1 Wednesday, 24 November 2004
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.09 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
6 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Case number IT-00-39-T, the Prosecutor versus
8 Momcilo Krajisnik.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
10 I'd like to ask Madam Usher to escort into the courtroom first
11 counsel, then the witness, Mr. Mandic, unless there's any procedural
13 MR. TIEGER: There is one procedural matter, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. There's one thing I thought I could deal with,
15 taking into account how much time it usually takes to get the witness
16 into the courtroom, and that is, I would like to ask Mr. Stewart how much
17 time he would need for any observations or submissions in relation to
18 material that arrived on the desk of the secretaries of the Judges and
19 has not reached the desks of the Judges themselves.
20 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, I feel fairly confident I can
21 make my points in less than five minutes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then deal do that at the end of this first
23 session, just before the break. Then we'll stop five minutes earlier.
24 Mr. Tieger, is there anything you'd like to raise?
25 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Your Honour. This relates to the matter raised
1 yesterday in connection with the disclosure of documents. Let me begin
2 by noting that I have absolutely no intention of reopening or re-arguing
3 that motion, but last night we went through a recalculation of the
4 documents disclosed. I notified Mr. Stewart about that recalculation,
5 and he graciously suggested or agreed that we should at least bring that
6 clarification to the Court. In sum, it appears that the calculation of
7 the number of documents disclosed, based on gigabytes, yields an
8 inaccurate number, for a variety of reasons, including the fact that it
9 contains TIF files versus Word documents, which have considerably more
10 gigabytes and the fact that they were video and audio files contained in
11 there as well.
12 Our support staff instituted a recalculation based on ERN ranges,
13 and of the number of documents, of those documents which are in excess of
14 ten pages, and those calculations produced a number of disclosed pages of
15 approximately 1.600, somewhere under 2.000, rather than the 25.000 that
16 were indicated yesterday. And so in keeping with my discussions with Mr.
17 Stewart, we agreed that we'd bring those enhanced, refined figures to the
18 attention of the Court.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So I do understand that the parties discussed
20 that the number was lower, but still a considerable number of pages.
21 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour. In fact, the discussion took
22 place -- I mean, we understand that Mr. Curiam spent some considerable
23 time, we understand, yesterday doing this exercise. I received an e-mail
24 from Mr. Tieger yesterday evening, and I responded to it in the terms
25 which he's just summarised last night. There were one or two exclusions
1 or exceptions to that figure that Mr. Tieger has given, but we suggest
2 that we don't spend any more time on this this morning, Your Honour. We
3 can spend a bit of time checking some of them. When I say checking,
4 we're not doubting Mr. Acrilan's work, but is just seeing how it fits
5 into the picture. So that's where we are at the moment.
6 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber is grateful that the parties expect the
7 Judges to understand the difference between a Word file and a TIF file.
8 Then, Madam Usher, could I ask you to escort first counsel and
9 then the witness into the courtroom.
10 [The witness entered court]
11 [Witness's counsel entered court]
12 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Tomic.
13 MR. STEWART: One more thing, it won't take a second. I don't
14 have a problem with the witness being in court. It was just that Ms.
15 Cmeric overnight, she was troubled yesterday, as she is sometimes by
16 discrepancies in translation, looking at the English statements of the
17 interviews of this witness and the B/C/S versions.
18 [The witness entered court]
19 MR. STEWART: Her troubled nature hasn't calmed down overnight
20 because as she is looked at it, she has found significant discrepancies.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Let me first --
22 MR. STEWART: Sorry, Mr. Mandic.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Ask Mr. Mandic to be seated. He was still standing.
24 Please proceed.
25 MR. STEWART: I'm sorry, Your Honour, for not raising this a
1 moment ago. It's just that, Your Honour; and our concern is we have
2 found what Ms. Cmeric regards as significant discrepancies. It's that
3 when passages in the statement or critical passages are put to the
4 witness, we suggest that perhaps a witness should be provided with the
5 B/C/S version of the statement. Alternatively -- well, I'm trying to
6 think what an alternative is. But, well, yes, Your Honour. Excuse me
7 one second.
8 [Defence counsel confer]
9 JUDGE ORIE: I take the opportunity, Mr. Mandic, to say good
10 morning to you. We'll finish this procedural issue in a second.
11 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour. Excuse me. I was just
12 confirming what the system was here. Yes. We suggest that the witness
13 is provided with the B/C/S statement, because we understand that the
14 B/C/S version of these interviews is a transcription of the
15 tape-recording of what the witness said in B/C/S in the original
16 interview. And of course, it was interpreted. And that the English
17 version of the -- the English version of the interviews is a
18 transcription of what was said by the interpreter. Mr. Margetts was
19 actually there, but that's what we understand as being the procedure.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I take it that the questions, the English is
21 the original, and answers, the B/C/S version might be the original, the
22 most directly linked to what was said.
23 MR. STEWART: Yes. That must be right, Your Honour. But Mr.
24 Margetts was actually present at these, and so was Mr. Tieger.
25 MR. TIEGER: That part is certainly correct. It wouldn't answer
1 the question of how the transcription took place. The transcription can
2 be either --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We can discuss a lot, but the matter is
4 whether there's any important difference in language in one language or
5 the other. Would you mind to -- that the witness has the B/C/S version
6 of the transcript, if that's available, in front of him when his
7 attention is drawn to certain parts of his statement?
8 MR. TIEGER: Well, of course I wouldn't mind, Your Honour.
9 However, that is assuming that Mr. Stewart's understanding of --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. TIEGER: -- what is represents is correct. Otherwise --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Whatever happens, it's always important to find out
13 that there is inconsistency in language in one version or another, and
14 we'll then, if we are confronted with that, of course we'll have to find
15 out what's the most reliable version and what's the real version. And
16 we'll solve that then. But let's start with --
17 MR. TIEGER: And I'm also trying to determine whether we have the
18 transcription in B/C/S for the second interview.
19 JUDGE ORIE: That was one of my questions.
20 MR. STEWART: Ms. Cmeric has got what we understood to be that,
21 Your Honour. Just to clarify - I hope perhaps in my own mind as
22 well - what's happening otherwise is that something which was originally
23 said by Mr. Mandic at the interview in B/C/S was interpreted, it was
24 translated into English then and is now being translated back again by
25 the interpreters in this court. So it's introducing two steps. And the
1 result is considerable discrepancies.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, if your assumption is right, then of
3 course the inferences you've drawn are right as well. Whether they're
4 right or not, we'll find out, because there will be an audiotape anyhow.
5 So that if there's any problem about what the witness really said when he
6 gave his statement, we'll always have an opportunity to check that.
7 Let's get started and let's see how it goes. Do we have B/C/S
9 MR. TIEGER: At least one copy, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And I understand the Defence has the are other
11 one and is willing to make that available.
12 MR. STEWART: Of course, Your Honour. Can I just mentioned in 15
13 seconds. We also are troubled by a number of points in the statement
14 where we come across unintelligible. We'll look into that further to see
15 the scale of that difficulty.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I noticed yesterday when we listened to a
17 telephone intercept that something that was -- that could not be heard in
18 the transcript, that our interpreters were able to hear.
19 MR. STEWART: Yes. We'll investigate that a bit further, Your
20 Honour, because we're a bit concerned about it.
21 MR. TIEGER: And finally, Your Honour, although it will become
22 apparent at least during the course of this morning's session if we
23 attempt to use the transcript, there are no line-reference numbers on
24 these transcripts, as I think Mr. Stewart is aware. And the page numbers
25 will --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Okay. We'll have to solve that problem. Mr.
2 Tieger -- first of all, Mr. Mandic, Mr. Tieger will now resume his
3 examination-in-chief. I'd like to remind you that you're still bound by
4 the solemn declaration you've given at the beginning of your testimony.
5 Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
6 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
7 WITNESS: MOMCILO MANDIC [Resumed]
8 [Witness answered through interpreter]
9 Examined by Mr. Tieger [Continued]
10 Q. Good morning, Mr. Mandic.
11 A. [In English] Good morning.
12 Q. Mr. Mandic, just before we recessed yesterday, I had asked you
13 about the development of any rivalry between Dr. Karadzic and Mr.
14 Krajisnik, and you had responded that after a few years of the war, there
15 was a kind of rivalry that sprang up and a stratification among people as
16 to who was closer to one or the other.
17 A. [Interpretation] Correct.
18 Q. I had been about to present you with a document, and I'll do that
19 now. That's B008-4249, Prosecution's next in order.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit number P414.
21 MR. TIEGER:
22 Q. Mr. Mandic, I'll give you a moment to review that document, which
23 is a draft official note from the security services centre at Banja Luka,
24 prepared in June of 1993, referring in particular to contacts with
25 individuals from the National Security Service and military security.
1 And I want to direct your attention in particular to a portion that
2 appears on page 3 of the English, which is the portion of the third full
3 paragraph of the document. That's the paragraph that begins: "Through
4 the contacts with Markovic ..." And it refers to some of the comments of
5 Markovic, including: "When speaking of the leaders of the Republika
6 Srpska including Mr. Karadzic and Mr. Krajisnik, Markovic and his
7 proteges used extremely abusive terms that degraded and belittled these
8 two leaders of the Serbian people. It is interesting that their comments
9 indicated that there was a subdued struggle for domination between Mr.
10 Karadzic and Mr. Krajisnik."
11 And then the document does go on to include other comments by
12 Markovic and other rumours regarding Mr. Karadzic and Mr. Krajisnik. I
13 wanted to ask you, however, whether that document reflects, and the
14 comments that I just referred to, reflect the rivalry that you referred
15 to in your testimony yesterday.
16 A. This is the first time I see this document. I don't know who
17 this Mr. Markovic is at all. I don't think that Karadzic or Krajisnik
18 liked some parts of Republika Srpska more or less.
19 Q. And that comment you just made, I presume, refers to a comment in
20 the document by Markovic about Mr. Krajisnik's negative attitude toward
21 Banja Luka?
22 A. Correct.
23 Q. Apart from that, Mr. Mandic, does the comment about the struggle
24 for domination, a subdued struggle for domination, the document reads,
25 between Mr. Krajisnik and Dr. Karadzic, reflect the view that a rivalry
1 had developed between Dr. Karadzic and Mr. Krajisnik at that time?
2 A. Well, I think that, thanks to some people who were in the
3 immediate vicinity of one or the other, there were latent
4 misunderstandings, or rather, subdued rivalry between Mr. Krajisnik and
5 Mr. Karadzic.
6 Q. Mr. Mandic, you've indicated, and we've just touched on the
7 existence of people who were identified with or close to one or the other
8 of these two leaders. Were you friends with or closely identified with
9 one or the other?
10 A. I was close to Momcilo Krajisnik.
11 Q. Now, Mr. Mandic, yesterday we looked at the minutes of a meeting
12 of the Council of Ministers, which included an agenda item referring to
13 the priorities springing from the promulgation -- the declaration of the
14 promulgation of the Republic of the Serbian People of Bosnia-Herzegovina,
15 and that included the defining of ethnic territory and the establishment
16 of government organs.
17 A. Correct.
18 Q. Did Bosnian Serb authorities begin to move forward, at least in
19 part, to ensure that Serbian power was felt in the territories claimed by
20 the Bosnian Serb authorities by organising a Serbian MUP?
21 A. Correct.
22 Q. Let me show you --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Someone is typing near a microphone which gives us
24 the constant sound of typing. If there would be another technical
25 solution for that, it would be fine.
1 Please proceed.
2 MR. TIEGER: Thank you.
3 Q. Mr. Mandic, may I ask you to look at the Prosecution's next
4 exhibit in order. That's SA00-6590.
5 THE REGISTRAR: P415.
6 JUDGE ORIE: If I may make a suggestion. Sometimes two
7 mouse-pads under the keyboard helps.
8 MR. TIEGER:
9 Q. Mr. Mandic, the exhibit now in front of you, P415, reflects the
10 minutes of a meeting held in Banja Luka on 11 February 1992. And the
11 first paragraph indicates the attendees at that meeting, including
12 yourself; is that correct?
13 A. That's right. Correct.
14 Q. And those persons were the leading Bosnian Serb officials in the
15 -- in what was at that time the unified MUP of the Socialist Republic of
16 Bosnia-Herzegovina; is that right?
17 A. Correct. That's right.
18 Q. Now, if I could direct your attention to the second speaker, Mr.
19 Stanisic, whose comments appear in the second paragraph. Mr. Stanisic
20 referred, did he not, to the position of the Ministerial Council, the
21 position of the Council of Ministers?
22 A. That's correct.
23 Q. And that position was that in the territory of Bosnia and
24 Herzegovina which is under Serbian power, this power has to be felt; is
25 that right?
1 A. Correct.
2 Q. And Mr. Stanisic then went on to state that work should be done
3 on the organisation of a Serbian MUP, starting with municipal and
4 regional branches, to the Serbian ministry itself.
5 A. At that meeting, the leaders of the Serb people in the joint MUP,
6 Mr. Stanisic, he informed us about the decisions of the Assembly and the
7 Ministerial Council, and Mico Stanisic was a member of that council, as
8 the future minister, and he told us what the decisions of the ministerial
9 council were, the ones that were held -- from the meeting held before
10 this meeting. He told us about the establishment of the Serb MUPs in
11 municipalities where there was a majority Serb population.
12 Q. And Mr. Radovic, speaking after Mr. Stanisic, discussed the
13 decision of the Assembly of the Serbian people of Bosnia-Herzegovina with
14 regard to the establishment of a Serbian MUP?
15 A. Correct. Before this meeting, the Assembly of the Serb People in
16 the Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina reached a decision on the
17 establishment of a Serb MUP, and I think that on that occasion a law was
18 passed, a law on the MUP.
19 Q. Now, later on during the course of this meeting, and I would
20 direct your attention to the comments of Mr. Tutus, there was an
21 expression of the loss of confidence in the Serbian leadership of the MUP
22 and the expression of trust in you, as the MUP representative.
23 A. Well, Tutus probably meant coordination and cooperation with the
24 headquarters of the joint MUP in Sarajevo. Actually, before the war,
25 Krajina was territorial, or rather, organisationally separated from
1 Sarajevo. They had their headquarters in Banja Luka. There was already
2 the reflex of the war from Croatia that was spilling over into Krajina,
3 which bordered on the then Serb Republic of Krajina, which was in
4 Croatia. And then there was poor cooperation between Banja Luka and
5 Sarajevo, and there were already disagreements.
6 Q. And Mr. Tutus was reflecting those disagreements in his comments,
7 but indicating that he and others from Bosnian Krajina had trust in you,
8 as an individual?
9 A. Correct. That's exactly the way it was.
10 Q. Now, the meeting reached certain conclusions, which appear to be
11 contained on page 4 of the English translation and are headed
12 "Conclusions," including the following: That a Serbian advisory board
13 would be established at the joint MUP, consisting of the Serbian staff in
14 leading positions; that that advisory board would be headed by you, who
15 would ensure that conclusions were acted upon and carried out; that the
16 Serbian advisory board was ordered to carry out all the necessary
17 preparations for the functioning of the Serbian MUP, following the
18 adoption of the constitution of the Serbian Republic of
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. And that not a single decision on the personnel policy in the
22 joint MUP would be carried out without the prior consent of yourself.
23 A. Correct.
24 Q. Of course there are other conclusions, as we can see from the
25 page, but those are the ones I wanted to bring your attention to.
1 Now, following this meeting, Mr. Mandic, you followed up by
2 taking steps to discharge the responsibilities which you had received at
3 the meeting by instructing leading Bosnian Serb officials to move forward
4 in that process; is that right?
5 A. That's right.
6 Q. Let me present you with Prosecution's next exhibit in order.
7 That's 0063-7176.
8 THE REGISTRAR: P416.
9 MR. TIEGER:
10 Q. Mr. Mandic, it's a very short document, dated February 13th,
11 1992, two days after the man Banja Luka meeting, that refers to the
12 conclusions reached at that meeting, and it is signed by you.
13 A. Correct.
14 Q. Can you tell us what it was you were instructing those to whom
15 the document was directed to do?
16 A. Well, to act in accordance with the conclusions from the previous
17 document, the one that we read a few moments ago. That means that
18 according to the decision of the Ministerial Council and the Assembly of
19 the Serb People, a decision was reached to organise a Serbian MUP, and
20 Goran Radovic and Mico Stanisic informed us about these decisions. He
21 was a member of the Ministerial Council. So we passed a decision in that
22 respect and we acted upon it. This is an obligation that we had because,
23 as assistant minister, I'm the only one who had a 02 line then, and I
24 could send telegrams throughout the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina, as
25 the highest-ranking Serb person in the joint MUP.
1 Q. And to whom was this document directed?
2 A. It was directed to the heads of the centres. The security
3 centres of Banja Luka, Nevesinje, Sokolac, Doboj, Gorazde, Nevesinje,
4 Sokolac, and Sarajevo. These are the major security centres in the
6 Q. Now, Mr. Mandic, did some of the steps toward the preparation for
7 separation of the joint MUP, or unified MUP, include arming of Serbian
8 police stations or police officials and at least the beginnings of
9 terminations of non-Serbs from police forces?
10 A. Well, I think it was the other way around then. Up until the
11 beginning of the war, in the police of Bosnia-Herzegovina, there were
12 about 11.000 members of the MUP. From among them -- among them, there
13 were 75 per cent Serbs. In Bosnia-Herzegovina, it was mainly Serbs who
14 were in the army and police, which did not correspond to the ethnic
15 pattern of Bosnia-Herzegovina. So conclusions were reached by the senior
16 staff of the MUP to dismiss Serb personnel who were trained and educated
17 to work on this kind of job, and that Bosniaks and Croats should be
18 recruited from elsewhere, including the reserve force and the Territorial
19 Defence, so that this pattern would correspond with the ethnic pattern in
20 Bosnia-Herzegovina. That means that at that time, there were more Serbs
21 on the force than there were in Bosnia-Herzegovina itself, and that is
22 one of the problems that was faced by the joint MUP.
23 Q. And we'll touch upon that issue perhaps a bit later. Let me
24 return to the question I asked before, and that is whether or not there
25 was -- there were efforts by Bosnian Serb officials to arm Serbian
1 police, provide arms to Serbian police, and whether or not the beginning
2 of terminations of non-Serbs from police forces began prior to the onset
3 of the conflict.
4 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, those would really be better, we
5 suggest, as two separate questions. They're quite big topics.
6 JUDGE ORIE: It came into my mind as well, Mr. Tieger.
7 MR. TIEGER: Let me -- I think that's a fair comment, so let's
8 begin with the question of arming.
9 Q. Did that take place, Mr. Mandic?
10 A. No. Because, you see, this dispatch was sent to the top leaders
11 of Serbian origin in those particular towns, and they disposed of all the
12 equipment in terms of weapons in those towns, both to the active-duty
13 police and reserve police, and I'm talking about Sokolac, Bijeljina,
14 Gorazde, and other towns, and Banja Luka, of course.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, if you would allow me just one question.
16 You now mentioned Bijeljina as well, where in a prior --
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
18 JUDGE ORIE: -- part of your testimony, when reading to whom this
19 was addressed, you -- I think you left out Bijeljina, because it was
20 stricken through, or at least it seems to be. Could you tell us whether
21 it was also sent to Bijeljina.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I read the name of Bijeljina on the
23 front page, but it doesn't indicate that it was sent here. However, I
24 know that the first policeman in Bijeljina was a Serb. His name was
25 Miodrag Jesuric.
1 JUDGE ORIE: And is that also the name you decipher on the first
2 page of this document? Because it's illegible in the translation.
3 Mr. Mandic, that's the name you read also, Jesuric, on the front
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Jesuric was his name.
6 JUDGE ORIE: And as far as you remember, was it sent to Bijeljina
7 as well?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think it was. I can't say for
10 MR. TOMIC: [Interpretation] I apologise to the Honours, and his
11 name is Predrag Jesuric, not Miodrag.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, correct. His name was
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Tomic, I think you added something to the
15 testimony which is not -- first of all, you make a correction on
16 something I have not heard or seen. I didn't see any Miodrag. And so,
17 therefore, there was no need for a correction. I think we fairly
18 discussed what your role would be, and that's not supplementing the
19 evidence of Mr. Mandic.
20 Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
21 MR. TIEGER: Let me try to clarify that quickly, Your Honour.
22 Q. Mr. Mandic, do you know Mr. Jesuric's first name?
23 A. His first name is Predrag.
24 Q. Now, you said that the centre leaders, the regional centre
25 leaders to whom you sent your letter on February 13th, disposed of
1 weapons in response. What did you mean by "disposed of the weapons"?
2 What did they do with weapons in response to your February 13th letter?
3 A. Each centre, apart from their regular stockpile of weapons, they
4 had rifles that belonged to the reserve police force. So they disposed
5 of this particular stockpiles of weapons, and each security centre in
6 each major town kept these weapons in their depots.
7 Q. And did they do so so those weapons would be available to the
8 Serbian MUP once it split from the joint MUP, and not to the members of a
9 remaining Muslim MUP?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. In addition to that, did you or Mr. Stanisic or others
12 participate in the delivery or dissemination of weapons to Serbian police
14 A. No. For many years before that, the weapons were kept for many
15 years in the depots for the purpose of the reserve police forces.
16 Q. Well, let me ask you to look at another exhibit, if I may, then,
17 and that would be 0121-5571.
18 THE REGISTRAR: P417.
19 MR. TIEGER:
20 Q. Mr. Mandic, this exhibit, P417, is an interview published in
21 Slobodna Bosna of April 10th, 1998. Excuse me. In Oslobodjenje, in
22 April of 1998, with you. The interviewer was Jelena Stamenkovic.
23 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, it is Slobodna Bosna, we understand.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you look at the original, Mr. Tieger,
25 you'll see it says Slobodna Bosna.
1 MR. TIEGER:
2 Q. And in the first part of the article, Mr. Mandic, you give some
3 of your background, describing the fact that you'd been involved with the
4 MUP since the age of 15 and talking about some of your history and some
5 of the events leading up to tensions in the MUP. And then the next
6 question is: In what ways did you help the Serbian side? And your
7 answer in that article is: "I gave them or put at their disposal
8 official cars. I recruited and admitted to the police force those Serbs
9 proposed by Radovan Karadzic and Ranko Dukic, but I also gave them some
10 material means and communications equipment. We would even deliver
11 weapons to Serbian police stations, for example, in Pale, Sokolac, et
12 cetera. We grabbed and shared out as much as was needed."
13 A. At a meeting in Krtelji, I think it took place on the 3rd of
14 April, 1992, which was attended by the Croatian, Muslim, and Serbian
15 leaders, the joint leadership of MUP, and that is when the special unit
16 was divided, and the Serbian part of the special unit, 35 men, headed by
17 Milenko Karisik went to Rakovica [phoen], a part of the company Upi at
18 the time, and it was agreed that the Serbian part of the police would go
19 to Vrace, to the old special police barracks and that a new special
20 police base, Krtelji, would be placed at the disposal of the Croats and
21 Muslims who remained behind.
22 On the night between Saturday and Sunday, that is, between the
23 4th and the 5th April, we went to Vrace, where an armed conflict broke
24 out between the reserve police members, composed of Muslims, and the
25 Serbian special police forces, and as a result, two Serbian policemen,
1 special policemen, were killed. Their names were Pupic and Lopatic, and
2 the other two were wounded. There were no casualties on the Muslim side.
3 That is when we entered the school building in Vrace and the old special
4 police base.
5 Concerning the recruitment of personnel and with the consent of
6 Rajko Dukic and Karadzic, each municipality, the town and region,
7 proposed three members each from their own ethnic groups. The
8 recruitment commission, Dukic and Karadzic, coordinated views with us and
9 we had chosen the best people to be admitted into our ranks.
10 So if in a town the chief was a Muslim, the police commander
11 would be a Serb, and the CID chief would be a Croat, or vice versa: If
12 the chief of the police was a Croat, the commander was a Muslim and the
13 CID chief would be a Serb. This referred exclusively to leadership in
14 certain police stations and in certain security services centres that at
15 the time were five in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
16 Q. Let me return, if I may, to the specific question of arming,
17 however. I had asked you whether or not part of the preparation for
18 separating the joint MUP was the arming of Serb police or certain Serb
19 police stations, and in the article in Slobodna Bosna -- so is the -- let
20 me ask it more directly. Is the answer yes, part of the preparation did
21 include arming of Serb police and Serb police stations?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Now, in addition, I had asked you earlier, as part of a compound
24 question, whether or not the beginnings of terminations of Muslims from
25 police stations began before the actual or final separation of the joint
2 A. A single Muslim [as interpreted], as far as I know, was dismissed
3 between the separation of the MUP and before I sent the dispatch to that
4 effect. And I repeat: The moment the ethnic or nationalist parties won
5 made it more difficult to maintain the balance of relationships within
6 the MUP, reflecting the national, ethnic composition of
7 Bosnia-Herzegovina, because we had a surplus of the Serbs in the MUP.
8 And the Serbs who were dismissed, not Muslims, at least not until I sent
9 this dispatch or this telegram instructing the division of the MUP of
11 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, it's going to be a fairly obvious
12 correction, I think, when anybody is reading the transcript, but plainly,
13 the word "not" should have been at the very -- or was at the very
14 beginning of that answer, and needs to be there on the transcript at some
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Mandic, did you say not a single Muslim,
17 as far as you know, was dismissed between the separation of the MUP and
18 before you sent the dispatch to that effect? Yes.
19 May I just ask you for your attention --
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Based on the MUP headquarters, as
21 far as I know, not a single Muslim was dismissed from any police station.
22 Whether there were any isolated cases, I cannot say. It may have
23 happened in other municipalities, but I have no knowledge of that.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, may I ask you whether my impression is
25 right that you are asking several times what happened after this dispatch
1 was sent and that Mr. Mandic elaborates on what happened before that
3 MR. TIEGER: No, Your Honour. Perhaps I've been unclear. This
4 -- I think Mr. Mandic correctly understood my intention to ask him about
5 any terminations before the dispatch was sent.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. It's my misunderstanding. Please proceed.
7 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, let me clarify that, and my apologies
8 for really confusing the issue. The term "dispatch" is one that we'll
9 hear in relation to a couple of documents. With reference to the
10 February 13th letter that Mr. Mandic sent, you are correct, and I think
11 Mr. Mandic also understood that it was correct, that I was referring to
12 events after that. That's true. And -- but I was referring to events
13 after that February 13th letter, but before the final separation of the
14 unified MUP.
15 JUDGE ORIE: It's clear to me now. Please proceed.
16 MR. TIEGER:
17 Q. Mr. Mandic, with regard to individual cases in which Muslims were
18 dismissed from police stations, let me ask you if you recall events in
19 Sokolac that may have been precipitated by Mr. Cvijetic.
20 A. It is true that before the final separation of the MUP, Mr.
21 Cvijetic had dismissed all Muslim staff, and at our joint meeting, we
22 passed a decision to suspend this police station, that it be excluded
23 from financing and also from the rest of the BH MUP.
24 Q. Muslims had been dismissed and ...
25 A. The reason was because he dismissed the Muslim employees at his
1 own will. And I think that was the only one and the first case of that
2 nature, did that without the knowledge or the consent from anyone in the
3 MUP, both the Serbian or other officials.
4 Q. And despite the decision by the leadership of the joint MUP in
5 response to the actions of Mr. Cvijetic, did you, in conjunction with Mr.
6 Karadzic, take steps to ensure that the police force in Sokolac, led by
7 Mr. Cvijetic, would continue to receive pay?
8 A. I don't remember that, that anything of that nature was taken.
9 Mico Stanisic was in charge of these matters.
10 Q. In that connection, then, Mr. Mandic, let me direct your
11 attention to two documents that might assist. The first is a small
12 portion of the 36th Assembly session of Republika Srpska.
13 THE REGISTRAR: And that will be Exhibit P418.
14 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, I note that there's an English
15 translation of this document that I think we need to improve upon by
16 separating from the rest of the document. I apologise for that. And we
17 will take steps as soon as possible to rectify that.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Apart from that, Mr. Tieger, could the
19 logistics be improved as well? Because usually when you indicate that a
20 new document will be presented to a witness, it's still on your desk,
21 then it has to travel all around the courtroom. If we could just go one
22 document ahead, so that would save a lot of time. So that, for example,
23 now the next -- that P419 would already be put at the disposal of Madam
25 MR. TIEGER: I'm not sure we can remedy that at this session.
1 We'll do so at the first opportunity.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
3 THE INTERPRETER: Mr. Tieger, would you be so kind as to provide
4 the ERN number for the interpreters. Thank you.
5 MR. TIEGER: 0215-1371.
6 Q. Mr. Mandic, I'm directing your attention to a short excerpt from
7 that session, during which you speak and say to the members of the
8 Assembly: "It's true, gentlemen. Vito and Delimustafic wanted to put me
9 in gaol and you know why: Because together with Stanisic I took 560
10 Hecklers to Romanija and divided them between Sokolac, Rogatica, Han
11 Pijesak, and Pale; and because when Zoran Cvijetic was commander of the
12 public security station in Sokolac three months before the war, I drove
13 all the Muslims out of the station and suspended them and Vito and Alija
14 forbade me to pay their pensions and I paid them out of a special fund
15 for fuel and pay."
16 And let me also direct your attention to another exhibit
17 referring to the same events, and that's ETV 000-243600.
18 THE REGISTRAR: P419.
19 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, excuse me. I wonder if Mr. Tieger
20 could just remind us or inform us. The 36th Assembly, I'm afraid I
21 simply don't remember the date of that. And the particular document that
22 was put to the witness a moment ago, P418, just says "Assembly of
23 Republika Srpska, 1992 to 1995." So it's taken from a more compendious
24 document. I just wonder if we could have the date, please.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger?
1 MR. TIEGER: I'll have to retrieve that, Your Honour. I don't
2 know the precise date.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps you could proceed, and once the date has
4 been found, you'll tell us. Please proceed.
5 MR. TIEGER:
6 Q. Mr. Mandic, P419 is an interview with you by a gentleman named
7 Risto Djogo on a programme called "My Guest is Truth." And if I could
8 direct your attention to your comments that appear at approximately about
9 25 per cent into the interview but at a portion marked 3210. You can see
10 along the side that there are markings representing the length of the
12 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, we're hopelessly confused. First of
13 all, we don't see the reference; and secondly, this doesn't seem to be an
14 interview with this gentleman at all.
15 JUDGE ORIE: What ERN number do you have in front of you you're
16 referring to, Mr. Tieger?
17 MR. TIEGER: The ERN number of the document I'm referring to,
18 Your Honour, is ET V000-2436001725.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We have a different document, I'm afraid. We
20 have ERN, and then V000 and then 2436, but nothing more. So there seems
21 to be some confusion. Would you perhaps show your document, just to
22 compare whether it's ...
23 MR. TIEGER: [Microphone not activated]
24 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please switch -- I didn't hear you.
25 MR. TIEGER: I apologise. It's the document, the format looked
1 the same, and my document indicates transcript of the broadcast "My Guest
2 is Truth" with Momcilo Mandic.
3 JUDGE ORIE: That's not what this document says. And we noticed
4 that a portion marked 3210 does not appear in the original B/C/S.
5 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, it seems that there are three
6 documents, we believe, with the first lot of numbers, but then there's a
7 suffix of further numbers which is where the discrepancy has emerged.
8 MR. TIEGER: I think I can see where the problem arose. The only
9 issue is how to resolve it effectively here. My suggestion would be as
10 follows, Your Honour. If it would --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Could it be put on the ELMO so that we -- is there a
13 MR. TIEGER: Yes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, could you -- the document Mr. Tieger is
15 using at this moment should be put on the ELMO.
16 Mr. Tieger, would you -- are you referring only to that part at
17 1832 or ...
18 MR. TIEGER: The part depicted on screen now is simply the first
19 page, indicating the introduction to the broadcast, and I would direct
20 the witness's attention to a portion on page 5 of the English
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 MR. TIEGER: And that's the portion that is highlighted toward
24 the bottom of the page.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you perhaps would read it slowly.
1 MR. TIEGER: I will. That portion of the interview during which
2 you're speaking, Mr. Mandic, states: "However, at the time, I had a
3 special cash register, as the head of one of the Ministry departments,
4 and since Zoran Cvijetic, God rest his soul, was the head of police in
5 Sokolac, who jumped before all of us and didn't exactly behave by the
6 agreed policy, he fired all employees of Muslim nationality before
7 everybody else did, and as a result, the police station in Sokolac was
8 suspended. Of course, people had to receive their salaries, to buy fuel
9 and everything else, because they didn't have means to live and work. In
10 the agreement with Mico Stanisic, he was already Serbian minister of
11 Serbian MUP, but with the knowledge of Radovan Karadzic, I transferred
12 the means from that cash register to Sokolac. That was to cover the
13 salaries, the fuel, and all that. That was very risky move which I hid
14 in the paperwork and decisions, saying that some of it went to Banja
15 Luka, some of it to Medici, some on different places. And that was the
16 way we kept this station going for two months."
17 Q. Mr. Mandic, having an opportunity to hear again your comments
18 from the 36th Assembly session and your remarks during the interview with
19 Mr. Djogo, does that refresh your memory about your response to the
20 suspension of the Sokolac police department?
21 A. Well, it wasn't exactly like that. In the special treasury or
22 cash register, I had two or three thousand German marks at the time, and
23 that certainly wasn't enough to cater to the salaries and expenses of the
24 SUP Sokolac. But the media kept stressing the role and importance of
25 individuals, so I mentioned this. But quite certainly, these people from
1 Sokolac received fuel from somewhere else, and I think their salaries
2 too, from the Sokolac SUP. And this can be checked out. If you look at
3 the records of the MUP, you will be able to see how many months this was
4 and how many months my special cash register had to cater to. I think
5 this was more media publicity than actually what was going on.
6 Q. Let me see if I can parse that out somewhat. Of course, you've
7 already indicated that the Sokolac SUP was suspended, and why. Is it
8 correct that you took some steps in response to that to ensure that this
9 now exclusively Serbian police force would be kept going?
10 A. Not by way of money. I didn't give any money, because in my cash
11 register I had a very small amount of money; negligible, in fact, which
12 was not enough for the employees. And as I said, this was more for the
13 purposes of the media, for publicity and the role -- to increase my role
14 in all this.
15 Now, as far as fuel is concerned, I think that during that time
16 some fuel was taken away from the Sokolac police station and that they
17 used that fuel for their own vehicles. That's the truth of it.
18 Q. Were you aware that there were efforts being made to keep the
19 Sokolac SUP going and to pay the Serbian police and at least do ...
20 A. Yes. Yes.
21 Q. And to the extent you could, I take it you supported that.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Now, we've referred --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, may I ask Mr. Mandic.
25 Mr. Mandic, you say this was -- you didn't pay -- it was
1 publicity, but in the Assembly of the Republika Srpska that was just read
2 to you, I think, you said: I paid them out of a special fund for fuel
3 and pay.
4 That's how to reconcile that you said that you did not pay and
5 what you said in the Assembly of the Republika Srpska?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct, Your Honour. In the
7 Assembly there was a verbal duel between myself and Biljana Plavsic. We
8 clashed, because our views diverged on certain issues. And at one point
9 she called for my dismissal. And in my verbal duel with Mrs. Plavsic, I
10 stressed that at one point in time I had helped the Sokolac police
11 station in material terms and in terms of fuel. However, as far as this
12 material assistance was concerned, there was none, because my special
13 cash register or treasury as the head, was very small, negligible, as I
14 said. I only had two or three thousand marks and some dinars, which was
15 negligible and a very small amount, which couldn't help anybody. It
16 certainly couldn't help the MUP employees.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But do I understand that you spent money not
18 to pay employees but to pay fuel for Sokolac? Or did you not at all pay?
19 So were you not telling the truth in the Assembly of Republika Srpska?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.
21 JUDGE ORIE: You're defending yourself, your position, you're
22 saying you did pay --
23 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, the witness's answer "correct" came
24 following a fairly composite question from Your Honour. It's very
25 difficult to see what he's affirming.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps I'll clarify.
2 Mr. Mandic, when you said in the Assembly of Republika Srpska:
3 "I paid them out of a special fund," did you pay?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
6 Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
7 MR. TIEGER:
8 Q. Now, Mr. Mandic, you've referred on more than one occasion to the
9 final splitting of the MUP. Let me direct your attention, then, to
10 Prosecution's next in order, 0049-0125.
11 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, as far as the previous document is
12 concerned, is that now the one that is going to be 419, scrapping the
13 original, incorrect one? And then are we go going to get --
14 JUDGE ORIE: It certainly will not, because it will add to the
15 confusion. I take it, Mr. Tieger, you will distribute immediately after
16 the break a document in which the text appears that you just read out.
17 MR. TIEGER: That's correct and that's what I understood Mr.
18 Stewart's question to be whether that distributed document correcting
19 reflecting the interview to which we were referring will now become 419.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That seems logical to me.
21 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour. That was my question and the
22 answer I'm a hundred per cent happy with. Thank you.
23 THE REGISTRAR: The next exhibit will be P420.
24 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, could we at some point, if Mr. Tieger
25 could just possibly take the opportunity of checking it or having it
1 checked over the break, if we could, please, have the dates of that 36th
2 Assembly. We could, I suppose, check that as well, but Mr. Tieger, I
3 believe, is going to do that. And then also the date of that programme,
4 "My Guest is Truth," that was being referred to a few minutes ago. That
5 would be helpful.
6 JUDGE ORIE: At the same time, Mr. Tieger, is this something you
7 could -- this subject you could finish within five minutes? If not, I
8 would suggest that we'll continue after the break and give Mr. Stewart an
9 opportunity to explain in the five minutes he asked for the procedural
11 MR. TIEGER: It seems like a perfectly appropriate time, Your
13 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
14 MR. TIEGER: I'm sorry.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I heard you saying that this was a perfectly
16 appropriate time.
17 MR. TIEGER: Thank you.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mandic, we'll have a break for approximately a
19 half-hour for you. Madam Usher will lead you out of the courtroom.
20 We'll first deal with a procedural matter and then we'd like to see you
21 back after the break.
22 Mr. Stewart.
23 [The witness stands down]
24 MR. STEWART: Yes. Your Honour, the matter relates to the
25 material which was supplied direct by Mr. Krajisnik to the Trial Chamber,
1 and the reason why I said I believed I could be fairly short is because I
2 don't wish to discuss the content of that particular material at all. Of
3 course the Trial Chamber, not in much of a position to discuss the
4 content because in response to my question you specifically have not
5 looked at it. But I should say, Your Honour, apart from a glance,
6 neither have I, at the moment. I know it relates to the witness Mr.
7 Bjelobrk, and I know the broad nature although I haven't myself opened
8 the compact disk.
9 But the point of principle is this, Your Honour, that occasional
10 opportunities for Mr. Krajisnik to communicate direct in court here to
11 the Tribunal are an exception to the general position that the conduct of
12 the case is in the hands of his counsel. When from time to time for
13 practical convenience any sort of material is communicated by the parties
14 directly to the Trial Chamber, and it is -- as between Prosecution and
15 Defence, of course, we offer each other the correct courtesy of providing
16 copies for each other, because there shouldn't be unilateral or secret,
17 as it were, communications with the Trial Chamber. So that procedure is
18 followed without any problem at all. And of course, anything coming from
19 Mr. Krajisnik, we would never wish to disguise, nor should we disguise
20 from the Prosecution that that has arrived. And in a sense it's not
21 confidential, either, because whatever Mr. Krajisnik's intentions if
22 material for practical convenience is transmitted behind the scenes for
23 the Trial Chamber, it still should be public because it's only a
24 practical substitute for what in principle should be conveyed in open
25 court. So that's the, if you like, the underlying analysis, we would
1 say, of the position.
2 However it comes to this, Your Honour, that I make it clear, and
3 it's consistent with the position that we have adopted as counsel before:
4 That we do not wish Mr. Krajisnik to make such communications to the
5 Trial Chamber. We wish, as his counsel, to have the conduct of the case,
6 as is the correct principle, the correct approach; as enshrined as it
7 happens both in the conduct code of conduct applicable specifically to
8 this Tribunal and to the very similar codes of conduct applicable to me
9 as a member of the bar of England and Wales, and Ms. Loukas as the
10 members of the bar of New South Wales. We do wish to do that.
11 And therefore, our request, Your Honour, is that, subject I
12 suppose always to very specific, very exceptional situations on which I
13 would wish always to have the opportunity, please, of making submissions,
14 comparable to the situation where Mr. Krajisnik wishes to address the
15 Tribunal directly here in open court, we would ask that the Trial Chamber
16 simply does not receive and is not willing to receive such direct
17 communications from Mr. Krajisnik and simply returns them, either to Mr.
18 Krajisnik or to us, as his counsel. But one way or another, that such
19 material is simply returned and it is made clear to Mr. Krajisnik that
20 unless some specific advance application is made by him to have some
21 direct communication, sidestepping, as it were, his counsel, that any
22 such communication should come through us.
23 Your Honour, that is our submission. I can elaborate as
24 necessary, but it doesn't really allow much elaboration. That is our --
25 I say request, but it is a submission and we do say it's correct in
1 principle and it is consistent with our having the conduct of Mr.
2 Krajisnik's case. And we of course submit it because we -- our
3 submission and our view, and we can express a view here as counsel, is
4 that that is in fact in Mr. Krajisnik's interests. We may have a
5 conflict of view, Mr. Krajisnik and we as his counsel, but we as his
6 counsel do not see it as a conflict of interest.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Stewart, may I first ask you whether you
8 being aware of material sent directly to the Chamber, whether you
9 discussed the matter with Mr. Krajisnik and whether this -- what would
10 have been the result of this discussion. I can imagine that you would
11 say it's a mistake, I'll ask it back or I'll first give it to you and ask
12 the Judges not to look at it. There are various possibilities. But did
13 you discuss it?
14 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I didn't know anything about it until
15 it had already been received by the Trial Chamber.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand. But after that.
17 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, Mr. Krajisnik knows my views on this.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then --
19 MR. STEWART: He's waving his hand, Your Honour, and --
20 JUDGE ORIE: I'm aware of that.
21 MR. STEWART: -- and wishes to --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of course. Of course, the usual -- usually
23 it's counsel who addresses the Chamber, but under these specific
24 circumstances, I'll not ignore the waving hand.
25 MR. STEWART: No. I'm not inviting you either in these
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik, would you like to address the
3 Chamber, in view of the material you sent?
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours, for
5 allowing me to address you. I have to say that I am taken by surprise by
6 what counsel has just said. It was following your instructions that I
7 sent my lawyers the documentation that I had sent to you, and they were
8 stenographic notes.
9 In order to assist you and for you to be able to focus on the
10 critical elements in the stenographic notes, I put on the CD parts of the
11 stenographic notes which had to do with the relevant issues linked to Mr.
12 Bjelobrk, in order to justify the reason for which I wanted to highlight
13 Mr. Bjelobrk and other important witnesses whom I wished to examine
14 additionally, and that was my aim in doing that. But I did supply Mr.
15 Stewart with all the documentation, and it was up to him to send those
16 stenographic notes on to you, which I assume he did. But in my request,
17 and I should like to ask you to do this now as well, I should like to
18 have relevant witnesses such as the one we have here today to be allowed
19 to ask them additional questions, because I am quite convinced that this
20 witness has mixed up the events with the relevant times and that very
21 often, unconsciously, he is in fact not telling the truth because of
22 that. So that was my purpose with Mr. Bjelobrk and other witnesses too.
23 Therefore, Your Honour, let me repeat this in an open session: I
24 have very good and skilful lawyers, and that is my opinion of Mr.
25 Stewart. But I am very dissatisfied with the manner in which the defence
1 case is being conducted, because they are not ready for a defence case
2 and they don't understand certain matters because they don't have enough
3 time to delve into them. And, unfortunately, our communication has been
4 rather poor. That is why in order to assist the Trial Chamber, and in
5 order to assist the Defence case generally, to help him, and to help
6 myself, and to help you have the proceedings evolve as well as possible.
7 So I should now like to ask you this -- and I discussed this
8 witness, today's witness, with Mr. Stewart. I think we have managed to
9 clarify many matters. And if he does succeed in getting through the
10 important points and examine the witness on the important points, then I
11 won't ask you to allow me to ask the witness additional questions.
12 Now, everything he said about me is true but needs explanation,
13 because it is in a different light that they should be seen. I would
14 like to be allowed to ask additional questions of witnesses who mention
15 me, not the other witnesses, and Ms. Loukas is doing that very well
16 herself. She is conducting the cross-examination very well. But when it
17 comes to witnesses of this kind, whom I knew, could you please make an
18 exception and allow me to ask additional questions. If I can't do so in
19 this way and be allowed to do so in this way, then I shall have to do it
20 in a different manner. But let me say that I don't wish to do so,
21 because I am very satisfied with the way this trial is being conducted
22 and I should like to assist the Trial Chamber. I'm very happy to see
23 when you ask witnesses questions yourself, because it is always your
24 intention to ascertain the truth. So I thank you for that and that is
25 what I had to say. Thank you.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Krajisnik. First of all, we have two
2 issues now. The first issue is the material sent to the Judges, and I
3 think Mr. Krajisnik added a matter which is, by way of exception, to
4 allow him to put questions to this witness.
5 I would say the second issue we'll not give any decision now
6 because there are still a lot of uncertainties about when this witness
7 will be cross-examined. So, therefore, I'd rather not going into that
9 I also now do understand, Mr. Krajisnik, that you, where - I'm
10 now working from my memory - where I said that in stenographic notes
11 could give a more precise picture of certain meetings, that of course
12 those stenographic notes might assist the Chamber. And I think then the
13 misunderstanding is only about how to introduce such matters.
14 From my experience as defence counsel, I can tell you that
15 defence counsel, whatever happens, and even if they would totally agree
16 that it would be helpful to have such precise and detailed information
17 available to a Trial Chamber, that defence counsel always want to see it
18 first. Therefore, I think we are mainly talking about which procedure to
19 follow. I do understand that you prepared the stenographic notes in such
20 a way that they are accessible for everyone who wants to read them.
21 Would you mind if we would -- it's about Mr. Bjelobrk, which is not
22 something that's dealing with today or tomorrow. Would you mind if we
23 return it to you, if you send it to Mr. Stewart, that Mr. Stewart looks
24 at it. If there's any hesitation whatsoever -- in timing, in content, in
25 whatever -- if he has any hesitation to send it to the Chamber, that you
1 would discuss that; and that if you agree on sending it to the Trial
2 Chamber, then of course we would need to find the proper procedural way
3 of introducing it and to have it in evidence. That's a technical aspect,
4 on which I certainly think Mr. Stewart could find the appropriate ways of
5 doing that.
6 Would that be a solution for you?
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have nothing against that. And
8 it was not my intention to make a problem here, and I completely share
9 your opinion that the best thing is when one has a good cooperation with
10 one's lawyer. Because I have a good lawyer. I don't have a bad lawyer.
11 If I did, I would say it loud and clear here. But I thank you.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, I take it that this resolved this
13 matter. And let's not give rulings in general terms, because it seems to
14 be a misunderstanding where Mr. Krajisnik only wanted to assist the Trial
16 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour. I'm perfectly happy that we have
17 resolved this particular matter, and the wider, more general principles
18 and questions, I think Your Honour is suggesting and I would, with
19 respect, completely agree that those should be left for another day,
20 another time.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps they might never come up again.
22 MR. STEWART: We can live in hope, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik, we'll return the material to you, and
24 we do understood that there's a fair chance sooner or later in whatever
25 form we'll receive it anyhow and of course the Prosecution will be aware
1 of it as well. And we now adjourn until five minutes --
2 MR. STEWART: May I just say, Your Honour, that Your Honour is
3 100 per cent right, call us old fashioned, but yes as Defence counsel we
4 really, really do like to see material first. Yes, Your Honour is
5 absolutely right about that.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We adjourn until five minutes past 11.00.
7 --- Recess taken at 10.40 a.m.
8 --- On resuming at 11.10 a.m.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, the Chamber now received a copy of P419,
10 the new one. "My Guest is Truth." Please proceed.
11 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour. And in that connection,
12 there was a question about the date of that interview.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 MR. TIEGER: It is shown on the cover page of the document as
15 July, August 1994. I can also indicate at this time that the date of the
16 36th Assembly session was 30 December 1993.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please proceed.
18 MR. TIEGER: And lastly, Your Honour, I would indicate that we
19 provided lined versions of the B/C/S.
20 JUDGE ORIE: B/C/S originals, yes.
21 Mr. Stewart, will we receive a B/C/S copy of P419 soon.
22 MR. STEWART: Mr. Tieger, Your Honour is addressing or --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I made a mistake.
24 MR. STEWART: Yes. I just want to be clear, Your Honour, because
25 I wouldn't know the answer.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, I see P419 is only in English at this
3 MR. TIEGER: It's not available at the moment, Your Honour.
4 We'll have it at the first opportunity.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you. Please proceed. Just in order to
6 save paper, is it of any use to keep the old P419, which then will
7 reappear under another number, or is it better to give rid of it.
8 MR. TIEGER: I don't think we'll see it again in this examination
9 again, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Then, of course, the witness should be
11 brought into the courtroom.
12 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, Mr. Tieger very helpfully indicated
13 that we would be provided with a lined version of the B/C/S. We're now
14 totally at a loss as to what it is we're being provided with a lined
15 version of.
16 MR. TIEGER: Sorry.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I took it that it was from the -- I take it
18 from the interviews with Mr. Mandic.
19 MR. TIEGER: That is correct, Your Honour.
20 MR. STEWART: Yes. Thanks for clarification.
21 MR. TIEGER: And you say the interviews. It would be the March
22 interview. The only one available in B/C/S.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 [The witness entered court]
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mandic, please be seated. Mr. Tieger will
1 resume his examination-in-chief.
2 MR. TIEGER:
3 Q. Mr. Mandic, just before the recess, I think you had been provided
4 with Prosecution's Exhibit 420, which is a document dated March 31st,
5 1992 and bears your signature as deputy minister of the interior. And
6 just for clarification, as an initial matter, Mr. Mandic, although the
7 English translation says "deputy minister of the interior," is it correct
8 that your position with the joint MUP at that time, that is, on March
9 31st, 1992, was assistant minister in charge of crimes?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. Now, more substantively, Mr. Mandic, is the document we're
12 looking at now, P420, the directive to Serbian police officers in
13 accordance with the decisions of the Assembly and the February 11th, 1992
14 meeting to split the joint MUP? Sorry, Mr. Mandic. Are you taking your
15 time and reading the document or did you not understand the question?
16 A. I'm waiting for a question. I know the document, yes.
17 Q. Okay. No. The question was whether or not you can confirm that
18 this is the document that was sent to Bosnian Serb police officials and
19 officers in accordance with the decision of the Assembly of the Serbian
20 People and with the February 11th meeting to split up the joint MUP.
21 A. Correct.
22 Q. Mr. Mandic, was the dissemination of this document effectively
23 the start of the war in Bosnia? That is, did you, in effect, by sending
24 this document, begin the conflict in Bosnia?
25 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, that's not an appropriate question.
1 That's -- it's far beyond and far too general beyond any factual question
2 which is appropriate to address to this witness. Questions must be more
3 specific than that.
4 MR. TIEGER: Let me refine it slightly, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Tieger. Especially the phrase "start of
6 the war" is too unclear, I would say. Well, I would say that you could
7 give all kind of answers to that, depending on how you interpret these
8 words, and there should be no confusion about the question itself.
9 Please proceed.
10 MR. TIEGER:
11 Q. Mr. Mandic, at the time you sent the document, did you realise or
12 believe that the dissemination of this document would commence the
13 conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina?
14 A. No. I only acted in accordance to the decisions of the Serbian
15 people which on the 27th of March, 1992, passed such a decision, and also
16 the law on the interior. Since I was a high-ranking administration
17 official, or actually, in terms of rank, the top official in the joint
18 MUP, I was instructed by the newly appointed minister of the interior,
19 Mico Stanisic, to send this kind of telegram, and that's what I did.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mandic, may I just interfere. I'd like you to
21 carefully listen to the question, because from your answer, you explained
22 why and on whose instructions you sent this document. The question,
23 however, was whether you did realise or believe that the dissemination of
24 the document would commence the conflict.
25 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, he did -- I'm sorry. I beg your
2 JUDGE ORIE: If you would say that acting on instructions was the
3 only thing you had in your mind, that's clear; but one does not exclude
4 the other. Mr. Tieger did not specifically ask you on whose instructions
5 you sent the document, but he asked you whether you believed this to have
6 a certain effect or that it would bring about a certain result or would
7 start a kind of development. I'd like you to focus especially on the
8 question put to you.
9 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, before the witness does that, Your
10 Honour, I apologise to be too hasty, because sometimes it's difficult to
11 judge, Your Honour, before the -- well, I won't say that, Your Honour.
12 But he did answer the question. He answered it very
13 specifically. He then went on to add something, but he answered the
14 question with the very first single word of his answer. And if that had
15 stood, it was a complete answer to Mr. Tieger's question. He then added
16 something else.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But if you would consider the following lines,
18 where he starts: "No. Only -- I only." If that would be an explanation
19 of his first answer, it still -- the question should be put to him again.
20 Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
21 MR. TIEGER:
22 Q. Mr. Mandic, irrespective of who gave you instructions to prepare
23 and disseminate the document, did you understand at that time that the
24 dissemination of that document would commence the conflict in Bosnia and
1 A. I did not think about that.
2 Q. Did you subsequently come, or later come to understand that by
3 the dissemination of that document, you and those who had instructed you
4 to send it had started the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina?
5 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, it's not clear why this witness's
6 subsequent opinion, retrospectively, is part of his factual evidence
7 before this Trial Chamber.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger.
9 MR. TIEGER: I think the -- I think it's a predicate question
10 which has a considerable relevance, Your Honour. The determination or
11 the significance of this particular act or this particular document is of
12 considerable importance to this case, and I think this is clearly a
13 witness who can shed some light on that.
14 MR. STEWART: He's not a witness of opinion, Your Honour. He's
15 not a witness of opinion. The fact that he may have subsequently formed
16 some view has then really not nothing to do with the facts. If this is
17 intended to elicit some factual evidence from the witness, then that
18 should be done specifically rather than seeking opinion evidence from
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'm not sure Your Honour has turned
22 his microphone off at any point. It's only fair for -- we sometimes make
23 that mistake, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: There was no microphone open.
25 MR. STEWART: Well, I don't know why it is, then, through the
1 ether, we were managing to hear quite a bit of what Your Honours were
2 saying. It's -- I think it's only fair to --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much for drawing our attention to it.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE ORIE: I am aware that we have some difficulties now and
6 then, but there's nothing really scandalous about what the Judges
7 exchanged. The objection is sustained. Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
8 MR. TIEGER:
9 Q. Mr. Mandic, I'd like to direct your attention to Prosecution's
10 next exhibit in order. I don't know if the registrar has it at this
11 point. It's L009-7976.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, just to avoid whatever confusion: Your
13 number you gave is L009-7976. What we have in front of us now is --
14 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, I'm going to guess you have 0303.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And then 1202.
16 MR. TIEGER: Correct. Well, that is the -- I tried to signal
17 that the exhibit to which I was turning, in light of the responses and
18 the Court's ruling, might be different from the one that the registrar
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MR. TIEGER: But I encourage the Court to hang on to 0303.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I will.
23 THE REGISTRAR: P421.
24 MR. STEWART: I'm sorry. Which is P421 now?
25 JUDGE ORIE: L009-7976.
1 MR. STEWART: Yes. Thank you.
2 JUDGE ORIE: And what was supposed to become P421, I do
3 understand will most likely be P422.
4 MR. TIEGER:
5 Q. Mr. Mandic, P421 is a document dated March 21st, 1992 [sic],
6 bearing the signature of the Minister of the Interior, Alija
7 Delimustafic. And Mr. Delimustafic was your direct superior; is that
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, I see in the transcript "document dated
10 March 21st, 1992." I take it it should be 31st.
11 MR. TIEGER: Yes. Definitely the 31st, Your Honour. Thank you.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
13 MR. TIEGER:
14 Q. Sorry, Mr. Mandic. Mr. Delimustafic was your direct superior, as
15 the minister of the interior?
16 A. Yes, he was.
17 Q. Thank you. And in this document, he expresses his reaction to
18 the dispatch that we just looked at and which you sent; is that right?
19 A. Yes, it is.
20 Q. And among other things, Mr. Delimustafic expresses the belief
21 that the majority of MUP employees want to work in a unified or united
22 MUP and that they find any segregation, particularly on a national basis,
23 difficult, and he urges MUP employees not to allow anyone to separate
24 them from their colleagues; is that correct?
25 A. Yes, it is.
1 Q. Let me also ask you, then, to direct your attention to
2 Prosecution's next in order, which is ET 0210-0215.
3 THE REGISTRAR: P422.
4 MR. TIEGER:
5 Q. Mr. Mandic, P422 is an issue from 1 April 1992 of Oslobodjenje
6 that directs its attention to the division of the MUP announced
7 yesterday, or as it says at the beginning of the article, the division of
8 the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Mr. Mandic, let me ask you first of
9 all if you have that article from Oslobodjenje in front of you. Take a
10 moment, then, to orient yourself to it.
11 This issue devotes considerable attention to the events of the
12 previous day and to the division of the MUP, as you can see. We've
13 already examined the reaction of the minister of the interior to the
14 dispatch that you sent. On page 2 of the English translation, we see a
15 portion of that issue entitled "MUP union organising a public protest.
16 No to the divisions." Do you see that, sir?
17 A. Yes, I do.
18 Q. And that reflects, does it not, the response of the independent
19 union of the persons employed at the Ministry of Internal Affairs, which
20 stated in part: "Shall we look at each other as targets? Shall we
21 forget the decades of work while protecting each others' back? Shall we
22 provoke the beginning of the war by dividing the war that will take our
23 loved ones?" And the article goes on to note that certain members of the
24 union of Serbian nationality did not support an undivided MUP and would
25 be expressing that view as well.
1 Was the reaction in Oslobodjenje, the reaction of the independent
2 union of employees of the MUP, part of the immediate response to the
3 dispatch that you sent instructing the division of the MUP?
4 A. Yes, it was.
5 Q. And similarly, in connection with that, I'd like to ask you to
6 look at Prosecution's next in order, ET SA 04-0273.
7 THE REGISTRAR: P423.
8 MR. TIEGER:
9 Q. Mr. Mandic, P423 is a document sent to, as you can see, many
10 levels of the joint MUP, from the public security station in Zvornik.
11 And it's signed by the Zvornik public security station chief and the
12 leaders of its organisational units. Now, that document also expresses a
13 reaction specifically to the fax that was sent by you on March 31st, as
14 well as the fax that was sent by Minister of Interior Delimustafic in
15 response; is that right?
16 A. Yes, it is.
17 Q. And it expresses the view that the -- that all workers of the
18 Zvornik public security station are in favour of unity in the MUP and
19 therefore against any divisions on an ethnic basis, and also urges urgent
20 measures in the joint MUP to clear up inter-ethnic relations in the
21 leadership of the MUP and to stop the manipulation of employees because
22 this is very dangerous at this time and could lead to inter-ethnic
23 conflicts. Is that correct?
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. Mr. Mandic, having reviewed those documents -- the response from
1 the public security station officials in Zvornik; who expressed their
2 concern that division of the MUP would lead to inter-ethnic conflict; the
3 position of the union of MUP employees that dividing the MUP would be the
4 beginning of a war, a war that would take the lives of their loved ones;
5 the response of Mr. Delimustafic -- does that refresh your recollection
6 at all on your awareness of the impact that dividing the MUP would have
7 on Bosnia and Herzegovina and the relative likelihood that it would
8 produce an inter-ethnic conflict?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And in fact, Mr. Mandic, did you later acknowledge that by
11 sending the fax on March 31st, in response to instructions as you've
12 indicated, that you and Mr. Stanisic effectively began the conflict in
13 Bosnia and Herzegovina?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Can I turn, Your Honour, now to 0303-1202.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's the one that --
17 MR. TIEGER: -- was prematurely distributed, yes.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 THE REGISTRAR: P424.
20 MR. TIEGER:
21 Q. Mr. Mandic, P424 is an interview with you by Ekstra Magazin,
22 conducted by Radmila Zigic. As you can see from the caption under the
23 photograph, "I hope to be the first and last ambassador in my own state,"
24 it was conducted at the time when you were director or the chief of the
25 bureau in Belgrade in 1993 and 1994.
1 MR. STEWART: Is it possible to be more specific than that in
2 putting the question?
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, would you have any further details?
4 MR. TIEGER: No, Your Honour. I only have a contextual date for
6 Q. Mr. Mandic, that would be correct, would it not, that the
7 interview was conducted at a time when you were director of the bureau?
8 If you would look at both the caption under the photograph, and I would
9 turn your attention to about the fourth question: "Can your office of
10 director of the bureau be considered an ambassadorial post, as it is
11 often popularly designated?" I believe the questions are underlined.
12 A. What was the question, please?
13 Q. I directed your attention to that particular question simply to
14 ask you if -- to confirm that the interview took place at a time when you
15 were the director of the bureau in Belgrade.
16 A. Probably.
17 Q. That was in 1993 and 1994; is that right? I realise that's only
18 -- that's a broad range.
19 A. That is the time when I was the director of the bureau.
20 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, it isn't very satisfactory to have
21 such a broad range in relation to a document which is, after all, in a
22 published organ.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, you're invited to give further details
24 as soon as possible on the date of publication of the Ekstra Magazin.
25 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, I will advise the Court at the earliest
1 opportunity if we could advise of the date or of the reasons why not.
2 JUDGE ORIE: First of all, we were interested to have the date.
3 I take it it must be somewhere. Of course if you have no date, of course
4 we'd like to be informed why not. But yes, please proceed.
5 MR. TIEGER:
6 Q. Mr. Mandic, I'd like to direct your attention to a portion of
7 that interview which occurs late in the interview, and if you'll turn to
8 the -- about the fifth question from the last one. That question begins:
9 Biljana Plavsic is not the only person who got her relatives out.
10 First of all, do you see that?
11 A. Yes, I do.
12 Q. And in the course of your answer to that question, you say the
13 following: "The fact that some see me as Slobodan's man is a result of
14 the fact that Mico Stanisic and I are friends. Mico Stanisic and I
15 started the war in Bosnia. We separated the Serbian part of the MUP,
16 created the MUP, and set out to Vrace. We were supposed to be shot by
17 firing-squad that evening."
18 And then you go on to compare yourself to others who did not
19 engage in similar actions and while labels are being stuck on you.
20 Mr. Mandic, does that refresh your recollection about
21 subsequently acknowledging that the splitting of the MUP commenced the
22 war in Bosnia?
23 MR. STEWART: Excuse me, Your Honour. Maybe it's just me here.
24 Mr. Tieger in his question started with a quotation, "the fact that some
25 see me as Slobodan's man is a result of the fact that Mico Stanisic and I
1 are friends. Mico Stanisic and I started the war." I can see Mico
2 Stanisic and I started the war in the bold passage, but I can't see
3 immediately before that the reference to "some see me as" -- "the fact
4 that some see me as Slobodan's man." I'm just not seeing it.
5 MR. TIEGER: The bold passage is a paraphrase of the actual text
6 that appears before that. So if you look to the unbolded text,
7 immediately below that you'll see the passage.
8 JUDGE ORIE: In the original you'll see highlighted portions.
9 It's clear to me now.
10 MR. STEWART: I see now. Well, yes. What a strange way of doing
12 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps you'll repeat your question to the witness,
13 Mr. Tieger.
14 MR. TIEGER:
15 Q. Mr. Mandic, does that refresh your recollection about
16 subsequently acknowledging that the splitting of the MUP commenced the
17 conflict in Bosnia?
18 A. The division of the MUP did not precipitate the war in Bosnia.
19 I'll quote the example of Bijeljina, where inter-ethnic clashes started
20 well before the 31st of March. The clashes in Herzegovina began much
21 before the 31st of March, and that applied to Mosor as well. That is
22 before the dispatch. Also, the Serbian policemen were killed in the SUP
23 of Novo Sarajevo and in the area of Capljina. Therefore, there were
24 armed incidents before. One of the most prominent took place in
25 Bijeljina, when Biljana Plavsic and other top officials of
1 Bosnia-Herzegovina went to meet Zeljko Raznjatovic, Arkan, where armed
2 conflict broke out when the paramilitary forces captured that town. And
3 that was at least one month before the division of the MUP.
4 Q. Mr. Mandic, you indicated a couple of times in response to
5 questions about the splitting of the unified MUP into ethnic divisions
6 that you were acting in accordance with instructions that you were given;
7 is that right?
8 A. That's right.
9 Q. And is that something you've consistently maintained as well,
10 that is, that your act was not your -- not your sole initiative, but that
11 you were acting at the behest of your superiors?
12 A. Correct.
13 Q. And in that connection, can I ask you to turn to another portion
14 of the article. That would be the fifth question from the beginning of
15 the article in P424.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, have you finished with this portion of
17 the interview? Because I would have an additional question then.
18 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mandic, the interview states that you've said
20 "Mico Stanisic and I started the war in Bosnia," and then, in the
21 following lines, it says how you separated the Serbian part of the MUP,
22 that you created the MUP, et cetera.
23 If you did not start the war, if the war was not started by the
24 separation of the Serbian part of the MUP, not by the creation of the MUP
25 but by other events, how did you then start the war, as the interview
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that was a free
3 interpretation by the journalist. I cannot recall exactly what I said 12
4 years ago.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Does this mean that you say that you did not
6 say to the journalist that you started the war?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember what I said to the
8 journalist 12 years ago.
9 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'd like to make an observation about
10 this question unusually in the absence of the witness, about this
11 particular -- not specifically Your Honour's question, in fact, but the
12 -- this whole passage in the interview. And I would, if I may, I would
13 particularly like to make that in the absence of the witness.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Mandic, could you please follow the usher
15 and leave the courtroom for a second.
16 Mr. Stewart, would you find it appropriate, also in view of the
17 role of counsel, that he remain here?
18 [The witness stands down]
19 MR. STEWART: I'm not troubled by the remaining presence of
20 counsel on the basis that there is no communication.
21 JUDGE ORIE: He's instructed.
22 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, it's this: It's really to raise a
23 possibility, because I don't know the answer to this. But it does look
24 as if it's distinctly possible -- this answer, as reported by the
25 journalist in this interview, and I'm talking about page 4 of the
1 English, the fact that "some see me as Slobodan's man is a result of the
2 fact that Mico Stanisic and I are friends "and then the next bit, which
3 is the critical passage: Mico Stanisic and I started the war in Bosnia;
4 we separated the Serbian part of MUP; created the MUP and set out to
5 Vrace; we were supposed to be shot by firing-squad that evening.
6 That last bit does at least raise the possibility that what was happening
7 here was not simply the witness saying this is my view -- and after all,
8 it's a second-hand report by a journalist, anyway -- but that he was
9 really reciting or reported by the journalist as saying, reciting what
10 others were saying, and particularly "we were supposed to be shot by
11 firing-squad." Is he saying that in his view we were supposed to be shot
12 by firing-squad or that somebody else was saying they were supposed to be
13 shot by firing-squad? So I hope I'm making myself clear. The underlying
14 basis of this questioning may be flawed.
15 JUDGE ORIE: It may be. We'll -- I do understand. Rightly you
16 have drawn our attention to a possible interpretation of what this
17 interview says and you also rightly have drawn our attention to the fact
18 that, of course, this is not necessarily a literal reference to what he
19 said, but cautions us. To act cautiously in this respect is something
20 the Chamber fully understands.
21 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, may I take advantage of the fact the
22 witness is out of the court to say something, that as Mr. Tieger explores
23 once again this area of who gave instructions to whom, we don't appear
24 yet in this bit of the evidence to have got into the realm of a
25 justification for hostile witness, cross-examination-type questions. Our
1 submission is that we are still in a mode, if I may put it that way,
2 where the questions here should be put in as neutral and non-leading a
3 form as possible, at least in the first place.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger.
5 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, if the Court is asking me for a
6 response to Mr. Stewart's suggestion that -- I'm not sure he's directing
7 the Court's attention or my attention to any particular question --
8 MR. STEWART: I could, if it would help.
9 JUDGE ORIE: No, Mr. Tieger, Mr. Stewart is asking your attention
10 that at least on some major points, there are no indications at this
11 moment that the need to keep the witness on the track you had in mind has
12 become clear, and therefore you should refrain from leading. And
13 specifically, Mr. Stewart referred to the issue of instructions received
14 by the witness. I just want to know whether you take his suggestion or
15 that you say: No, the basis for what he -- the basis and the course of
16 the examination is such that you would disagree with him.
17 MR. TIEGER: I think I do, Your Honour. And I understand the
18 Court's instructions, and I understood from the way the examination had
19 been proceeding that the Court was reasonably satisfied that the
20 examination was proceeding in a fair manner, which is certainly my
21 intention. To the extent that there is any inadvertent deviation from
22 that, I will of course attempt to correct it. But I am attempting to
23 direct the witness's attention to issues that need to be discussed, but
24 not in any particular manner.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And I do understand that Mr. Stewart says that
1 if there's no clear indication that there's any need to lead the witness,
2 that at least you should start in a non-leading way.
3 MR. TIEGER: I understand, Your Honour. I thought I had been,
4 and where --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. No. I think it was just in order to avoid any
6 problems in the near future.
7 MR. STEWART: It might help if I'm a little bit specific there,
8 Your Honour. Mr. Tieger was about, perhaps in his mind, is about to put
9 to the witness the fifth question in this interview, and what I'm saying
10 is that it's not appropriate for him at this point to put that fifth
11 question and the answer to that fifth question to the witness, because
12 it's clearly designed to lead the witness into the answer to the question
13 which Mr. Tieger was asking him a short while ago, as to where he got his
14 instructions in relation to the splitting of the MUP. So that's the
15 specific point.
16 In general, the way that cross-examination -- examinations, slip
17 of the tongue -- the way that examinations proceed fairly is by counsel
18 asking questions, counsel on the other side objecting as appropriate and
19 the Trial Chamber making appropriate rulings. That's how we achieve
21 JUDGE ORIE: I think the point is clear now. Mr. Tieger, unless
22 you would have any further comment.
23 MR. TIEGER: I don't have any further comment, Your Honour. I
24 think the way -- and I'm going to say again. I think the way the
25 examination is proceeding is entirely fair. I disagree with counsel.
1 JUDGE ORIE: We'll continue, then.
2 Madam Usher, would you please escort the witness into the
3 courtroom. I would have one or two more questions to the witness on the
4 issue raised before Mr. Stewart intervened.
5 [The witness entered court]
6 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for your patience, Mr. Mandic. Did you
7 read the interview as published at the time it was published?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember this interview at
9 all, to be quite frank, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Mandic.
11 Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
12 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 Q. Mr. Mandic, I had just directed your attention to the fifth
14 question that appears in the article, and that question is directed to
15 your reaction to the political conflict and severance of relations
16 between Republika Srpska and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. And
17 your first sentence in response is: "As a man, I am very devoted to both
18 Slobodan Milosevic and to Radovan Karadzic. With Karadzic and Krajisnik,
19 I began the war in Sarajevo and now when I am sitting here and watching
20 what happened, I find justification for the Serbian leadership of
22 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, this is exactly the question to which
23 I was specifically objecting.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 MR. STEWART: That's the whole problem.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Tieger. Let me just ask you --
2 Mr. Mandic, do you speak any English? Do you understand any
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, a little.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Then I'd like to ask you again to leave the
6 courtroom for a second.
7 [The witness stands down]
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, what would be your question? I mean, if
9 your question would be: Is this what you said to a reporter? Then it's
10 fair to put it to him, to this witness. If, however, your question would
11 be: Is this the way you personally took the political conflict and the
12 severance of the relations, then of course you have whispered the answer
13 in his near such a leading way, against which Mr. Stewart clearly
14 objected in advance. Could I ask you what your question would be.
15 MR. TIEGER: Okay. First of all, I'm sorry if that was
16 understood as an objection in advance to that particular question.
17 Let me set the backdrop to this particular question so that the
18 Court can understand it in its entirety and rule fairly. The witness had
19 said on a number of occasions that the splitting of the MUP was in
20 response to instructions from his superiors or from the leadership. And
21 I asked him if that was a position he maintained, he had maintained
22 consistently, and I believe he indicated yes. We've heard considerable
23 evidence about who the leadership was. This is hardly coming as a
24 surprise, and this is corroboration of -- or not, depending on what the
25 witness answers -- of just that. I accept fully that we're trying to
1 proceed in a manner that is not leading, but I think the Court has to
2 bear in mind that these are witnesses who are not proofed. Clearly in a
3 proofing this kind of document would be presented to the witness he would
4 be asked the relative significance in light of the overall information he
6 But now, in light of the objection that Mr. Stewart has been
7 raising, we -- I think we've reintroduced into this process the sort of
8 formalistic protocols that exist in jury systems whereby we ask a very
9 general question in order to receive some kind of answer and move
10 progressively toward the information that everybody knows is at the heart
11 of the issue. I'm not trying to suggest answers to this witness, but I
12 don't think that by presenting him with something that's been said before
13 and asking him its relationship to those issues to which he has testified
14 I'm doing that.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think Mr. Stewart suggested that we'd start,
16 at least, with an open question and then confront the witness with any
17 answer he had given in an interview after that. I'll not give any
18 general opinion of the Chamber on the trial techniques as developed in
19 jury systems. It's not the time to do it. But we listen carefully to
20 your objections to the use of that time-consuming way of examination of
21 the witness.
22 You're invited, Mr. Tieger, to put the question in a more
23 general -- at least in a less leading way. The problem is that when you
24 started reading, the Chamber, at least, didn't know what your question
25 would be. Therefore, if you want to seek confirmation or denial of the
1 words spoken to an interviewer, then of course you have to read it to the
2 witness. But if you're trying to seek an answer to the question, a
3 question that was put to the witness at that time by a journalist as
4 well, then of course the proper way would be not to already read the
5 answer to him.
6 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, may I be more, just for one moment, be
7 more specific in the absence of the witness about what we submit the
8 problem is. A few minutes ago, and it's now a few minutes ago, Mr.
9 Tieger put the question to the witness about his getting instructions
10 from the leadership in relation to the division of MUP.
11 Now what he's doing, and we've seen this before, before he's
12 inviting the witness to go further into that issue, he's putting very
13 directly and specifically before the witness a piece of the interview
14 where, surprise, surprise, one of the names that appears is Mr.
15 Krajisnik. That's the point. Of course the Prosecution want to link all
16 this to Mr. Krajisnik; that's what we're here. But the way it should not
17 be done in these circumstances, unless we, through answers we get to the
18 point where it is legitimate -- but the way it should not be done in the
19 first place is by waving Mr. Krajisnik's name under the nose of the
20 witness in that way.
21 MR. TIEGER: Maybe that does get to the heart of the issue, Your
22 Honour. Because I think that's a completely misguided approach to this
23 matter. To say that the Prosecution is linking Mr. Krajisnik is
24 precisely the -- illustrates the fallacious nature of that argument.
25 We're talking about an article, we talked about a portion of it. Now --
1 an interview with this witness. Now I turn to another portion of the
2 interview in which Mr. Krajisnik is linked to those particular acts. Why
3 it's necessary to go through some -- I mean, with all respect, relatively
4 formalistic approach which ignores the fact that this witness has
5 identified who the leadership was in the course of this testimony; has
6 said that he acted at the behest of the leadership in dividing the MUP;
7 and now I turn to a portion of the interview that we're looking at at the
8 time to direct his attention to it, that that is somehow the Prosecution
9 linking Mr. Krajisnik rather than the exhibit itself or the witness
10 himself, is false.
11 MR. STEWART: Perhaps the best course, Your Honour, would be for
12 Mr. Tieger, then, to indicate, in the absence of the witness now, very
13 specifically what his question is going to be. Having put this piece of
14 the interview under the nose of the witness, what are the questions that
15 are then going to follow? Because that will enable the Trial Chamber,
16 and of course as it happens the Defence, the basis of any submissions, to
17 see what it is.
18 JUDGE ORIE: I'll first ask Mr. Tieger. I have to go back and
19 return to exactly -- I do remember that the witness told us about the
20 positions and the leadership. Was there a specific indication that these
21 instructions to distribute this -- he said he acted on the instruction.
22 Was Mr. Krajisnik specifically mentioned in that context?
23 MR. TIEGER: Mr. Krajisnik -- I don't think the word "Krajisnik"
24 came up. He referred to the Assembly; he referred to the February 11th
25 meeting;, referred to the Council of Ministers, where Mr. Karadzic and
1 Mr. Krajisnik participated in the discussion and so on. So in that
2 sense, certainly yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You say implicitly yes. Then this would ...
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE ORIE: Before I give a ruling, you're invited to say
6 exactly what the question will be to the witness.
7 MR. TIEGER: I'm only hesitating because I had intended to ask
8 that question some time back and we've gone through a few permutations
9 since. But essentially, Your Honour, I think it was going to be whether
10 or not this was a reflection of his consistent position that the act of
11 splitting the MUP was not at his initiative; it was done at the behest of
12 his superiors.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE ORIE: We'll ask the witness to come in again, and I might
15 have a few questions for him.
16 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, may I just make one observation on
17 that. In the terms in which the question has just been expressed, the
18 further question arises why it need to be asked. Because the witness --
19 that's in a sense asked and answered.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Would you please refer us to the exact source.
21 MR. STEWART: "That the act of splitting the MUP was not at his
22 initiative, it was done at the behest of his superiors. I'd also have to
23 track back about five or ten minutes into the transcript to find that
24 answer. Because -- but as I recall it, Mr. Tieger said something like:
25 And this was the splitting. This was done on the instructions of your
1 superiors or on the instruction of the leaders. And he said yes. So he
2 has said that. So, so far as what Mr. Tieger's question is supposed to
3 be about to be is concerned, that's already been dealt with. If Mr.
4 Tieger is then seeking to be more specific in identifying not simply the
5 fact that Mr. Mandic got his instructions from somewhere else, but from
6 whom specifically he got those instructions, then we go right back to the
7 very objection I'm making: the putting in front of him specific names
8 and, surprise, surprise, one specific name, Mr. Krajisnik, for the
9 purposes of that exercise. And the reference is page 51, line 9 --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, you're moving too far away from your
12 MR. STEWART: I'm sorry, Your Honour. Page 51, lines 9 through
13 to line 17, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: I'd like to take the parties back to page 41, where
15 the witness said: "I was instructed by the newly appointed Minister of
16 the Interior, Mico Stanisic, to send this kind of telegram, and that's
17 what I did." So the direct instructions, Mr. Tieger, were given by
18 Stanisic. Of course, on the basis of what had been decided before, but
19 Mr. Mandic was not present at that meeting where these decisions were
20 taken, if I correctly understood his testimony. Is that a correct
22 MR. TIEGER: Sorry, the Council of Ministers meeting or February
23 11th meeting? Mr. Mandic was not present, as I understand it, at the
24 Council of Ministers meeting. He was present at the February 11th
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And then he was instructed to ...
2 Let's call the witness in again and see whether we can hear some
3 evidence from him.
4 [The witness entered court]
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mandic, I would have a few questions for you.
6 As far as the instructions are concerned to separate the Serbian MUP from
7 the united MUP, did I understand correctly that this was a decision taken
8 by the Council of Ministers, in which you were not present?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The decision was made by the
10 Assembly of the Serb People in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and at the Assembly
11 was the minister -- the Council of Ministers. I was not a member of the
12 Council of Ministers myself, so I was not there at the meeting.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It was later discussed on the 11th of
14 February; is that correct?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The 11th of February, yes. This
16 was discussed. The meeting was held in Banja Luka, of the leaders of
17 Serb ethnicity in the joint MUP of Bosnia-Herzegovina. And some
18 conclusions were made that were presented to me by the Prosecutor.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And then you have sent these instructions or
20 the dispatch to the -- to some of the MUP officers; is that correct?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I sent the dispatch to all the SUPs
22 in the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina and all their administrations and
23 all the security centres. I was informed, and I informed those centres
24 in turn, that the new minister of the interior was Mico Stanisic and that
25 a Serbian MUP had been established and then conveyed the instructions
1 that I received from Mico Stanisic as the new minister about the work of
2 the new SUP, Serbian SUP.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Was there unanimity among those who you ever met on
4 this subject, whether there should be a separate Serbian MUP or whether,
5 within to say Serbian circles, were there any opponents against this
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I acted pursuant to the decisions
8 made by the Council of Ministers and the Assembly of the Serb People.
9 But I can tell you, Your Honour, that afterwards there were both kinds of
10 reactions. Some were for united MUP -- or rather, they were sorry that
11 the MUPs were separating on an ethnic basis, whereas others said that was
12 the right thing to do because you couldn't cooperate with the Muslims.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And at the higher levels was there unanimity
14 or was there a similar difference of view? I mean, the levels higher up
15 to you.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, do you mean the Serb
17 cadre or the Bosnia-Herzegovinian cadre?
18 JUDGE ORIE: The Serb cadre.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, mostly they agreed, and as
20 far as the Serbs were concerned in the joint Ministry of the Interior.
21 Perhaps there were a few dissensions, but very few.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you tell us who dissented? Do you have
23 any names of those dissenting?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] One of them was Vitomir Zepinic,
25 who was the deputy MUP minister.
1 JUDGE ORIE: And as far as you were aware of and in view of the
2 answers you have given in respect of who were the Bosnian Serb
3 leadership, was there any disagreement on this issue, to your knowledge,
4 within the Bosnian Serb leadership?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, do you mean within the
6 MUP or in the political leadership?
7 JUDGE ORIE: Political leadership.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the political leadership, there
9 was a unanimous opinion to create a Serb MUP, and I received instructions
10 from the political leadership of the Serb people.
11 JUDGE ORIE: I think you earlier indicated that you understood by
12 "Serbian leadership" to include Mr. Karadzic. Is that correct?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Karadzic was the president of the
14 party, but he wasn't in the official organs in Bosnia-Herzegovina until
15 the start of the war. However, he was consulted at all levels.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, --
18 JUDGE ORIE: To --
19 MR. STEWART: Excuse me, Your Honour. I know that Your Honour
20 was given an injunction only very rarely to intervene when the Bench is
21 asking questions, but Your Honour, we do submit in this particular area
22 Your Honour has given one name that would be a particular area where --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm not finished yet with that.
24 Mr. Mandic, in order to avoid whatever confusion, would you
25 repeat to us what you consider to be the political Bosnian Serb
1 leadership. That would include -- perhaps you've said it already, but
2 then I ask you to repeat it, or at least to give your answer.
3 MR. STEWART: Excuse me, Your Honour. Our transcripts are not
4 working. I don't know whether Your Honours have the same problem.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We have the same problem. The problem is if
6 we do not say any more word, then it will not restart. If only for that
8 It will take a minute or two, presumably, so I suggest that we
9 wait for a minute or two.
10 Mr. Mandic, we have some technical problems. Therefore, it will
11 take a couple of minutes to have them resolved.
12 The technicians need someone to say something in order to test
13 whether the system is working again: I see on my screen that LiveNote is
14 restarting. I think it works now again. Is that correct? Yes.
15 Then, Mr. Mandic, you have had ample time to think about it's
16 answer to my last question. I think you said before who you considered
17 to be included in the leadership. Could you give us an answer to that
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, could you please
20 repeat the question.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. When I asked you whether there was unanimity
22 among the Bosnian Serb leadership, you asked: Do you mean the political
23 leadership? I said yes, I mean the political leadership. Could you just
24 give us the names of those you would consider to -- yes.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Dr. Radovan Karadzic; Momcilo
1 Krajisnik, MA; Professor Djeric; all the deputies in the Serb Assembly;
2 and the minister of MUP, Mico Stanisic.
3 JUDGE ORIE: And when you said they were unanimous in favour of
4 the separation of the Serbian MUP, you would say you referred to this
5 circle of people?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.
8 Mr. Tieger, you may proceed, but we have got two minutes left. I
9 don't know whether you wanted to enter a new subject or whether this
10 would be an appropriate time to have a break.
11 MR. TIEGER: I think this is probably an appropriate time to
12 break, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll have a break until ten minutes to 1.00.
14 --- Recess taken at 12.28 p.m.
15 --- On resuming at 12.55 p.m.
16 JUDGE ORIE: May the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
17 [The witness entered court]
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, please proceed.
19 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
20 Q. Mr. Mandic, before the recess, we had looked at some documents
21 that were issued in the aftermath of the March 31st fax that you sent,
22 and I'd like you to look at one additional document, that is, ETP
24 THE REGISTRAR: P425.
25 MR. TIEGER:
1 Q. Mr. Mandic, that's a document signed by Minister of Internal
2 Affairs Delimustafic, to the security centres and the public security
3 services and the secretariat of internal affairs Sarajevo. And is that
4 the document reflecting your termination of employment at the MUP by Mr.
5 Delimustafic and as a result of a decision by the Socialist Republic of
6 Bosnia-Herzegovina government?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. As the document indicates, the reasons for the decision was as
9 listed in the last paragraph a serious breach of the rules of the
10 service, illegal actions and criminal behaviour while in the service of
11 the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Now, earlier in your testimony, you stated that the first
14 position you assumed after the outbreak of the conflict for the Bosnian
15 Serb Republic was the position of deputy minister of the Serbian MUP; is
16 that correct?
17 A. Mico Stanisic authorised me to stand in for him. So I acted as
18 deputy minister of the interior in the Serbian MUP.
19 Q. And you issued directives and instructions as the deputy minister
20 of the Serbian MUP; is that correct?
21 A. I was deputy minister, and at that time I had my office in Vrace.
22 Q. Let me ask you to look at Prosecution's next in order, that's
24 THE REGISTRAR: P426.
25 MR. TIEGER:
1 Q. Mr. Mandic, P426 is a document which bears the heading of the
2 Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Ministry of the Interior, dated
3 16 April 1992, and sent to Mr. Jesuric at the public security station
4 Bijeljina, and bearing your name as deputy minister and a signature. Is
5 it a document that you signed, sir?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Could you tell us what you were instructing or directing Mr.
8 Jesuric to do in that document.
9 A. When the law of the interior was drafted, that is to say, of the
10 Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, a mistake was made, stating that the
11 headquarters was not in Bijeljina, and it was supposed to be Bijeljina,
12 because of the infrastructure and equipment that was in Bijeljina, and
13 that is why that was supposed to be the seat of the MUP. So this was a
14 small mistake that we noted and corrected.
15 Q. And therefore, according to the document, you instructed Mr.
16 Jesuric to carry out all preparations in connection with the takeover of
17 the CSB and advise the government of Majevica and Semberija?
18 A. According to the law on the interior of the Serb Republic of
19 Bosnia-Herzegovina, a centre was formed, a district centre for Majevica
20 and Semberija, for all the work that had to do with the interior, the
21 MUP. Ugljevik was a mistake. So the headquarters, the seat, were
22 transferred from Ugljevik to Bijeljina, because it's a bigger town. It
23 has the proper equipment. So I officially informed this Mr. Jesuric
24 about it, because even before the war, he was head of the MUP in
1 Q. Now, you indicated earlier that when you became deputy minister
2 of the MUP, you were headquartered in Vrace.
3 A. I was in Vrace, but Mico Stanisic, as minister, was in Pale.
4 Q. And what were your duties and what role did you discharge during
5 the time you were deputy minister in Vrace?
6 A. I received all my instructions and assignments from Minister Mico
7 Stanisic. I did whatever he ordered me to do.
8 Q. And as a general matter, what did you do during that time?
9 A. This is an example of what I did on Mico Stanisic's instructions,
10 that is to say, to inform Jesuric that the centre is in Bijeljina rather
11 than Ugljevik and that this was a typographical error in the law on the
12 interior and we informed both Jesuric and the government about that.
13 Q. Did you direct war operations during that time?
14 A. I don't recall.
15 Q. Were you engaged with the national security and police services
16 in connection with war operations in Grbavica, Dobrinja, Ilidza, the
17 surroundings of Sarajevo?
18 A. Together with me at Vrace was the commander of the special unit,
19 and the special unit itself, from the ranks of the Serb people. And it
20 is possible that I took part in decision-making, or rather, in terms of
21 the use of special units in the areas of Dobrinja, Vrace, Grbavica and so
23 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note: Could the witness please be
24 asked to speak a little slower. Thank you.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mandic, you're asked to speak slower, because
1 the interpreters have difficulties following your speed.
2 Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
3 MR. TIEGER:
4 Q. Mr. Mandic, you indicated that it was possible -- let me direct
5 your attention, then, back to Exhibit 419. And Mr. Mandic, I appreciate
6 that the exhibit placed before you is in the English language, so I will
7 have to read you the portion slowly so it can be translated for you.
8 I'll be directing your attention and counsel's attention and the
9 Court's attention to the passage contained on the bottom of page 10 of
10 the English translation, beginning at the section marked 5230 of the
11 video. And to refresh your recollection, Mr. Mandic, although you may be
12 able to tell from the English version alone, this was an interview July
13 and August of 1994, conducted by Mr. Djogo on the programme "My Guest is
15 And you said at that portion: "I stayed for a month on Vrace,
16 you know. People came. We formed services. I was working. Mico
17 Stanisic coordinated between President Karadzic, who was on Pale at that
18 moment, and I was on Vrace with the members of the special unit. We
19 accepted --" a question mark behind that word "-- our national security,
20 police services, liberated the neighbourhoods of Grbavica, Dobrinja,
21 Ilidza, and communicating with Slobo Kovac [sic], who did Ilidza
22 extremely well, as well as some other people from Serbian Sarajevo,
23 Ilijas, Hadzici, Pale and other parts of Sarajevo."
24 Mr. Mandic, does that refresh your recollection about your
25 participation in efforts during the month of April or during the time you
1 were on Vrace to "liberate the neighbourhoods of Grbavica, Dobrinja,
2 Ilidza" through operations involving those forces?
3 A. I think that this pertains to the Serb police in the area of
4 Sarajevo. Ilidza, Hadzici, and Pale belonged to that municipality. This
5 does not mean that it was some kind of cleansing. This was a takeover by
6 the Serb police in those areas, and here in Ilidza, Tomislav Kovac was
7 the chief of police in Ilidza. The name is wrong here.
8 Q. Were there war operations in those municipalities that resulted
9 in the capture and detention of Muslims?
10 A. Well, I don't know. I was at Vrace only for a month. Then I
11 went to Pale, where I became minister of justice. I spent a very short
12 period of time there.
13 Q. What did you mean when you talked about the liberation of the
14 neighbourhoods of Grbavica, Dobrinja, and Ilidza?
15 A. Well, probably together with these crisis staffs of these areas,
16 the Serbs took over power in Ilijas, Hadzici, Grbavica. I assume that
17 that's the way it was. This interview was -- took place 14 years ago, so
18 I assume that that is what was meant by it.
19 Q. Were you one of the strategists of war operations in connection
20 with the liberation of Grbavica, Dobrinja, Ilidza, or any other aspects
21 of the effort to establish Republika Srpska?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Were you regarded by members of the Assembly as -- or any other
24 persons in authority in Republika Srpska, as a war strategist?
25 A. At the beginning of the war, it was the army that mapped the war
1 strategy in Bosnia-Herzegovina. So special MUP units were under the
2 command of the army. So there is no way I could have been the chief
3 strategist in Bosnia or in Sarajevo, because in the beginning of April,
4 Ratko Mladic became chief of staff, and he took over all responsibility
5 in terms of the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
6 [Prosecution counsel confer]
7 MR. TIEGER:
8 Q. Mr. Mandic, the transcript indicates that you said that Ratko
9 Mladic became Chief of Staff at the beginning of April. Is that in fact
10 the date you recall, at the beginning of April 1992?
11 A. The month of April 1992. That's for sure, that he became
12 commander then, I think.
13 Q. Well, in connection with the questions I asked about your -- the
14 question I asked about you as war strategist, let me direct your
15 attention to another exhibit, and that's a portion of the 16th Assembly
16 session of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, held on the
17 12th of May, 1992.
18 THE REGISTRAR: P427.
19 MR. TIEGER:
20 Q. First of all, Mr. Mandic, do you recall being present at the 16th
21 session of the Assembly of the Serbian People in Bosnia-Herzegovina in
22 Banja Luka on May 12th, 1992?
23 A. I do not recall.
24 Q. Let me direct your attention and the Court's attention to page 3
25 of the English translation, and I believe -- in any event, it's item 14
1 of the agenda. Was that the date on which your position as minister of
2 justice was confirmed by the Assembly?
3 A. On the 19th of May, I was appointed minister of justice, I think.
4 I was appointed when it was published in the Official Gazette. That's
5 probably the date, but I do not recall the exact date.
6 Q. Let me now direct your attention to the remarks of a member of
7 the Assembly, Beli, contained on --
8 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, could we be clear whether it's the
9 Prosecution's position that Mr. Mandic was or wasn't at this meeting?
10 MR. TIEGER: First of all, I think it's about to become
11 abundantly clear. Second, the witness said he didn't recall. I think
12 it's appropriate for me to attempt to refresh his recollection with a
13 portion of the transcript.
14 MR. STEWART: I wasn't saying it wasn't, Your Honour. What Mr.
15 Tieger is saying he's about to make clear is exactly what I was asking to
16 be made clear.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, therefore, the position of the
18 Prosecution is clear. It would have been clear, I take it. Please
19 proceed, Mr. Tieger.
20 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
21 MR. STEWART: Well, I'm sorry, Your Honour. It's not yet clear
22 to me. That's what apparently was about to be made clear.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, you're confronted with which part
24 exactly of the --
25 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, with respect, I think that's an
1 unnecessary intervention and it would have been completely clear.
2 I had directed the Court's attention to page 16 of the English
3 translation, the re-marks of Mr. Beli.
4 Q. And Mr. Mandic, that begins on page 10 of the B/C/S version you
5 have in front of you.
6 MR. STEWART: I'm so sorry, Your Honour. I asked a very simple
7 question which is whether it is the Prosecution's position that Mr.
8 Mandic was or wasn't at this meeting.
9 JUDGE ORIE: I take it, Mr. Stewart, from what I understand from
10 Mr. Tieger, that he'll draw the attention to the text, especially on page
11 17, where it becomes abundantly clear --
12 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I see that now. Thank you very much.
13 And Ms. Cmeric has just drawn it to my attention. We could have got
14 there a lot quicker if Mr. Tieger had just said yes. I can't see every
15 word at every moment. I asked a simple question to which a simple answer
16 would have been yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: And it would have been just as clear without the
18 intervention. Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
19 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
20 Q. And Mr. Mandic, let me direct your attention to a particular part
21 of Mr. Beli's remarks that appear approximately in the middle of his
22 comments, where he says: "To keep it brief, I would like to ask that we
23 do not leave this place without, and above all, the military strategist.
24 I see Mr. Mandic is here. Without having some problem areas such as
25 Brcko or Derventa precisely defined in military terms so that we know
12 Blank page inserted to ensure the pagination between the English and
13 French transcripts correspond
1 where to turn for help."
2 A. I'm sorry. Was this a different Mandic perhaps? Could you
3 please tell me what page you were quoting from.
4 Q. That's on page 10 of the version you have in front of you, Mr.
5 Mandic. And if you -- the identities of the speakers are indicated at
6 the beginning of their comments on the left in capital letters and it's
7 -- Beli, yes. And the comments to which I'm referring appear in
8 approximately the middle of his remarks.
9 A. I think that this is a different person here. There is a Mandic
10 from Ugljevik who was some kind of military officer. It's certainly not
11 me. Mr. Prosecutor, I think that you simply misidentified the person
13 Q. And the Mandic to whom Mr. Beli is referring is who, according to
15 A. I think that the man has the last name -- the same last name and
16 from Ugljevik. He was some kind of local leader, or rather, he was a
17 radical. So I think that's the mistake. Mistaken identity.
18 Q. Did you --
19 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I must -- with respect, I must persist
20 with the inquiry that I'm making, because again this is the Prosecution's
21 witness. The witness says he can't recall. Is it going to be the
22 Prosecution's case that Mr. Mandic was at the meeting, wasn't at the
23 meeting or that the Prosecution cannot say and is therefore entirely
24 neutral at the moment as to whether he was or he wasn't? Because it
25 does, after all, make quite a difference when a witness is going to be
1 apparently questioned in relation to a particular meeting of which we
2 have pages and pages of transcript, whether the questioning is proceeding
3 on the footing that he was there or wasn't there.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, could you now answer the question.
5 Because now we have a situation which is a bit different from three
6 minutes ago.
7 MR. TIEGER: Yes. I'd be happy to, Your Honour. Number one, I
8 don't think it's incumbent on the Prosecution to take a particular
9 position on the question of Mr. Mandic's presence unless additional
10 questions are asked about events at that particular Assembly. It was
11 clear I was asking that question in connection with Mr. Mandic's role
12 while deputy minister and while headquartered in Vrace. And that was the
13 nature of the question that was asked. We have an answer to that
14 question now. I'm moving on to other areas --
15 JUDGE ORIE: And you are relatively -- I mean, you asked a
16 question about his presence. I take it that you assumed that on the
17 basis of that observation by one of those present during the meeting that
18 Mr. Mandic would have been there as well, but at the same time, do I
19 understand you that since Mr. Mandic says it was not a person that you
20 now leave that open at this moment?
21 MR. TIEGER: Precisely, Your Honour. I'm note going to make an
22 issue of that at the moment, regardless of what other evidence may or may
23 not disclose during the course of this case.
24 Let me say also that -- maybe this is an useful opportunity,
25 although, to draw a line. I haven't been objecting to objections.
1 However, I think there comes a point at which constant interventions that
2 are unnecessary become disruptive in a manner that impedes both the
3 efficiency of the court and the court's opportunity to hear evidence.
4 And I would appreciate counsel waiting for cross-examination if he has
5 questions, or waiting until the conclusion of at least a portion of the
6 questioning process during examination-in-chief before making
7 interventions that effectively disrupt the flow of the examination.
8 JUDGE ORIE: I think the positions are the parties are clear to
9 the extent that Mr. Stewart thinks that he should intervene whenever he
10 thinks that necessary; at the same time, Mr. Stewart may have noticed
11 that the Chamber would not always agree on the necessity of the
12 intervention. Sometimes, Mr. Tieger, the Chamber followed some
13 suggestions by Mr. Stewart. Both parties are invited not to disrupt the
14 flow of evidence unless there's a real necessity.
15 But I'm doing it at this moment myself, Mr. Tieger. I have some
16 difficulties to reconcile the first page of these minutes in English and
17 what I see in the original.
18 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I was about to disrupt by mentioning
19 exactly that point, Your Honour. We're missing I think three pages of
20 B/C/S. There isn't a B/C/S translation of the first three pages of this
21 particular -- four pages, I'm told -- of this document, which is in fact
22 Your Honour anticipated me by about five seconds there.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please take care that we have the
24 same document in English and in B/C/S, and please find out what the
25 difference exactly is.
1 MR. TIEGER: Absolutely, Your Honour. And this may -- perhaps
2 this shouldn't receive a separate exhibit number in any event, in view of
3 the fact that I think this is -- this was introduced during the course of
4 Mr. Treanor's testimony.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, we might not have read every single
7 MR. TIEGER: I appreciate that, and I think therefore we'll be
8 able to resolve the discrepancy the Court just noted.
9 MR. STEWART: And Your Honour, so far --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps you'll check, then, during the next break
11 the P65 and then tab 127.
12 MR. STEWART: May I observe, Your Honour. Mr. Mandic, we
13 believe, has only had from page 5 onwards or the equivalent B/C/S of what
14 we see in the English from page 5 onwards.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. At the same time, it seems to start the same,
16 to be the minutes of the 16th session and then who is presiding, and then
17 suddenly it becomes different. Is that -- or do I ...
18 MR. STEWART: It seems that the first few pages are some sort of
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Whatever it is, we would have to -- these
21 first pages might not be in the -- might not be focused upon. But please
22 take care, Mr. Tieger, that we have the same documents in English and in
23 B/C/S. About whether they get a separate number or not, we'll first
24 await your observations in that respect.
25 MR. TIEGER: Thank you.
1 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, please proceed.
3 MR. TIEGER:
4 Q. Mr. Mandic, can I ask you next to take a look at the
5 Prosecution's next in order, which is an article from February of 1998
6 that appeared in Oslobodjenje. That's ET 0093-8152.
7 THE REGISTRAR: P428.
8 JUDGE ORIE: If the Defence would make any observation as far as
9 the title of the -- the translation of the title is concerned, it would
10 not surprise me.
11 MR. STEWART: Well, yes. Well, we make the obvious observation
12 that Your Honour implies.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 MR. STEWART: We don't know where it comes from.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, it's -- this article seems to start at
16 the right top something about Momcilo Mandic, and then it has got
17 something to do with the BiH MUP. Nothing of that kind appears in the
18 translation. Then the main title seems to be "Wrong policy," and I have
19 some doubt as to whether "Radovanova pogresna politica" is exactly just
20 "wrong policy."
21 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, I can certainly see the point the Court
22 is making. That will have to be corrected and I apologise for that
23 translation error. It appears to me from the rest of the article the
24 translation corresponds.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I'll ask the Defence and especially Ms. Cmeric to
12 Blank page inserted to ensure the pagination between the English and
13 French transcripts correspond
1 keep a close eye on all those portions of the article which are put to
2 the witness. Please proceed.
3 MR. TIEGER: Thank you.
4 Q. Mr. Mandic, I wanted to direct your attention to a portion of the
5 article that appears about two thirds down, after a discussion of -- and
6 I'm going to mention a couple of names to help you identify that portion
7 of the article more easily. There's a discussion about Ejup Ganic, and
8 then Ratko Mladic and then Mr. Karadzic; and then Ms. Plavsic are
9 mentioned in short succession. Do you see that portion?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And then the article goes on to say the following -- After you
12 comment about Mrs. -- well, let me start it at that portion. Perhaps it
13 will be easier:
14 "I also mentioned the thing when Ejup Ganic took the state
15 security from us using these technical devices that we lost on that
16 occasion. They recorded Ratko Mladic and Karadzic, which is now the main
17 evidence to The Hague. Well, we had to release 5.000 imprisoned Muslims
18 for the family of Biljana Plavsic, and she was in Belgrade. She has got
19 a flat in Vracar. She was the first one to get a flat whereas I, a
20 minister, was wearing a flak jacket and taking part in combats in
21 Dobrinja as a soldier. I was a minister up to 2.00 and I took part in
22 actions in the afternoon."
23 Mr. Mandic, does that refresh your recollection about your duties
24 and role during the time you were at Vrace as deputy minister?
25 A. Mr. Prosecutor, you keep supplying me with newspaper articles
1 where I seem to inflate my role with respect to Biljana Plavsic. Because
2 there was this conflict going on between her and myself since 1991, when
3 she was a Presidency member. So I never did actually wear a flak jacket
4 or fight, because at Dobrinja and when I was at Vrace, I wasn't able to
5 go anywhere else. And then I moved to Pale and Hotel Bistrica Jakonina
6 [phoen], as the minister of justice. So these are newspaper articles
7 that you keep showing me, and as such, I don't think that you should give
8 -- lend too much importance to the statements made here in these
9 articles, if they are indeed my own statements. Because I was
10 criticising Radovan Karadzic in actual fact, his -- the wrong policy he
11 was pursuing, and his agreement to have the MUP enter into corruption,
12 crimes, and that the perpetrators and so on. Radovan Karadzic and myself
13 didn't see eye to eye on this point. And I went to Belgrade afterwards
14 on the 2nd of December. That's the truth.
15 Now, in each of these articles, the ones you've presented me
16 with, you have relationships between myself and Mrs. Plavsic which were
17 bad. We were in conflict. I said that I -- and then I exaggerated the
18 extent to which I worked for the Serb cause, and said that Biljana sent
19 her family to Belgrade and so on and that in hospitals where wounded
20 people were put up, that she had accommodated her relations there. So
21 this was all the result of that conflict that we had going on between us.
22 And you've pulled this out of context, out of the interview, the entire
23 interview, when I speak about the weaknesses of Radovan Karadzic's
24 leadership, corruption, crime, and everything else that forced me to
25 leave and go to Belgrade.
1 Q. I think you just indicated that you didn't wear a flak jacket.
2 Did you monitor, coordinate, direct, or otherwise get involved with
3 operations in Dobrinja, Grbavica, Ilidza, or the surrounding areas in
4 Sarajevo during April and May of 1992?
5 A. I don't remember.
6 Q. Perhaps we can turn to some of the recordings that you referred
7 to in the article we just looked at. You referred to recordings using
8 devices of people who were talking. Let's turn, then, to a couple of
9 contemporaneous telephone intercepts. The first is 0322-0086.
10 THE REGISTRAR: P429.
11 [Intercept played]
12 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover]:
13 Tomislav KOVAC: Hello.
14 Momcilo MANDIC: Momo Mandic on the phone. Who's there?
15 Tomislav KOVAC: Momo, Tomo here.
16 Momcilo MANDIC: Tomo how are you?
17 Tomislav KOVAC: Well.
18 Momcilo MANDIC: Tell me, what's up in Ilidza?
19 Tomislav KOVAC: Fuck, a lot.
20 Momcilo MANDIC: Are there big problems?
21 MR. STEWART: There's no B/C/S, I think, Your Honour, coming
23 JUDGE ORIE: I do not hear anything, and therefore, so no
24 translation. I think we best restart.
25 MR. TIEGER: Since we're going to do that, perhaps I can
1 introduce this exhibit a little bit more fully. It's a conversation that
2 takes place on the 23rd of April, 1992, between Mr. Mandic and Mr. Tomo
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And on the bottom of the page it says it's the
5 first out of 6 and all together I think there are three pages; is that
7 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Your Honour.
8 THE REGISTRAR: The audio will be P429 and the transcript will be
10 JUDGE ORIE: Let's restart.
11 [Intercept played].
12 Momcilo MANDIC: What was the telephone number in Ilidza again.
13 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover]:
14 Tomislav KOVAC: Hello.
15 Momcilo MANDIC: Momo Mandic on the phone. Who's there?
16 Tomislav KOVAC: Momo, Tomo here.
17 Momcilo MANDIC: Tomo, how are you?
18 Tomislav KOVAC: Well.
19 Momcilo MANDIC: Tell me, what's up in Ilidza?
20 Tomislav KOVAC: Fuck, a lot.
21 Momcilo MANDIC: Are there big problems?
22 JUDGE ORIE: Stops at the same moment. We're close to a quarter
23 to 2.00, Mr. Tieger. Would you have any further questions unrelated to
24 this to the witness? If not, perhaps we would otherwise adjourn for the
1 MR. TIEGER: Well, the next exhibit is also an intercept, Your
2 Honour, and whether or not we have the same problem, I don't know, but I
3 don't think we'd get through it in five minutes, in fairness.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'd better adjourn.
5 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, may I observe. Apparently, and I
6 think it's fairly plain, in fact, the introductory lines under the
7 heading "English translation" contain one or two remarks which are not
8 strictly translation. The bits in brackets "(RS Minister of Justice)"
9 and brackets after Tomo, "(Ilidza para-police commander)", those are not
10 taken from the B/C/S. They've been added.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand this, Mr. Stewart, and
12 although you know that I'm very fond of precise translations, if we have
13 it on the record, would it be sufficient? Because otherwise it has to be
14 reprinted again, which takes not only ink but also paper and time.
15 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, we're keen on precision, but also I
16 ought to make it clear I'm not asking for it to be redone; I am as Your
17 Honour is indicating, just putting it on the record.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's on the record now. Is there any further
19 procedural issue to be raised at this moment? If not, we'll adjourn for
20 the day.
21 Mr. Mandic, I'd like to give you the same instructions as I did
22 yesterday, that is, not to speak with anyone, not to communicate with
23 anyone, so that's not only speech but also e-mails and the like, about
24 the testimony you have given and you're still about to give. We'd like
25 to see you back tomorrow morning, 9.00, same courtroom.
1 Yes. We adjourn.
2 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.43 p.m.,
3 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 25th day of
4 November, 2004, at 9.00 a.m.