress and portraits of Saddam Hussein came from the

10 Netherlands Institute for War Documentation, would that in any way change

11 your answer?

12 A. You're asking me what I saw, and I'm telling you what I personally

13 saw.

14 Q. Okay. Now, going back again to what you say in paragraph 9 about

15 the SDS election campaign. You are aware, of course, that Mr. Izetbegovic

16 was a guest of honour at the SDS inaugural event; correct?

17 A. Not only him -- you mean the SDS? Did you say SDS?

18 Q. Yes. The SDS inaugural event.

19 A. In Bosanska Krupa, you mean?

20 Q. No. The SDS inaugural event generally in Bosnia.

21 A. I'm speaking about the campaign in Bosanska Krupa.

22 Q. Okay. So you're not aware of the actual SDS inaugural event;

23 correct, more generally in Bosnia?

24 A. Partially. But I didn't go, and I wasn't a witness of those

25 events. All I saw was what was happening in Bosanska Krupa.

Page 6487

12 Blank page inserted to ensure the pagination between the English and

13 French transcripts correspond

Page 6488

1 Q. Okay. In any event, just dealing with your paragraph 9, where you

2 talk about the election campaign being fought aggressively by the SDS,

3 it's true to say, is it not, that all three ethnically based parties, of

4 course, fought their election campaigns aggressively, is it not?

5 A. We have to be objective here.

6 Q. That's what I'm asking you to be, Witness.

7 A. I also have the right to ask you to be objective and to say -- I'm

8 saying that the SDS -- the SDA party had no national symbols. It did not

9 have symbols under which, in the previous period, people suffered and fell

10 victim who were non-Bosniak. And it could not have given rise to fear and

11 disquiet amongst other ethnicities with the symbols it displayed, because

12 they were, if I can put it this way, newly composed, newly devised

13 symbols, the green flag where it says the SDA on it it wasn't all green.

14 There was a white background, a white area, and it was a symbol that

15 appeared for the first time in the history of the Bosniak people. It was

16 displayed for the first time. And the songs that were being sung were

17 patriotic songs linked to Bosnia-Herzegovina.

18 Q. What was the symbol of the SDS?

19 A. The symbol of the SDS was a double-headed eagle with the

20 sign -- four S-letter signs, in Cyrillic, and under that symbol, the

21 Bosniak people, in earlier times, had experienced suffering and fallen

22 victim. So they were afraid of that kind of symbol. Hymns were being

23 sung, "Boze Pravde," that hymn, and other songs, which we feel

24 uncomfortable when we hear.

25 Q. Wouldn't it be fair to say, Witness, that in terms of an

Page 6489

1 ethnically based election campaign, with three ethnically based parties,

2 that all three groups in Bosnia had issues arising from previous history

3 in relation to the other groups? That's a fair statement, is it not?

4 A. If you're referring back to history, then you must know that the

5 Muslim people, because the term "Bosniak" is of -- is a latter-day term,

6 but it's also an illustration where we stand as an ethnicity, and the very

7 troubled road that we traversed in arriving at the knowledge and present

8 situation. I'm a relatively young man, but there was a period in my life

9 of -- 18 years, in fact, when I was undetermined in my ethnic stance. I

10 was not allowed -- actually, I was not allowed to express my national

11 identity. So this question is a very important one, and it's important

12 for the Court to know about it. The process that the Bosniak people went

13 through in recognition of its own identity and in recognition of the state

14 of Bosnia-Herzegovina itself. So through history, we had ten genocides,

15 although, realistically speaking, we were never a danger to anyone, never

16 presented a danger to anyone. I was the head in 1998, and I -- as the

17 chief, I was able to talk to international representatives, and some

18 people -- some of them were prone to equate the blame and share the blame

19 amongst all the three ethnicities. I can accept that, but realistically

20 speaking, the Bosnian side was the only side that, realistically speaking,

21 had absolutely no chance in this war. And anybody with an honest attitude

22 to this issue and question will agree with that fact.

23 Q. Okay. Do you think that perhaps it's just possible, Witness, that

24 it's a little difficult for you to be objective in your answers,

25 considering the opinion you hold?

Page 6490

1 A. No, I don't think it is difficult for me to be objective, because

2 in our country we have an expression which says you have to put on a

3 lambskin -- you're putting on a lambskin to make the wolf afraid. So

4 regardless of the campaign, realistically speaking, it didn't carry much

5 weight. We were a lamb in sheep's clothing. And Karadzic said that the

6 danger existed of the Muslim people disappearing altogether, and that

7 danger was realistic.

8 Q. Just getting back to this issue of the election campaign: Are you

9 aware that the actual symbol of the SDS was "SDS" written in Cyrillic?

10 A. Well, both the Cyrillic and Latin script are scripts used in

11 Bosnia-Herzegovina. So I saw both variations of the SDS, both written up

12 in Cyrillic and in the Latin script, and that's quite acceptable for us.

13 And the name the Serbian Democratic Party is an acceptable name, because

14 it is a party of the Serbian people. What cannot be accepted is symbols

15 under which the Bosniaks suffered and fell casualty. So this two-headed

16 eagle with the sign of the four Ss and the songs that were being sung were

17 unacceptable to us.

18 Q. Okay. But that actually wasn't the official symbol of the SDS,

19 was it?

20 A. Well, carrying a flag with that emblem was then an official

21 symbol, if that's what you displayed.

22 Q. Well, on that basis, people carrying green flags with Arabic

23 letters would be the same. But surely you would concede that there were

24 extremists in all ethnic groups who attended rallies; correct?

25 A. This is how it was: We had the SDA flag and the SDS had its own

Page 6491

1 flag with the SDS. So anything else is less important, if anybody brought

2 anything else, that was lest important. These were the official flags.

3 The SDA had a green and white on its flag, the Party of Democratic Action.

4 Whereas the SDS had a flag which was a tricolour flag with the coat of

5 arms of a double-headed eagle, and that was their official flag.

6 Q. I think we'll leave this topic of the flags alone now, Witness.

7 Now, just in relation to -- in fact, I note the time, Your Honour.

8 I'm --

9 JUDGE ORIE: If your next subject would take more than three

10 minutes.

11 MS. LOUKAS: It certainly would, Your Honour.

12 JUDGE ORIE: We'd rather have a break now. We'll adjourn until 5

13 minutes to 11.00.

14 --- Recess taken at 10.27 a.m.

15 --- On resuming at 11.00 a.m.

16 JUDGE ORIE: The witness may be escorted into the courtroom again,

17 and then you may proceed, once the curtains are up again. Perhaps I could

18 use the time. I invited the parties yesterday to see what remaining

19 issues they had and to make a small list so that we could compare it with

20 our lists. If these lists would be available in the next break, we could

21 make our agenda for next Monday.

22 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honour, in relation to the Defence list, in

23 fact, Ms. Cmeric and I will be compiling that when we finish from court

24 today. We haven't since yesterday had an opportunity to compile that

25 list, but as soon as it's compiled, we will be emailing it or forwarding

Page 6492

1 it to --

2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis -- yes, the witness may be escorted in.

3 Mr. Hannis looks as if he has a list already. If perhaps during the next

4 break you could have a brief look at it and so to see. Because if there

5 would be any additional matters to be discussed today about the agenda of

6 next Monday, then of course if we receive it in the afternoon, then

7 there's hardly any chance, apart from Monday morning, to change the

8 agenda.

9 MS. LOUKAS: I'm sure that the list compiled by Mr. Hannis will be

10 the list that the Defence in all probability will agree with.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps during the next break you would have a look

12 at it.

13 Ms. Loukas, you may resume your cross-examination as soon as the

14 noise has stopped.

15 MS. LOUKAS: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour.

16 Q. Now, Witness, before I move on to my next topic, which is in

17 relation to this monument to Branko Copic, I just wanted to clarify some

18 matters that were being dealt with just prior to the break. Now, you

19 mentioned an anthem, "Boze Pravde," right? That's of course the current

20 Serbian national anthem; correct?

21 A. We were discussing the campaign before the war.

22 Q. Indeed.

23 A. I wasn't familiar with that hymn. It was an anthem I did not

24 know, and its contents were unfamiliar to me. It wasn't from the

25 territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and it did not fit in with the

Page 6493

1 viewpoints that we had during that period of time.

2 Q. Okay. Now, just going back to --

3 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, may I ask you one thing. You put it to

4 the witness whether it was the Serbian national -- is that Serbia and

5 Montenegro national hymn or is it Republika Srpska, which is also a

6 Serbian -- I --

7 MS. LOUKAS: No, Your Honour. It's actually both.

8 JUDGE ORIE: It's both. We have -- they share the national hymn,

9 do I understand?

10 MS. LOUKAS: That's correct, Your Honour.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I didn't know that.

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The anthem that one hears in

13 Belgrade is not the Boze Pravde anthem.

14 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat his answer.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please repeat your answer, because the

16 interpreters were not able to grab it.

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That anthem is not played in

18 Belgrade. It can't be heard in Belgrade. It is played in Banja Luka.

19 JUDGE ORIE: So do I understand your answer that where I inquired

20 about Serbian national hymn meant, that you say that you're aware of it

21 being used as a national hymn in Republika Srpska but not in Belgrade?

22 Yes. Well, I think it's not really a matter which should be explored any

23 further. I take it, Ms. Loukas, that you wanted to establish that this

24 hymn which was qualified in a certain way is used as a national hymn

25 nowadays.

Page 6494

1 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, indeed, Your Honour. I'm informed by Ms. Cmeric

2 it was made the official hymn a couple of months ago by the Assembly in

3 Belgrade. It's not an issue I need to spend or time on.

4 JUDGE ORIE: I just wanted to understand your question and answer.

5 MS. LOUKAS:

6 Q. In relation to the election campaign at the time, in 1990, you're

7 not saying there was anything wrong with the use of a double-headed eagle,

8 are you?

9 A. I have already mentioned the Bosniak attitude to that symbol,

10 because it was under that symbol that the Bosniak people suffered the most

11 in the course of its history.

12 Q. I don't want to spend a lot of time on this, Witness, but of

13 course it is the current symbol of Albania; you'd agree with me about

14 that, wouldn't you?

15 A. I don't know what the symbol of Albania is, but I do know that

16 this is a symbol used in Republika Srpska. And its currently in dispute

17 in the Assembly of Republika Srpska because representatives of other

18 peoples who are now members of Republika Srpska, who are now in

19 Republika Srpska, are not recognised by this symbol.

20 JUDGE ORIE: May I seek a further clarification. Earlier in your

21 testimony, you spoke about the double-headed eagle, together with the four

22 S's. This part of your answer, is this about the double-headed eagle

23 alone or is it in combination with the four S's?

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The symbol wasn't changed. The

25 earlier one and the current one is the same. It's the double-headed eagle

Page 6495

1 with a cross and four S's.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Four S's being part of that double-headed eagle

3 coat of arms.

4 Ms. Loukas, please proceed.

5 MS. LOUKAS: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour.

6 Q. Now, just going back to this rally in September 1990 in

7 Velika Kladusa. Of course, Mr. Izetbegovic spoke at that rally; correct?

8 A. There were a lot of speakers, and he was one of them.

9 Q. And of course you were there at that rally?

10 A. As I have already said, I was.

11 Q. And of course you would have heard him indicating that, if need

12 be, Muslims will defend Bosnia with arms?

13 A. I'm not sure that I can remember what he said in his speech, and

14 especially not such details. This is something that happened a long time

15 ago, after all, and at the time, I was just an observer of that rally.

16 Q. Now, moving along to this topic of the Branko Copic statue. You

17 indicated in your evidence yesterday that Branko Copic was a poet, a

18 partisan poet; correct?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And that he had a broad following amongst all the nations and

21 nationalities or ethnic groups in Bosnia; correct?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And you indicated that the SDS wanted to erect a monument to him,

24 as he was born in Bosanska Krupa; correct?

25 A. Well, one could say so, because he was born in the village of

Page 6496

1 Haselj [phoen], near Bosanska Krupa, that is to say, in the municipality

2 of Bosanska Krupa.

3 Q. And I think that you indicated that you opposed the monument being

4 erected because it was illegal; correct?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Why did you consider it to be illegal?

7 A. Because in order to erect the monument, it was necessary to follow

8 a certain procedure and have certain documents. Those who were erecting

9 the monument didn't have these items.

10 Q. Were Muslims in your local area opposed to the erection of the

11 statue?

12 A. Well, look. Copic was an iconic figure, poet, and streets bore

13 his name, as well as schools. There was a Branko Copic club, a poets'

14 club. And there was a project to build a Copic village, which was

15 supposed to be the cherry on the cake when it came to celebrating this

16 poet. So the Muslims had an already well defined altitude towards the

17 matter, and what the SDS was requesting was something that was specific to

18 the SDS. It was an intention that they had which was not necessary to see

19 through, because Copic was already celebrated. The Muslims were not

20 opposed to the erection of a monument and to the construction of

21 commemorative buildings, but in this case, it was really an illegal act

22 that was in question.

23 Q. Well, hadn't Mr. Lazar got the approval to build it?

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 6497

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let me reread it.

8 Yes. The last eight lines. Please proceed.

9 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honour, I do propose to ask some more questions

10 on this topic, to it's probably preferable that we go into private

11 session.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps then we'll go into private session.

13 [Private session]

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 6498

11 Page 6498 redacted. Private session.

Page 6499

11 Page 6499 redacted. Private session.

Page 6500

11 Page 6500 redacted. Private session.

Page 6501

11 Page 6501 redacted. Private session.

Page 6502

11 Page 6502 redacted. Private session.

Page 6503

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 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 [Open session]

18 MS. LOUKAS: Yes. I think we're back in open session now.

19 Q. Now, just in relation to the question of the distribution of power

20 after the elections: Of course, the Muslims were in the majority in your

21 municipality; correct?

22 A. Statistics are very precise on that point. The Muslims had the

23 majority.

24 Q. And it was the situation, was it not, that in terms of the

25 distribution of power, that Serbs were in your local municipality

Page 6506

1 A. Yes, we understand each other.

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 MS. LOUKAS: Now, Your Honour, this may be an area that may

5 involve having to go back into private session.

6 JUDGE ORIE: We'll return into private session.

7 [Private session]

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 6507

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 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 [Open session]

25 JUDGE ORIE: It's confirmed on our screen. Please proceed,

Page 6508

1 Ms. Loukas.

2 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.

3 Q. Were you aware, prior to the war, of a paramilitary formation of

4 the Patriotic League being formed in your area, Bosanska Krupa?

5 A. Tell me, please, what you mean by "paramilitary formation".

6 Q. Let me put it another way. Are you aware of a formation of armed

7 men under the banner of the Patriotic League whose commander was, in your

8 local area, Bosanska Krupa, Sead Sehic?

9 A. I am not aware of any armed formation which was called the

10 Patriotic League in Bosanska Krupa.

11 Q. Were you aware of index cards being stolen from municipalities and

12 military installations by Muslims?

13 A. There was one particular incident, one instance, but those

14 archives were returned.

15 Q. And are you aware of the reasoning behind that being so that the

16 men of appropriate age could be taken into paramilitary formations of the

17 Patriotic League?

18 A. I think that that was something to do with doing their military

19 service. Can we just briefly go back into private session? Because I

20 would like to explain one particular case.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we can go into private session. I'll tell you

22 when we are.

23 [Private session]

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 6509

11 Pages 6509-6523 redacted. Private session.

Page 6524

1 (redacted)

2 [Open session]

3 MS. KARAGIANNAKIS:

4 Q. The question put to you whether there were weapons during the war

5 all three parties the answer was: "They had hunting weapons, tactical

6 weapons." Now, who had hunting weapons?

7 A. Not tactical weapons, but weapons for competitions.

8 Q. Who -- which people of which ethnicity had those weapons, the

9 weapons for competitions?

10 A. All three ethnic groups did. We had a hunting club, and this club

11 had members from all ethnic communities. This was a legal manner of

12 owning weapons. Police had records on these weapons. And under the

13 Territorial Defence and the police, or rather, the reserve force of the

14 police, could have other weapons.

15 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... Weapons?

16 A. What do you mean by "tactical weapons"?

17 Q. I'm just -- what do you -- well, you answered to Defence counsel:

18 "They had hunting weapons." And then "tactical weapons." What do you

19 mean?

20 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Karagiannakis, when I look at the transcript, the

21 witness said, when you put to him the question who had hunting weapons, he

22 more or less corrected the previous part of your question, where you are

23 talked about tactical weapons. He said: "Not tactical weapons, but

24 weapons for competitions."

25 MS. KARAGIANNAKIS: Yes, Your Honour. I take that on board.

Page 6525

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The first time I saw the weapons,

2 weapons that weren't hunting weapons or weapons for competitions, was in

3 Arapusa. (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 MS. KARAGIANNAKIS:

6 Q. You just said that the first time you saw weapons that weren't

7 hunting weapons or weren't weapons for competitions were at the village of

8 Arapusa. In whose hands were those weapons?

9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Karagiannakis, is this not clearly in the

10 statement of the witness?

11 MS. KARAGIANNAKIS: Yes.

12 JUDGE ORIE: I think you started clarifying an issue of which I

13 could understand that it needed to be clarified, and once it has been

14 clarified, we now move to other issues that are clearly in the statement.

15 That's point one. Secondly, were dealt with, not specifically the

16 weapons, but -- cross-examination, but there's no real issue remaining and

17 we restart it now. So if you could move to your next subject.

18 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note: The word for tactical is

19 "takticarsko" [phoen] whereas for competition is "takmicarsko" [phoen].

20 MS. KARAGIANNAKIS:

21 Q. [Previous translation continues]... Referred to?

22 JUDGE ORIE: You heard the explanation by the interpreters, where

23 it seems to be that the word for tactical and the word for competition is

24 almost similar as in hearing. Is that correct?

25 THE INTERPRETER: That's correct, Your Honour.

Page 6526

12 Blank page inserted to ensure the pagination between the English and

13 French transcripts correspond

Page 6527

1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. So that explains the confusion.

2 Please proceed, Ms. Karagiannakis.

3 MS. KARAGIANNAKIS:

4 Q. Now, please answer this question without going into the -- to too

5 many details so we don't have to go into private session and don't have to

6 repeat what you've already said. But Ms. Loukas asked you, in relation to

7 your 1999 statement, at paragraph 33, whether that was correct and that

8 contained what the person referred to in that statement had said. Now,

9 can I refer you, please, to paragraph 14 of your 1998 statement. If you

10 could be shown paragraph 14 of your 1998 statement.

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Without going into the details, does this paragraph reflect what

13 you stated -- what you said in your statement in 1998 in relation to these

14 matters, and does it correspond with the additional information that you

15 provided to the Court today?

16 A. Yes. That's what I stated, and it does correspond to the

17 information that I have provided to the Trial Chamber today.

18 MS. KARAGIANNAKIS: No further questions, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Karagiannakis.

20 Any need for further questions, Ms. Loukas?

21 MS. LOUKAS: No, Your Honour.

22 [Trial Chamber confers]

23 JUDGE ORIE: Judge El Mahdi has one or more questions for you,

24 Witness.

25 JUDGE EL MAHDI: Thank you, Mr. President, but may I ask you,

Page 6536

1 at my list, Ms. Loukas. But I'm trying to compare the list I have. Is

2 there -- is this the complete -- short list by the Prosecution,

3 Ms. Loukas?

4 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, Your Honour. Mr. Hannis and I had the

5 opportunity to have a short chat during the break, and of course there are

6 quite a number of matters that come in under the heading of exhibits list,

7 of course, including material outstanding in relation to

8 Mr. Adil Draganovic and what have you, but they're matters that we can go

9 through in detail. But I think we have broad agreement on the kind of

10 matters that are included within the exhibit list matters.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

12 MS. LOUKAS: I think the 92 bis summaries is fairly

13 self-explanatory. And there, of course, those scheduling matters that are

14 mentioned there. But of course that fourth matter is a matter I think

15 that will require quite some discussion, as that's not a matter that would

16 be accepted by the Defence, this question of dossiers.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, I have not -- it's still a mystery for

18 me. The only thing I know the dossiers are very much the civil law-type

19 of material. But we'll hear then perhaps a little bit more in detail what

20 it is about so that we can give it already a bit of a thought over the

21 weekend.

22 But let's start with the practical matters. On all our lists is

23 the admission of pending exhibits.

24 Madam Registrar, do we have the updated list of pending exhibits?

25 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

Page 6537

1 JUDGE ORIE: I am informed that the parties have been provided

2 with an updated list, and of course it's mainly a matter of the backlog,

3 especially some older exhibits on which we still have to take decisions.

4 So everyone's prepared to do that.

5 Then the 92 bis summaries seem to be also an issue. Let's hope

6 it's not problematic.

7 Mr. Hannis, I think that the Prosecution well understood the

8 concern of the Chamber that the 92 bis summaries which are to inform the

9 public, would go into too much detail. I think recently I saw a summary

10 which I thought could be approximately one third of what it was then.

11 MR. HANNIS: I think we took on board Your Honour's suggestion

12 last time that you thought that 40 per cent of what we had presented would

13 be more than enough, so we'll shoot for that range.

14 JUDGE ORIE: So that's then clear. Then we'll hear the 92 bis

15 summaries.

16 Then scheduling matters. Well, that seems to overlap a bit with

17 one of the pending motions. That's the videolink motion, isn't it? Let

18 me just be careful that there are no protective measures in effect. There

19 are not. In respect of Mr. Biscevic. I had on my desk this morning the

20 response of the Defence on the motion for videolink. I only read the last

21 line, and that was that the Chamber is invited to deny the motion. We'll

22 have an opportunity -- if there's anything else to be said about it, but

23 of course the Chamber first has to read the further submissions by the

24 Defence. And the same, of course, Mr. Kljuic.

25 Weeks off in November and last day in December. We can deal with

Page 6538

1 that all. I'll make a full list so that everyone is aware. I also can

2 inform the Defence already that two weeks have now been identified in

3 October and November where we will sit in the afternoon. So I'll give you

4 the information then as well.

5 Then before we come to the dossiers, which is still a bit of a

6 mystery for us until this moment, I have a few other matters on my list as

7 well. First pending decisions of course, that's not your concern mainly,

8 but if anything in addition -- for example, if there would be an oral

9 response to the Defence response this morning to the videolink motion,

10 then we'll have an opportunity to hear that next Monday. There is still a

11 decision to be taken that we might deliver that decision next Monday,

12 certification of appeal on the protective measures of Witness 623. So

13 that's in respect of decisions.

14 There's one issue where I would like to pay a bit more attention

15 to at this moment, and that's -- these are two pending motions on

16 adjudicated facts. Yes. We would like to address that briefly next

17 Monday, and I will give you already an impression of what the Chamber has

18 in mind.

19 The Chamber has been seized all together of four motions on

20 adjudicated facts by the Prosecution. Two of these motions were decided

21 already a long time ago, and on the two remaining motions, the Chamber has

22 received the responses by the Defence. So far, we have not given a

23 decision on those motions because consultations between the parties were,

24 on possible agreement of facts, were still ongoing. But now it is time to

25 issue a decision.

Page 6539

12 Blank page inserted to ensure the pagination between the English and

13 French transcripts correspond

Page 6540

1 The Chamber makes a preliminary observation. The Chamber has

2 noted that the high number of the proposed adjudicated facts were far over

3 a thousand from the four motions taken together and taken as a whole may

4 cause a serious risk of oppression. And this burden is not only placed on

5 the Defence that might feel the need to rebut the admitted adjudicated

6 facts, but also on the proceedings as a whole. This is more true if we

7 take into account the potential for future submissions of the same kind

8 when the Tribunal delivers other judgements relevant to the time frame in

9 the territorial scope of the indictment in this case.

10 Moreover, the Chamber has the impression that some descriptions,

11 especially when they are going in much detail of incidents, seen in the

12 totality of the case as minor - I'm not saying that they are not

13 important - that these descriptions sometimes add very specific details to

14 general findings on such general things like mistreatment in camps. If

15 you, for example, would look at the list, as it stands now, the

16 consolidated list, although not everything has been either admitted or

17 not, but on some of the camps, if you would look at 755 until 788, you

18 would find there such a series of details and just trying to remember

19 other such instances. For example, if detainees have lost, in one of the

20 adjudicated facts, 25 to 30 kilos, and in another one, 30 to 35, and if we

21 then come to details on whether they had to rush for their food or whether

22 it took them two minutes to -- they're allowed two minutes, I think that

23 really goes into a level of detail which is certainly not assisting. Of

24 course, the food situation in a camp like Omarska is of importance, but

25 whether we should deal with that in so much detail, that's really

Page 6541

1 something to be further considered.

2 And sometimes, of course, also the language used in some of the

3 items proposed for admission and many of them of course were taken out of

4 the context, just isolated lines now, are sometimes misleading or

5 inappropriate.

6 But the Chamber has some hesitations to start making the

7 interpretations of what the adjudicated facts are without the parties

8 being involved. Several options are open, but of course a decision has to

9 be delivered. I mean, we can't continue to discuss options. Finally a

10 decision has to be taken. But we could, for example, deliver a decision

11 on these two motions, addressing these concerns. But we could also choose

12 to invite the Prosecution to re-file a substantially reduced list of

13 proposed adjudicated facts, in accordance with the principles I just set

14 out.

15 This is an issue the Chamber would like to hear the vision of the

16 parties on next Monday, well, let's say not more than 10 to 15 minutes,

17 because it might involve quite a lot of work for everyone. But on the

18 other hand, we also have to keep in mind that adjudicated facts still

19 should be manageable and of sufficient relevance to deal with them.

20 So that is a bit -- it's a long explanation on what the Chamber

21 has in mind if the adjudicated facts, the pending motions, are on the

22 agenda for next Monday.

23 Then before I invite the Prosecution to explain in a couple of

24 lines what the dossier exactly is about, I'd first like to go into private

25 session for one second.

Page 6543

1 bring up for Monday's housekeeping day, Mr. Harmon reminded me that this

2 was a, according to his notes, this was a matter that was discussed at a

3 formal meeting with Your Honour and the parties on the 12th of March, in

4 one of our meetings in room 177. And Mr. Harmon recalled to me that he

5 says that was discussed at the meeting with the Court and Defence, that

6 the idea was accepted, that we talked about dossiers going into evidence

7 containing mostly documentary evidence, and that it would contain an

8 index, it would have a B/C/S and English copy of each document, and there

9 would be a source where the documents came from. And we were talking

10 about primarily, I think, at that meeting, we were talking about primarily

11 municipality-related documents, although I don't think we foreclosed the

12 possibility that we would have documents relating perhaps to entities such

13 as the Ministry of the Interior, the army, et cetera.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I now better understand what you mean. It is

15 what is called in other cases sometimes documentary evidence tendered from

16 the bar table or, well, whatever. It's documentary evidence, not

17 introduced by a witness. Is that --

18 MR. HANNIS: Correct.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We could at least discuss that next Monday. Of

20 course, it might be -- it might make quite a difference on what type of

21 material we are talking about. I can imagine that taking a position in

22 general terms might not be easy for either party. But now at least it's

23 clear what "dossiers" means.

24 Any further issue? Ms. Loukas.

25 MS. LOUKAS: Just in relation to that particular issue. Of

Page 6544

1 course, I agree with Your Honour's observations in relation to it being

2 difficult for either party to take a position in general terms of issues

3 of that nature. But of course, we can go into that in something of more

4 detail on Monday. But I can indicate at this point that I'm not entirely

5 comfortable with it, Your Honour, and it is a matter that we will require

6 further elaboration on Monday.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think it will certainly assist the Chamber if

8 you could develop some criteria, or at least some types of documents you

9 would say are objections against admitting them in this way, would be even

10 fiercer than others. So try to identify perhaps categories of documents

11 which would be easier or more difficult to accept. I'm not saying to

12 accept or not to accept, but I'm -- I listened carefully to your words.

13 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, Your Honour. Your Honour is referring, of

14 course, to gradations of difficulty. I can indicate it might be useful if

15 Mr. Hannis or a member of the Prosecution produce a list of what

16 kind -- the categories of documents that they're proposing and then I can

17 meet each category with my particular submissions.

18 JUDGE ORIE: So the Prosecution is invited to avoid that the

19 discussion will be on too much -- will too much be on an abstract level

20 and rather that we know what we are talking about. Yes. Any further

21 issue at this -- yes, Ms. Karagiannakis.

22 MS. KARAGIANNAKIS: The matter of the exhibits for the last

23 witness.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We could do that today, because I said we would

25 deal with the backlog of exhibits next Monday. So, Madam Registrar, could

Page 6545

1 you please assist us in preparing our decisions on the admission of

2 exhibits in relation to Witness 048.

3 MS. KARAGIANNAKIS: Your Honour, I have a list of the proposed

4 exhibits here.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I take it that any exhibit that left your table

6 is carefully registered by Madam Registrar. But if you're following your

7 list, Madam Registrar, as the same on her list, then, Madam Registrar,

8 yes.

9 MS. KARAGIANNAKIS: I just have one comment to make. I could

10 indicate already now which ones should be under seal, so that that might

11 assist Madam Registrar.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, let's do it the following way: Madam

13 Registrar names the exhibits and adds whether they should be under seal or

14 not, and if she forgets one to be under seal, you'll immediately

15 interfere. Yes. Madam Registrar.

16 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit number P302, the pseudonym sheet, under

17 seal; Exhibit P303A, BiH agency for research and documentation statement

18 dated 31 March 1998, under seal; P303A.1, English translation, under

19 seal; P303B, ICTY witness statement dated 26th August 1999 and 3rd

20 November 1999, signed on 3rd November 1999, under seal; P303B.1, B/C/S

21 translation, under seal; P303C, UN-ICTY memorandum of conversation dated

22 29/06/2000 under seal; P303C.1, B/C/S translation under seal; P304, map of

23 BiH indicating Bosanska Krupa in green; P305, map showing Bosanska Krupa

24 with Una River in blue, marked by witness; And P305A, map showing Bosanska

25 Krupa with Una River in blue, marked by witness; P306, declaration of

Page 6546

1 witness dated 29/09/04, identifying voices of participants of intercepted

2 telephone conversations, under seal; P306A, intercept transcript dated

3 24/06/1991 of conversation between Momcilo Krajisnik and Miroslav from

4 Bosanska Krupa; P306B, intercept transcript dated 05/06 - just a

5 moment - 1991, between Radovan Karadzic and Miroslav Vjestica; P306C, CD

6 of intercepts; P307, draft report on the work of the Municipal Assembly

7 and War Presidency from the 1st of January, 1992, to 20 April, 1993;

8 P307.1, the English translation; and P308, photocopy of currency issued by

9 the National Bank of the Serbian Republic of BiH, issued at Banja Luka in

10 1992, and currency issued by the National Bank of Republika Srpska in

11 Banja Luka in 1993, two pages.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Ms. Loukas.

13 MS. LOUKAS: Yes. Just in relation to the various exhibits. Your

14 Honour will recall that I objected, of course, to the previous Bosnian

15 statement in terms of 89(F).

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

17 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honour, in relation to the intercepted

18 conversations, Your Honour will recall I objected in relation to questions

19 relating to those named individual there, and I won't go into the names.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

21 MS. LOUKAS: It's inappropriate, in view of the protective

22 measures. And I also indicate in relation to the Exhibit P307 that I do

23 register an objection in relation to that particular report on the basis

24 that it is a draft and it is unsigned.

25 JUDGE ORIE: And does this last objection go against admissibility

Page 6547

1 or ...

2 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, I would object on that basis to

3 the admissibility. I place that on the record. And I'd also indicate

4 that in relation to the -- this question of the intercepted conversations,

5 that the evidence was sought to be admitted purely on the basis of

6 authenticating the voices as opposed to the subject of the conversations,

7 as I understood it at the time.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Karagiannakis, may I have your response to that.

9 MS. KARAGIANNAKIS: Yes, Your Honour. In relation to the

10 objection regarding the B/C/S statement, I understand Your Honours ruled

11 yesterday that it was admissible. In relation to the intercepted

12 communications, my learned friend is right; the declaration in respect of

13 those intercepted, conversations relates to the identification of the

14 voices and simply that, so I don't see why there should be any objection

15 to that being put on the record.

16 In relation to the report on the activities of the Municipal

17 Assembly, the witness testified about who he said the author of the

18 document was, and he told the Court why. So there is a basis. And my

19 final point in relation to the objections for the report on the activities

20 is the objection goes to the weight of the evidence as opposed to its

21 actual admissibility before you.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll -- I'll give a decision on the -- as far

23 as the Bosnian statement is concerned, under Rule 89(F), the Chamber

24 preliminarily ruled that we would proceed on the basis of the document as

25 well. We'll further consider the objections.

Page 6548

1 About the intercepts and about the draft report being a draft and

2 not being signed, we'll decide on them later. That means that -- and I

3 always include the A, B, and C versions and the translations, 302, 303,

4 including -- apart from the Bosnian statement are admitted. That the maps

5 304 and 305 are admitted, including the one marked by the witness, that

6 the declaration on the intercepts, are you objecting against that as well?

7 Let me just try to ... So that would be 306, without any addition, just

8 recognising the ...

9 MS. LOUKAS: Yes. Your Honour will recall that I raise this

10 question in relation to personal knowledge in relation to identification,

11 and I have nothing further to add on that point, Your Honour.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Well, let's give it more time. We'll give a final

13 decision on Monday on 306, and of course also includes 306A, 306B, with

14 all the translations, 306C, which is the CD-ROM. 307, a decision will be

15 taken next Monday. And the bank notes, two pages are admitted.

16 MS. KARAGIANNAKIS: Your Honour.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

18 MS. KARAGIANNAKIS: I apologise, but I omitted to point something

19 out. Intercept 306B is actually an exhibit in the case. It's Exhibit

20 P64A and it was proffered through Mr. Treanor.

21 JUDGE ORIE: So that is a recall of that -- so that is then

22 already in evidence and no need to admit it again. Nevertheless, I'll

23 discuss with Madam Registrar whether -- the problem is that the

24 declaration, recognising the voices, does not refer to another exhibit.

25 So it might even be wise to have then this intercept twice. Because

Page 6549

1 otherwise we have a lot of confusion because the witness did not recognise

2 the voices on any intercept which we find in -- what is it, P64, P65,

3 Mr. Treanor. So therefore, it might be a good idea to have that, if we

4 would admit that, to have it double in our -- I hardly dare to say,

5 dossier.

6 Any other issue? If not, then we'll sit next Monday in Courtroom

7 III, not in this one. We'll start at 9.00 in the morning. And I wish you

8 all a good weekend.

9 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.51 p.m.,

10 to be reconvened on Monday, the 4th day of

11 October 2004, at 9.00 a.m.