1 Thursday, 25 May 2006

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 2.40 p.m.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.

6 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours this is case number

7 IT-00-39-T, the Prosecutor versus Momcilo Krajisnik.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar. Unfortunately we have a

9 very late start due to the other Chamber taking more time without any

10 consultation.

11 We will try to be as efficient as possible to the extent. I'd

12 also like, because it's the last day of Mr. Krajisnik's testimony to find

13 an opportunity to regain the time perhaps by having a bit shorter breaks,

14 absolute minimum, and perhaps with the indulgence of the interpreters and

15 technicians to perhaps continue for another 10 or 15 minutes. It would

16 save us from having an additional hearing tomorrow.

17 Then very quickly, a few procedural matters.

18 First, photographic evidence of the destruction, you are directed,

19 Mr. Harmon and Mr. Tieger, to submit the photos including all supporting

20 data as shown in, example, shown Excel spreadsheet attached to the 22nd of

21 May e-mail, as well as the CD the Defence has given, until no later to the

22 29th to object.

23 MR. JOSSE: Your Honour, I've got the CD. I've seen some of the

24 photographs. Mr. Krajisnik is going to see the material. I'm going to

25 need to speak to him about it. I do want the Defence to be in a position

1 to object if we want to.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik, I hope you don't hear it. We do hear

3 which reminds me of dentists. I hope it's not your fate at the beginning

4 of next week.

5 And I would very much appreciate if it would stop.

6 Then, Mr. Josse, if by Monday, you could not have made up your

7 mind because you had no opportunity yet to speak to Mr. Krajisnik, then

8 you can ask for --

9 MR. JOSSE: He's going to need to see the material before I am in

10 a position to know whether I wish to make any representations to the

11 Chamber.

12 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand. If you find no possibility to see

13 him before Monday, then we'll grant you a couple of additional days so

14 that you have an opportunity to --

15 MR. JOSSE: Well, I mean, I haven't seen the CD myself. We've

16 only got one. I'll see if an extra one can be burned. There are some

17 logistical problems.

18 JUDGE ORIE: The basic line is please respond as soon as possible,

19 of course, after you have had a possibility technically also to discuss it

20 with Mr. Krajisnik, after he has seen it, after you have seen it, try to

21 be very practical.

22 MR. JOSSE: Thank you.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Two is the double pension legislation. The Chamber

24 would like an immediate submission of the legislation. The matter has

25 been discussed between the parties. But we would like to receive that

1 legislation as soon as possible.

2 As for --

3 MR. JOSSE: Your Honour, there is no difficulty with that. I have

4 just sent an e-mail on the subject to a legal officer but there is no

5 difficulty.

6 JUDGE ORIE: I have not seen it.

7 MR. JOSSE: I've literally just sent it, Your Honour. But there

8 is no difficulty submitting the material that we've got at the moment.

9 MR. HARMON: Yes, Your Honour, counsel and I have conferred on

10 this. He's going to make certain submissions as to portions of the

11 legislation. I have portions of the legislation. I'm prepared to submit

12 those right now, if the Court so wishes.

13 JUDGE ORIE: The parties are invited to do it without further

14 delay.

15 MR. JOSSE: I'll do it at the next break, if I may.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you. Then P824 and related Official

17 Gazettes, the OTP is invited to submit the documents available. That is

18 the retranslation of P824, a decision on acquired rights based on tenancy

19 rights and labour relations. And if available, submit Official Gazette

20 11-92 which contains the decree on the return to the Serb republic of the

21 people who moved out.

22 And in addition to that, you're invited also to submit Official

23 Gazette 8-92 which contains the first printing of the decree - there was

24 an error in it and it was then republished - so that we have all the

25 material available.

1 Then Mr. Josse and Mr. Stewart, I have one other matter to be

2 discussed in private session. We'll do that at the end of this session.

3 By the way, in the presence of Mr. Krajisnik.

4 Who is going to continue the examination-in-chief?

5 MR. STEWART: I'm first off today, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And then, Mr. Krajisnik, although I'd forgotten

7 to tell you not to speak with anyone about your testimony, I take it that

8 you didn't do so and that you understood that that's a standard

9 instruction and you are also standardly reminded that you're still bound

10 by the solemn declaration you've given at the beginning of your testimony.

11 Mr. Stewart, please proceed.

12 WITNESS: MOMCILO KRAJISNIK [Resumed]

13 [Witness answered through interpreter]

14 MR. STEWART: Just on that single point, may I say I associate

15 myself precisely what Mr. Josse said yesterday on the issue of

16 Mr. Krajisnik not being in court, including the recognition of the

17 constructive and helpful spirit. It may never arise again, Your Honour.

18 If it does arise again, we would particularly ask to be given notice

19 because we, as Mr. Josse indicated, we don't feel comfortable with the

20 principle that in practice, as far as yesterday is concerned, we have no

21 more to say on the topic.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.

23 MR. STEWART: Your Honours, we are going to ask straight away for

24 a bit of the CD which is P70 to be played. That's the matter that

25 Mr. Krajisnik mentioned yesterday and it's a different bit. It's all in

1 evidence, Your Honour. There isn't a transcript of this bit that -- I'm

2 informed but it's a very, very short clip so I hope that won't

3 inconvenience anybody or it's a short --

4 JUDGE ORIE: We'll see whether the interpreters can follow. If

5 there is no transcript it might be a problem but --

6 [Videotape played]

7 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "So that I at least do not know the

8 name of the new Prime Minister designate.

9 Question: There will be no more members of the Presidency of

10 Republika Srpska, just the president of the Presidency and the president

11 of the assembly is known. As we don't have a new Prime Minister designate

12 or new members of the cabinet. Is this a new step in the functioning of

13 the government of Republika Srpska in these new wartime conditions?

14 Answer: I have to distinguish between two things here. One,

15 there was an initiative and I don't know whether this will be realised

16 although there is a good chance that it will be. In this time of war, we

17 have to centralise the government and with a centralised government,

18 create a state. That is how the idea came up, that from having a

19 Presidency we should move over to a presidential system, to have a

20 president, and this exists in our constitution because the presidency was

21 just a transitional phase. I think the Presidency should remain, first of

22 all, because three members of the Presidency, Mrs. Plavsic, Mr. Koljevic

23 and the president of the Presidency, Mr. Koljevic [as interpreted], are

24 very active and important persons and are making a huge contribution to

25 the Serbian people, and on the other hand, the people have accepted each

1 of these as their own."

2 MR. STEWART: Excuse me, Your Honour. Yes, Your Honour, the --

3 must see -- Your Honour, we really couldn't do anything about the fact

4 there isn't a transcript because this is in evidence but -- sorry,

5 Mr. Harmon has got a --

6 MR. HARMON: I'm informed there is -- the transcript was put into

7 evidence by the Prosecution, of this very portion.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Of this part as well?

9 MR. HARMON: Yes, I think that's P851.

10 MR. STEWART: In that case, I'm sure we can find that pretty

11 quickly. Thank you very much.

12 MR. HARMON: And the portion that is referred to is found at page

13 4.

14 MR. STEWART: Oh, yes, I see, it came up during the evidence of

15 Mr. Thompson. I should say Mr. Krajisnik was indicating to me that he

16 wants to deal with point. Not entirely unreasonably. He did actually

17 signal to me that he wanted to deal with the point, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

19 MR. STEWART: Your Honour has it. At the moment -- I'm sorry, we

20 did understand in the preparations this morning that there wasn't a

21 transcript. We are delighted to find there is. It's just I don't have it

22 in front of me at the moment.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I have it in front of me. If Mr. Krajisnik

24 would like to add anything or make a comment on this --

25 MR. STEWART: Does Your Honour have an English transcript?

1 JUDGE ORIE: I have an English transcript.

2 MR. STEWART: At some point, Your Honour, may I see it before I

3 proceed with questions?

4 JUDGE ORIE: You may have it because I have it double in front of

5 me, both on my screen and --

6 MR. STEWART: That's kind, Your Honour. Thank you very much.

7 JUDGE ORIE: It's the original so --

8 MR. STEWART: I won't make any paw marks on it, Your Honour. I'll

9 hand it back pristine.

10 I'm sorry, Your Honour, which page is it on?

11 JUDGE ORIE: Page 4.

12 MR. STEWART: Page 4, thank you. Well, there was a certainly an

13 ambiguity in the -- [Microphone not activated].

14 Your Honour, there was certainly an ambiguity in the English as

15 interpreted for which I certainly don't blame the interpreters doing it

16 off the cuff.

17 JUDGE ORIE: May I ask but it's a totally different matter,

18 Mr. Registrar, the electronic copy jumps from uneven to uneven pages

19 instead of covering it all, so I've now given away my one and only page 4.

20 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'll give it back straight away,

21 Your Honour. I don't -- thank you very much. That was very kind.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Yes.

23 MR. STEWART: There isn't -- a question: Is there a B/C/S

24 transcript?

25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, is there a B/C/S? In hard copy that

1 so that it could be presented.

2 MR. STEWART: It occurs to me Your Honour, if we put the B/C/S

3 passage on the ELMO, then the interpreters and Mr. Krajisnik can see it,

4 and then I think we are in business.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Seems to be no B/C/S.

6 MR. HARMON: English?

7 JUDGE ORIE: English is there. We have no B/C/S copy.

8 MR. STEWART: So it was translated straight to English? That's do

9 you --

10 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, I believe there is a B/C/S version but

11 it's just not in court.

12 MR. STEWART: I tell you what, Your Honour, shall I move on and

13 get my chaps to sort it out, Your Honour, so that we don't get bogged down

14 on this, we can come back to it at the beginning of the next session or

15 whatever. Otherwise, it's silly for us to get bogged down on these

16 practical matters.

17 MR. TIEGER: I agree. It's on the screen at the moment. If

18 it --

19 MR. STEWART: Oh, the B/C/S or the English? There isn't an

20 English so.

21 MR. TIEGER: The B/C/S.

22 MR. STEWART: Thank you.

23 JUDGE ORIE: If we could have it on the screen so if the

24 interpreters need it and if Mr. Krajisnik would like to consult it, they

25 are able to do so. So therefore could I instruct the technicians to show,

1 and let me just now see --

2 MR. STEWART: I suppose the thing, Your Honour, would it be to

3 just double check. Just this critical paragraph, just to ensure that the

4 transcript matches what the interpreters or what everybody hears, the

5 B/C/S speakers hear on the audio?

6 JUDGE ORIE: There we are. Please proceed.

7 Examination by Mr. Stewart: [Continued]

8 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, could you just read, please, perhaps from the

9 second sentence of that passage that you see on the screen? You can start

10 at about the 8th line. Well, we've lost the --

11 JUDGE ORIE: Still further back, it's 23350, there we are.

12 MR. STEWART:

13 Q. We can start at the about the 8th line. Does it say [B/C/S

14 spoken] it says, I'm told, reliably. Could you read out loud from there,

15 Mr. Krajisnik?

16 A. I don't see -- I personally, if it's line 8, it's not there.

17 JUDGE ORIE: It starts with [B/C/S spoken].

18 MR. STEWART: It's line 8 of the passage --

19 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, could you please assist --

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, excuse me, I do see it

21 now. "I personally think that the Presidency should remain. First of

22 all, because three members of the Presidency, Mrs. Plavsic, Mr. Koljevic,

23 and the presidents of the Presidency, Mr. Karadzic, are very active and

24 very significant persons, and are making a big contribution to the Serb

25 people, on the one hand. Secondly, the people have accepted each one of

1 these three members as their own, and they have their evaluation and so

2 on." This is a comment -- may I?

3 MR. STEWART:

4 Q. You said "this is a comment," which is now you commenting today on

5 that passage. This is a comment, Mr. Krajisnik. Please continue.

6 A. This was on the occasion of the assembly session of the 22nd of

7 November in Zvornik, when an activity was initiated to introduce a

8 president instead of a Presidency, and we had here the stenographic

9 minutes of that meeting, where that quotation by Karadzic is explained.

10 He said, when I'm not there, Mrs. Plavsic is there. When Plavsic isn't

11 there, Koljevic is there. And when Koljevic is absent, Krajisnik is

12 there. The conclusion that was drawn from this was that Krajisnik was a

13 member of the Presidency. On the occasion of that initiative, I gave an

14 interview on that day and in this interview I clearly stated who the

15 members of the Presidency were. This interview was made because of that

16 assembly session, not just the part that Karadzic spoke in but because of

17 that initiative, to have a president. Later on, Mr. Karadzic was

18 appointed president and the other two deputy presidents. And this change

19 was introduced in December. You can see from this that I knew who the

20 members of the Presidency were and that I was not one of them. That's why

21 I am happy that this was read out. I've never seen this Serb translation,

22 I have to say, nor have I seen this video before. I saw it for the first

23 time only a few days ago.

24 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, the way it -- the way we now have it, as the

25 interpretation from your reading out of the transcript, in English, I

1 appreciate you're going to get it back in your own language, but it says,

2 first of all, because -- this is page 9, line 13, Your Honours, first of

3 all, because three members of the Presidency, Mrs. Plavsic, Mr. Koljevic

4 and the presidents of the Presidency, Mr. Karadzic, are very active and

5 very significant persons and are making a big contribution to the Serb

6 people.

7 Your Honours, the problem I have there is that's ambiguous in

8 English, still. And I wonder whether it is ambiguous in the same way in

9 Serbian on the original -- on the original disk. I see Mr. Tieger, I

10 think agreeing that there is an ambiguity in the English.

11 MR. TIEGER: Yeah, just my recollection that there is always that

12 problem with articles. So -- but it may again be something we need to

13 check with the interpreters. I'm not sure it's best to do it again with

14 the interpreters in court but we can have a more thorough check made.

15 MR. STEWART: Well, it has to be done in this way, Your Honour,

16 and there is no option but to raise the point fairly and squarely in

17 English. Clearly if you say "the three members of the Presidency," it's

18 saying those are the members of the Presidency whereas, if it says it

19 without the definite article, it can imply something different. So --

20 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask -- it's a very specific question. Could

21 I ask the interpreters whether the portion just read by Mr. Krajisnik,

22 where he says, "First of all because three members of the Presidency,"

23 whether it is in the original clear from the language itself, so not to

24 draw any conclusions but whether the language leaves it open whether these

25 are all three -- the only members of the Presidency, or whether the

1 language would allow for an interpretation that there were more? It's

2 about the article, as said by both Mr. Tieger and Mr. Stewart.

3 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, may I observe, absolutely, Your Honour,

4 may I observe in the end that if there is any possible difference it's

5 going to be the language as used during the interview rather than strictly

6 the language on the B/C/S transcript, because there's always the

7 possibility that they do not match.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Let's then first check that, whether the

9 transcription is in this respect perfect. But then we have to replay it.

10 By the way, these are matters that could be easily solved out of court, I

11 would say, both in finding that there is a transcript, then with language

12 assistance, the parties could agree whether the article or is how or

13 whether the transcript is complete. But let's not lose any more time.

14 MR. STEWART: I'm sorry, Your Honour. We normally try to do that.

15 I apologise. It's sometimes -- in this particular situation --

16 JUDGE ORIE: All right. Mr. Stewart --

17 MR. STEWART: -- when it came up, in the time --

18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, I said let's proceed and

19 not lose any further time.

20 MR. STEWART: I just wanted to indicate why we apologise there is

21 this difficulty, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could that portion be played again? Only the

23 couple of lines.

24 [Audiotape played]

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It would be a good thing to play it

1 to the end.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Of course the interpreters could not see the

3 transcript while listening. Could it be shown on the screen, the

4 transcript now? The B/C/S transcript.

5 Could the interpreters read from the screen?

6 THE INTERPRETER: Your Honour, the interpreters heard -- heard the

7 witness say "three," and because the definite article does not exist in

8 B/C/S, this will always be ambiguous in B/C/S.

9 JUDGE ORIE: So the transcript reflects what we hear on the video,

10 and linguistically, the ambiguity will always be there?

11 THE INTERPRETER: Yes, Your Honour.

12 JUDGE ORIE: That's been clarified, Mr. Stewart. Please proceed.

13 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.

14 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, you will have heard that. Do you have any -- well

15 do you accept that as a matter of your own language, that ambiguity as to

16 whether, when you refer to three members, you're meaning the only three

17 members or three other possibly larger number of members is there as a

18 matter of language?

19 A. It is completely unambiguous here who the members of the

20 Presidency are, and in the continuation, I keep talking about the

21 characteristics of those three members, and I advocate that they remain.

22 You can see from the entire text as a whole, and I know what I was saying.

23 I also know who the members were. If you look at the further text, I say,

24 it would be a pity if any of them were left out. I didn't say it would be

25 a pity if any of us were left out. I'm advocating a three-member

1 Presidency, those three members. I don't know how it is in English.

2 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, what I'm going to do with Your Honour's

3 permission is move on, get all necessary bits of paper during the next

4 break, have all necessary discussion with my B/C/S speakers in the next

5 break, and then come back to it as necessary.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. At the same time, Mr. Stewart, it might be good

7 to keep in mind that although certainly this is one part of the evidence

8 and who was a member of the Presidency, that the Chamber, of course, will

9 take into consideration every bit and piece of the evidence, not just the

10 words used during an interview on who were members of the Presidency de

11 jure, who were -- might have been members of the Presidency de facto, how

12 it all functioned, what other witnesses said about it, what we find on

13 paper about it, how to interpret having --

14 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour.

15 JUDGE ORIE: I'm just pointing out to --

16 MR. STEWART: We understand that, Your Honour. Very clearly we

17 understand all that and have done for a long, long time, Your Honour. We

18 do, though, recognise that Mr. Krajisnik is particularly concerned about

19 this point and particularly concerned that he should not be understood,

20 so -- not be misunderstood, so, Your Honour, I --

21 JUDGE ORIE: It's perfectly clear that Mr. Krajisnik told us now

22 that the language he used in this interview should be -- that he considers

23 that to support his view that he was not a member of the Presidency and

24 linguistically, from what I understand, the opposite could not be

25 concluded from the language used at this moment. But, of course, if

1 further attention -- you'd like to pay further attention to it, you're

2 free to do so.

3 MR. STEWART: I'll do it in the way I indicated, Your Honour, and

4 not take my more time now.

5 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, I want to turn to a completely different topic,

6 which is that yesterday afternoon, quite late on yesterday afternoon, you

7 had referred to what was described as a brochure which was given the

8 exhibit number D217, produced by the Ministry of human right and refugees

9 for Bosnia-Herzegovina, that you were going to -- you have it there, I

10 see, with you. You've got the pukka coloured printed version. You were

11 going to have a look at that over night and, as I understood it, you were

12 going to explain to the Trial Chamber what was particularly pertinent in

13 this document. So please do.

14 A. What is relevant is the first of these tables. In Serbian it

15 bears the title, "Assessment of the population in Bosnia-Herzegovina based

16 on the census of 1991."

17 Q. Yes, that will be the one on page 4 of the English, I'm pretty

18 sure, projection of population of BiH according to 1991 census. Yes,

19 Mr. Krajisnik, we have that, I think.

20 A. I wanted to say at the end of this table, the expert commission

21 looked at the municipalities of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the situation in

22 1991. Bosniaks, Croats and Serbs are listed here. I am drawing attention

23 to the fact that out of 1 million 9 hundred and 56 thousand Bosniaks --

24 Q. I think the figure is gone wrong there, you're referring to

25 1.902.956, which is in the blacked out or highlighted band in the

1 middle of page 7 of the English under the column "Bosniaks," towards the

2 left. That's I think what you're talking about. So do continue,

3 Mr. Krajisnik.

4 A. Yes. I said 1.902.956 Bosniaks lived in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Of

5 these, 440.746 were in the present-day Republika Srpska. There is a map

6 in front. This amounts to 23.6 per cent of all Bosniaks. I've left out

7 the Brcko district here. The third column shows the Serbs. In the

8 federation, there were a total of 1.366.104 Serbs. Of these, there were

9 478.122 in the federation. More nominally than there were Bosniaks in

10 Republika Srpska. In terms of percentages, this accounts for 35 per cent.

11 For the sake of illustration, in Republika Srpska, there were only 18 per

12 cent Croats, 18 per cent of the entire Croatian population, that is. The

13 rest were in the federation.

14 Q. Pause there for a moment, Mr. Krajisnik. Your Honours at page 16

15 line 1 Mr. Krajisnik did say in the federation as recorded in the

16 transcript but he clearly meant in the whole of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

17 A. No. I meant the federation. The total number in the federation

18 was 478.122, so in the Federation of Bosnia-Herzegovina, that's how many

19 Serbs there were, and that's how many Serbs left the federation.

20 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. Krajisnik and it will be

21 clear on any subsequent reading of the transcript so do continue, please.

22 A. I wanted to show that for 38.000, not the nominal figure, more

23 Serbs left the federation and went to Republika Srpska and in percentage

24 terms, the difference is 23.6 per cent. The number of Muslims who left

25 Republika Srpska compared to 35 per cent Serbs who left the federation to

1 go to Republika Srpska.

2 And the total number of Croats, 18 per cent left Republika Srpska.

3 I'm talking about the population displacement and movement. I'm not

4 talking about expulsions, persecutions and so on. The second point that

5 is essential that I'd like to point out is, and there are many facts and

6 figures here, I don't want to abuse your patients but I would just like to

7 indicate one more matter, and it is this. Table number 11 gives us the

8 distribution of displaced persons in the year 2000 according to the

9 municipalities in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Displaced persons, persons

10 displaced by the war, but in the year 2000, I'm talking about how many

11 people were displaced at that point in time. If you found the table, I

12 can comment on it.

13 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... of the English?

14 JUDGE ORIE: Page?

15 MR. STEWART: 22, Your Honours.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Displaced Bosniaks, 236.115 is the

17 figure. Displaced Serbs, 2 [Previous translation continues] ...

18 MR. STEWART: 24 in the English.

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]

20 A. 267.752, which means that there were far more displaced Serbs

21 here. And on the following -- in the following table, or rather graph, we

22 can see the following: It says national structure or ethnic structure of

23 the displaced persons in Bosnia-Herzegovina, as of the 30th of June 2003.

24 Of all the displaced persons, 53.86 per cent were Serbs, and 43.91 per

25 cent were Bosniaks. There were 8.77 per cent Croats. I have another

1 piece of information here. Some more facts and figures. The household

2 units privately owned according to the 1991 population census, table

3 12A --

4 Q. Right. So this is --

5 A. -- housing units.

6 Q. Page 31 of the English. Yes, Mr. Krajisnik?

7 A. Bosniaks, they had houses or housing units to the tune of 249.307

8 in the federation. 92.940 -- no, I do apologise. No. Yes, that's right.

9 No. 177.656 were the number of units. I mixed things up. So the

10 Bosniaks had 249.307 in the federation, housing units or houses.

11 Q. That's at page 33 of the English. It's about four items up in the

12 column towards the left, headed Bosniaks. We are just trying to follow

13 it, Mr. Krajisnik, because you've got one version and we've got another

14 language version. Do continue, please.

15 A. Yes, I do apologise. As I was saying the Bosniaks had 249.307 in

16 the federation. And 93.939 in Republika Srpska. The Serbs had the

17 following: In the federation, 92.940, and in Republika Srpska 177.656.

18 That means that an equal, almost equal number of houses of Serbs in the

19 federation and Bosniaks in Republika Srpska.

20 Q. Yes.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Would you just give me one second to follow along and

22 find everything so that I better understand?

23 MR. STEWART: Oh, Your Honour yes, the difficulty is, Your Honour,

24 I can't easily interject those references without interrupting

25 Mr. Krajisnik. But those figures for Serbs, Your Honours will find about

1 five -- four columns over, page 33, if we look at the black highlighted

2 line, the first figures Mr. Krajisnik was giving, 249307, 93939 are found

3 in the Bosniaks' column. And then if we move about four columns to the --

4 to the right, to the middle of the page under "Serbs," the figures he was

5 giving are found in the antepenultimate line above there and he was

6 comparing or saying they were close together, the 93939 under the Bosniaks

7 column three lines from the bottom with the 92940 four lines up in the

8 "Serbs" column. That's so I understood it, Your Honour. When he says at

9 line 18, Mr. Krajisnik this is right, isn't it? When you said -- well,

10 you haven't got the line 11 but where you say, "In the -- you say, as I

11 was saying, it's line 8, as I was saying the Bosniaks had 249307 in the

12 federation and 93.939 in Republika Srpska, the Serbs had the following,"

13 and you give the figures, "that means that an equal almost equal number of

14 houses in Serbs in the federation and Bosniaks in Republika Srpska and the

15 almost equal is the figure of 93939 in the 'Bosniaks' column and 92940 in

16 the 'Serbs' column."

17 Those are -- that's what you're talking about.

18 A. Yes. Although percentage-wise, it paints a different picture

19 because of the 2.470 -- 351.324 is what the Muslims had.

20 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter lost the Serb figure.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So that figure would be to the

22 detriment of the Serbs but I'm saying nominally, in nominal terms, that

23 per 1.000 units the Muslims just had a bit more in Republika Srpska did

24 than the Serbs did in the federation.

25 MR. STEWART:

1 Q. And the figure, which understandably got lost for the

2 interpreters, the Serb figure was 274761, which is the one in the

3 highlighted line in the middle of page 33 of the English, at the foot of

4 the --

5 A. 274.

6 Q. 274761?

7 A. Yes, that's right. These were privately owned houses but then you

8 have the socially owned apartments. And that is reflected in 12 B, the

9 next table, 12 B. And then that would be as follows. It's on page 3.

10 Q. Yes, page 36 of the English.

11 A. Here, it says in the last column, the addition, that the Bosniaks

12 had 96.023 housing units meaning socially owned flats, whereas the Serbs

13 had 96.370 socially owned flats or units. There is no division for the

14 Bosniaks in the federation or Republika Srpska. There is no distinction,

15 but there is for the Serbs, and that would make it as follows: 56.984

16 flats or units were in the federation and 38.267 were in Republika Srpska.

17 Q. Just pause there a moment, Mr. Krajisnik so to be absolutely

18 clear. The 96.023 is at the foot of the "Bosniaks" column and similarly

19 to previous items, it's 3 and 4 lines up under the "Serbs" column that we

20 get those other figures of 5698438267. Your Honours, I don't know if that

21 is helpful?

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

23 What does that say, Mr. Krajisnik? I mean, you've given us a lot

24 of figures. Before I start analysing it I'd like to know what conclusions

25 you draw out of this.

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All I want to do is to assist the

2 Trial Chamber with respect to the population movement and displacement,

3 and the property left behind by people when they moved. So that you can

4 gain an impression and picture of how the Muslims -- what the Muslims and

5 Serbs did. What the Serbs left on one sides and the Muslims on the other,

6 how many Muslims left and how many Serbs left without entering into the

7 conditions under which they left and moved, because this is the picture

8 drawn by the professional services, without entering into whether it was

9 ethnic cleansing or the free -- people who left freely. They are

10 displaced persons today. And this is compared to the figures and the

11 situation in 1991. Because the Serb population is lower, the percentages

12 are far higher. It appears that far many Serbs left, there were far more

13 housing units because there were 1.300.000 of one and 1.900.000 of the

14 other and you can see who stayed on where and who left.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Well, whether you can further analyse the figures,

16 you have drawn our attention to and to see whether these would justify the

17 conclusions, just to one thing that came into my mind, that the figures of

18 the displaced persons might be influenced by the number of persons killed,

19 for example, which would not be counted any more in 2000 because they have

20 no place of residence any more so therefore I've got no idea what

21 influence that would it have on the figures but at least it would be one

22 element which from what I see now could not have been included in these

23 figures, and therefore would have to be carefully considered before

24 drawing statistical conclusions. Please proceed.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, may I just ask

1 something? It was my aim to show you that it would have been a good idea

2 if a demographic expert had compiled this and presented the information.

3 Now, Momcilo Krajisnik is the person who is saying this and telling you

4 this. This is a surprise for me too. I just looked at the facts and

5 figures and let me tell you that in the papers it was published that

6 120.000 -- there were 120.000 requests for property to be returned. They

7 were requests to the federation made by Serbs, and 96.000 requests were

8 sent into Republika Srpska by the Croats and Muslims for a return of

9 property. So I'm talking about what the situation is like. Without

10 saying whether somebody was expelled or not. I can't address that issue.

11 As far as killings and other things are concerned, deaths and so

12 on certainly that is the most important point because these people who

13 have been displaced or moved out can return or need not return, whereas

14 people who were killed have no chance of returning. So I understand that

15 fully.

16 This was just as far as displaced persons were concerned and I'm

17 sure there is an another analysis on how many people were killed and who

18 they were. But that wasn't the subject of this brochure and this was

19 quite a surprise for me, too, because I didn't flow this is how things

20 stood. So it would be a good idea if an expert were to compile this kind

21 of report and then give us an explanation about what all these figures

22 mean.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart.

24 MR. STEWART:

25 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, could you be given, please, the document which is

1 Exhibit P907, which is a demographic research report prepared by

2 Dr. Ewa Tabeau and a colleague?

3 A. I'd just like to mention that I fulfilled my obligation to the

4 president. I have brought in the minutes related to Deronjic, in addition

5 to all the other documents that you have.

6 JUDGE ORIE: I should have mentioned this at the beginning.

7 Mr. Krajisnik provided us with some of the documents he had considered to

8 be of importance, before looking at it, they are untranslated, I give

9 copies to the parties so that they can consider whether or not to include

10 that.

11 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.

12 JUDGE ORIE: And give a copy to the OTP as well.

13 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, may I say it occurred to me earlier

14 today that it is the position, really, that, as things stand at the

15 moment, we would rather not have shorter breaks today, even if that causes

16 a difficulty elsewhere, because Your Honour will see that today is a day

17 when actually more than usually we need those breaks.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's on the record. We'll consider it. And

19 please proceed.

20 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.

21 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, this document doesn't come as a complete surprise

22 to you, that's apparent. It's been put into evidence and you have spent

23 at least some time considering -- reading -- considering this document,

24 report by Dr. Tabeau, have you?

25 A. Yes. That is quite correct. It is her report but I have to say

1 that I didn't deal with it extensively. I didn't receive it on time and I

2 didn't have enough time to go into it at any great length.

3 Q. Well, in whatever time you --

4 A. But I can answer your questions, of course. Go ahead.

5 Q. Well, I'm delighted to hear that, Mr. Krajisnik. Mr. Krajisnik,

6 my first of all then, a general question: Do you have, then -- based on

7 such reading and study of this report as you've been able to make, do you

8 have any comment on it in relation to population movements in Bosnia and

9 Herzegovina during not quite the same period as the report, during the

10 period 1991 and -- particularly 1992?

11 A. When we had this report, I thought that we would have an expert on

12 our side to reply and respond to Mrs. Tabeau. What I can say now, and it

13 is my modest contribution, is this: She had a certain topic to deal with.

14 She was not able to draw the conclusion as to when, during what time the

15 displacement and movement took place, nor could she say under what

16 conditions. But she did compile an analysis and I think it needs an

17 expert to deal with properly. I consulted some experts and they consider

18 that there are a lot of things that were not taken to fruition in this

19 report, and that they were second hand information, if I can put it that

20 way.

21 Now, as far as the population displacement is concerned, there was

22 general population displacement and movement in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and I

23 can say, of course, I don't know who was expelled and who left voluntarily

24 so I don't want anybody to criticise me on that score but a large number

25 of people did leave. They left their places of residence, wherever they

1 were in the minority, whether in one way or another, because they

2 considered that it wasn't their war, and all I can talk about is the Serb

3 side. I can tell you why the Serbs moved, what I heard from them. I

4 heard about the Muslim side for the first time here at the Tribunal, and,

5 of course, through the media. But I heard from the Serbs themselves the

6 reasons why they left, so if that can be helpful I can give you my

7 impressions of that.

8 Q. Well, Mr. Krajisnik, let us look, for example, then, in this

9 report, at 3.1. In the English it's on page 8. You of course have a

10 slightly different version. It's page 7, top of page 7 of your copy,

11 Mr. Krajisnik.

12 A. Yes. I have 3.1. 03083441 is the page number.

13 Q. Well, it begins it's the percentage of Muslims in the population

14 of Krajisnik case municipalities in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Is that --

15 that's what you're looking at, are you?

16 A. Yes, yes.

17 Q. The text begins, "In the 37 municipalities included in the

18 indictment," and that was the original number, it's dropped but it was

19 37. "In the 37 municipalities included in the indictment, the share of

20 Muslims fell from 38.3 per cent in 1991 to 27.8 per cent in 1997, i.e., by

21 27.3 per cent." Those figures include all 37, though those assigned

22 ultimately to Federation of Bosnia-Herzegovina and those assigned to

23 Republika Srpska, after Dayton, and considering only the territories which

24 eventually constituted Republika Srpska, the share of Muslims fell from

25 38 -- sorry, 31, my slip of the tongue, beg your pardon, 31.8 per cent to

1 1.4 per cent, i.e., by 95.7 per cent over the same period. And in the

2 areas that in 1997 belonged to the federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina,

3 the share of Muslims increased from 50.1 per cent in 1991 to 84.4 per cent

4 in 1997. That's to say by 68.5 per cent. And then detailed figures by

5 municipality are provided in table 1M in annex A.

6 Mr. Krajisnik, I would like you to go to table 1M, please. It's

7 in the English it begins at page 23. Well, I'm sorry begins actually at

8 page 22 but in the English I'm going to page 24 where we deal with -- it's

9 Sarajevo/Pale. Pale is under Sarajevo in that table. It's item 29 any

10 way. The municipalities are given numbers. Do you find that,

11 Mr. Krajisnik?

12 A. If it is table 1NS, then that's Banja Luka.

13 Q. No, it's 1M. 1NS is an earlier table, Mr. Krajisnik. We get to

14 1M next?

15 A. Yes, 1M. I found it.

16 Q. It's on page 22 of the Serbian version. Now, do you see the

17 figures there are for Pale and they are divided up into the part of Pale

18 which has fallen into the federation and the part of Pale which has fallen

19 into Republika Srpska? Do you see that?

20 A. Yes, I do.

21 Q. And the comparison, of course, throughout Dr. Tabeau's report is

22 between 1991 and 1997. And so far as the federation part of Pale is

23 concerned, if I can call it that, the number of Muslims in that part of

24 Pale was 963 in 1991 and had fallen to 369 in 1997, but, of course, we can

25 see that at the same time there are no Serbs left there because the

1 percentage has risen to 100, the Muslims 100 per cent of the population in

2 that bit of Pale in 1997, and then the next line, in the -- what's now

3 Republika Srpska bit of Pale, there were 2.658 Muslims living there in

4 1991 and only 10 recorded here as living there in 1997. Mr. Krajisnik, as

5 best you can do, did those figures and that degree of change of the

6 population in those two parts of Pale, are they consistent with your own

7 knowledge and your own observations?

8 A. What I can say is this: And a lot of time has elapsed from my

9 arrival to the end of the war, a part of Pale - Praca, it's called - came

10 to belong to the Gorazde Muslim canton, and there was a church there on

11 the side that came to belong to the Muslims, and the Serbs made themselves

12 another church on the other side, but all the Serbs -- well, there weren't

13 any more Serbs there, there were just Muslims there. So this division and

14 the psychological division in Sarajevo, throughout Sarajevo, was like

15 that. The people would go back to their canton even after the war. So I

16 think this presents the proper picture. I don't know whether it's a good

17 example for a proper picture. But it is the same picture that we see

18 here. I don't know how many Muslims there are in Pale, whether 10 or five

19 or 15. All I can do is say that I believe that there are 10, if it says

20 so here but I didn't communicate with the ordinary man in the street about

21 this, and I know that Praca, the area that belonged to the Muslim canton

22 later on, the situation was like this. All the Serbs moved to Serb

23 territory and left their church behind and their cemetery behind, and

24 their graves, and so on. How they crossed, I don't know. I can't say.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, I again try to follow you. You were

1 quoting numbers from table 1M; is that correct?

2 MR. STEWART: Yes, indeed, Your Honour. Yes.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Then let me see if I can find the numbers you

4 mentioned. You were talking about the federation part of Pale --

5 MR. STEWART: Yes, I was, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE ORIE: -- which I find under 29. Then the first line.

7 MR. STEWART: Yes.

8 JUDGE ORIE: And then you said in the number of Muslims in that

9 part of Pale was 963 in 1991.

10 MR. STEWART: Yes.

11 JUDGE ORIE: I have not found that number yet.

12 MR. STEWART: It's the second column, Your Honour. I'm sorry,

13 Your Honour, I always try to balance between going too quickly and too

14 slowly, Your Honour.

15 JUDGE ORIE: I have 590 in there.

16 MR. STEWART: I think perhaps Your Honour might be looking at a

17 different table, then. I don't know

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Therefore I asked first whether I was looking

19 at table 1M.

20 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, I don't know what Your Honour is

21 looking at.

22 JUDGE ORIE: I am on page 23 as I was told that it would be in

23 English on page 23. But if it's another page ... I find, as a matter of

24 fact, Pale on page 23 as number 29 out of a list.

25 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I thought what I had said -- I

1 corrected myself at one point because I indicated at what page table 1M

2 began and then indicated that we were looking at item 29 in that list.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.

4 MR. STEWART: Which is Sarajevo/Pale.

5 JUDGE ORIE: And that's 23.

6 MR. STEWART: Yes, my apologise, Your Honours.

7 JUDGE ORIE: No. Let's try to find the numbers.

8 MR. STEWART: Yes.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Do you have a different version? I have numbers and

10 I'm just reading from the beginning of line 29 as far as the federation is

11 concerned, I have 1991, all ethnicities, 756.

12 MR. STEWART: Your Honour is on clearly on a different page.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well I'm on page 23 in English.

14 MR. STEWART: May I offer, if Your Honour were to simply pass over

15 Your Honour's book let and I'll have a quick glance because there may be a

16 simple explanation.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well --

18 MR. STEWART: I can then immediately see whether we are looking at

19 the same thing or what's possibly the explanation.

20 JUDGE ORIE: There is the page I'm working on.

21 MR. HARMON: We were having the same difficulty, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I'd like to see what -- yes.

23 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, I am looking at a research report

24 prepared for the case of Momcilo Krajisnik dated the 7th of May 2003. And

25 it seems that the rest of you are looking at an older report, which has

1 been superseded by the one that I'm looking at.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Could be. If we have the wrong one, then it's

3 certainly there to be blamed for it.

4 MR. STEWART: I'm to be blamed, Your Honour, for not ensuring that

5 everybody has got the same thing as I go through evidence. But,

6 Your Honour --

7 JUDGE ORIE: The one that has been -- this is the copy that is the

8 copy that has been tendered into evidence. During the next break, we'll

9 try to finds out -- it may be -- I have some recollection of newer version

10 of reports by Mrs. Tabeau.

11 MR. STEWART: The explanation, Your Honour, seems to be but it's

12 at great risk that one offers any explanation at the moment in this area,

13 the explanation seems to be that the document that has found its way on

14 the JDB is the old document which has in fact been replaced clearly a long

15 time ago, because 2003, by the updated report and I understandably, and in

16 fact I do venture to suggest entirely reasonably have been working from

17 the later version of the report. Your Honour, it's been a mechanical --

18 well, we have a phrase for it in English, Your Honour, but it's a

19 something has gone wrong.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

21 MR. STEWART: Apparently the phrase is shared on both sides of the

22 Atlantic.

23 JUDGE ORIE: At least it's good that we found out something went

24 wrong.

25 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, well, it's difficult for me to proceed.

1 Well, I can proceed if everybody can fairly quickly have the right report

2 and I can simply continue.

3 JUDGE ORIE: If we have -- could we then -- if there is any copy,

4 another copy, then we could put that on the ELMO and -- but at the same

5 time ...

6 MR. STEWART: Quite a substantial document, that's the trouble,

7 Your Honour. We could copy, print, but that takes a few minutes, of

8 course. Your Honour, I'm looking at the clock.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, can we perhaps do that --

10 MR. STEWART: Does slightly bear upon my request, Your Honour,

11 about the break.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you would like to have a full break.

13 MR. STEWART: Yes.

14 JUDGE ORIE: I'd First like to find out -- first of all,

15 Mr. Stewart, beyond anyone's fault, I would say, we were more or less

16 forced to have a late start.

17 MR. STEWART: He understand entirely, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE ORIE: We lost 20 minutes let me first inquire if it would

19 save us tomorrow's session to regain that 20 minutes after 7.00. Would

20 that be a possibility? So that ...

21 THE INTERPRETER: Yes, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I see nodding 'yes' from the technicians as

23 well. Well, if I do not hear from them, I take it.

24 We'll then have the usual break of 25 minutes unless, Mr. Stewart,

25 you would say you would need half an hour, then.

1 MR. STEWART: Oh, no Your Honour we will have - 25 minutes --

2 JUDGE ORIE: 25 minutes and we'll try to be --

3 MR. STEWART: -- straight away --

4 JUDGE ORIE: I'm not saying that the Judges always have to wait

5 for whatever happens in this courtroom but it often happens that we have

6 to wait some time. Let's try to get --

7 MR. STEWART: Sorry? Pardon, Your Honour? Have to wait for

8 what? I'm not --

9 JUDGE ORIE: -- plus sometimes for technical matters, et cetera,

10 and whatever it is --

11 MR. STEWART: We try to cut that to a minimum, Your Honour.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We try to resume at quarter past 4.

13 MR. JOSSE: Your Honour was going to deal with a matter in private

14 session before the break.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, yes, yes. Perhaps I'll very briefly do that.

16 Let me just -- we go into private session but not for more than two

17 seconds.

18 [Private session]

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 24736-24737 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 [Open session]

2 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar. Please proceed,

4 Mr. Stewart.

5 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour. As I was saying, I think we

6 sorted that out, happily. Mr. Krajisnik has always had the correct report

7 from May 2003 and it seems probably it's the old one that's on the JDB at

8 the moment, so that's probably the source of the problem. But,

9 Your Honour, we have had copies made of the correct version of the report.

10 I hope Your Honours --

11 JUDGE ORIE: The correct version in evidence is the 28th of July,

12 from what I see, and since I'm locked in here on the --

13 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, can that be right, with respect? I

14 thought the -- that the -- the updated version was formally served as I

15 understood it, under 94 bis and/or 92 bis and I had thought was -- had

16 been admitted.

17 JUDGE ORIE: 907 is still described on the list as -- on the list

18 as the 28th of July 2002, from what I understand. Since I had no access

19 to the -- to the transcript since I was locked in here - I couldn't do it

20 in my office - I have not had an opportunity yet to see whether at any

21 later moment the exhibit was replaced by the newer version but we'll sort

22 that out. But we have it in front of us now.

23 MR. STEWART: You've got the up-to-date one, Your Honour?

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

25 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I see we -- we sorted it out. I assume

1 the Prosecution would tell us at some point which of their reports they

2 would want to have in evidence. The --

3 Q. So, anyway, Mr. Krajisnik, happily you've got the up to date one

4 and we were looking at -- it was 20 -- page 24 of the English. We'll get

5 to it, I think, Mr. Krajisnik, anyway, item 29, Sarajevo/Pale and my

6 question, which I'm not sure to be honest, Mr. Krajisnik, that you had

7 directly answered it, my question was whether those changes of population

8 in the -- what is now the federation bit of Pale and on the other hand the

9 Republika Srpska bit of Pale, are consistent with your own knowledge and

10 observations of what happened in Pale from 1991 to 1997.

11 A. What I learned, and I delivered a document, at the beginning of

12 the war, before the Muslims left, all the Serbs were expelled. That's

13 what they wrote in a letter to the municipality, from the Muslim part of

14 Pale to Serb territory. It's in the documents I brought here. It's a

15 letter presented to the executive committee of Pale with a request that

16 accommodation be found for these refugees.

17 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, with the greatest respect that doesn't really go

18 very directly to my question because your answer relates to all the Serbs

19 having been expelled. The table we are looking at, at the moment relates

20 to the changes in the Muslim population in the two bits of Pale. So I'm

21 asking you whether the -- yes, it's page 22 of your version, whether those

22 changes in the Muslim population are consistent with your own knowledge

23 and observation in relation to the period 1991 to 1997.

24 A. I understood you to be asking about the Serbs from the Muslim part

25 of Pale. If you're asking about the Muslims, I think the picture is as

1 follows. As far as if heard. I don't have the precise information but I

2 think that's how it is.

3 Q. Yes. Thank you. And Mr. Krajisnik, if we then move on, and I'm

4 going to invite Mr. Sladojevic to give the page number in your own

5 version. It's at page 33 of the English. This is the equivalent table,

6 it's 1S, it's equivalent table concerning Serbs and that's -- that's

7 mentioned in the report itself, in the body of the report, at 6.1. If you

8 like, they are matching sections of the report and that's the section

9 major findings for Serbs whereas what we had looked at before was major

10 findings for Muslims. I'm skipping over, Your Honours and Mr. Krajisnik,

11 major findings for Croats and also major findings for others, not for any

12 sinister motive, but, Mr. Krajisnik, if we then look at that table 1S, at

13 page 22, wasn't it, it's Sarajevo/Pale, it's -- the specific item is on

14 page 31, then, of your copy and we see again broken down in the same way

15 Pale, FBH, federation, let's make sure we got the right point it says all

16 ethnicities, do you see a figure 1.384? Do you see that figure?

17 A. Yes, yes.

18 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... Doesn't see that figure on

19 their papers got the wrong paper. Then it's 407 Serbs, obviously the very

20 precise number doesn't matter, Mr. Krajisnik, 407 Serbs in 1991 in that

21 bit of Pale, none at all according to these figures in 1997, and then

22 Republika Srpska bit of Pale, 9.195 in 1991 and that's grown to 12.866 by

23 1997. I haven't dwelt so much on percentages here but that's gone up to

24 95.6 so obviously it's really overwhelmingly most of the population.

25 Again, Mr. Krajisnik, not the precise numbers, of course, but do those

1 figures, do they accord with your own knowledge and observation of what

2 happened in Pale between 1991 and 1997?

3 A. I think that this must be approximately correct. A large number

4 of Serb refugees left Pale, and I think this corresponds to the actual

5 situation.

6 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, we got the 37 municipalities in this table that

7 originally appeared in the indictment before a small number were removed

8 so for practically purposes most of these indictments listed are still

9 specifically identified and -- as the part of the Prosecution case on this

10 indictment. Are there other municipalities on this list of which you

11 would have, yourself, reliable knowledge from your own observation of the

12 broad scale of population changes during the period 1991 to 1997? First

13 of all, would that be true in relation to any of the Sarajevo

14 municipalities?

15 A. Yes. I'm just looking here, Novi Grad in Sarajevo. Well, in

16 Rajlovac alone there were Serbs, but I see here that in the entire

17 municipality, where there were about 30.000 Serbs, today there are only

18 2.000 something. As for Ilijas, this was a -- predominantly Serb.

19 Q. The question to start with then, Mr. Krajisnik, is do you have --

20 those two municipalities you've just mentioned, first of all, do you have

21 at least a reasonable knowledge from your own observation of the scale of

22 population changes as between the different ethnic groups over the period

23 1991 to 1997?

24 A. In the Novi Grad assembly, there were some Yugoslavs, but in the

25 urban area, the majority were Muslims. However, I was commenting on the

1 Serbs here because this is where there has been a reduction of the

2 population. So that in Sarajevo, as a whole, one can see that in the

3 Muslim part of Sarajevo, there has been a drastic reduction in the number

4 of Serbs due to people moving out. I can comment on this by municipality.

5 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. Krajisnik?

6 JUDGE ORIE: May I inquire what we are listening to at this

7 moment? It very much gives me the impression that you are drawing to our

8 attention to the fact that the population movement in the other direction

9 may have been of a similar size or even a bigger size than the moving out,

10 I leave alone for what reasons, by Muslims. Is that a correct

11 understanding or?

12 MR. STEWART: No, it's not, Your Honour --

13 JUDGE ORIE: Then --

14 MR. STEWART: -- with respect.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then we'll further listen to what -- I don't

16 know exactly, of course, it should not be said in the presence of the

17 witness, what you are drawing our attention to but I wonder whether it is

18 in dispute what -- but please think it over that it's not clear for me

19 then. But perhaps it's also partly due to the answers given.

20 MR. STEWART: They do come into the equation, Your Honour, you're

21 absolutely right. And to some extent that's the answer to Your Honour's

22 observation that what I am in a sense, of course, in asking questions

23 I'm -- have in mind matters that will in some way be drawn to the

24 attention of the Trial Chamber. But I'm in the hands of the answers as

25 well, Your Honour.

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'm aware of that but because I think we started

2 it with what was wrong with Tabeau's report, and apart from first of all

3 the Tabeau report doesn't give a lot of answers to questions but is very

4 much observing matters that happened with sufficient imprecision. I mean,

5 she was not in a position to clearly make a difference between movement of

6 population during the war, after the war, et cetera. There is a lot of

7 information which is not in that report, and I think could not be in her

8 report because of the data she had available to herself, and the -- I

9 would say the rules of logic that -- the rules of her profession that she

10 would have to apply. So please continue, then, and we'll -- hopefully we

11 will understand what it actually is about.

12 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I believe I can, I'll consider it. I

13 believe I can help Your Honour more without saying something which ought

14 not to be said in the presence of the witness.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Please do.

16 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'm first of all just trying to

17 establish -- and there need be no mystery about this. I'm trying to

18 establish the degree to which Mr. Krajisnik, where he does have some

19 knowledge of population movements, agrees broadly with what's in the

20 Tabeau report. Because after all it's not my task or it's not in Mr.

21 Krajisnik's interests to open up disputes where they don't exist. It's

22 better to try to narrow them down.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

24 MR. STEWART: So that's what I'm trying to do first. Then,

25 Your Honour, I am going to get, and there need be no mystery about there

1 stated in broad terms I will go on to the questions in the area that

2 Mr. Krajisnik can deal with but where, for exactly the reasons Your Honour

3 indicated, Dr. Tabeau couldn't because she's an expert dealing with raw

4 material and putting it together, not somebody who was there in 1991, 1992

5 and so on.

6 JUDGE ORIE: No. Okay then. I think perhaps you could have gone

7 more quickly to that point. I mean, I take it that you have spoken with

8 Mr. Krajisnik. If there any point which he says this is not correct. But

9 please continue. It's now clear to us.

10 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, this.

11 JUDGE ORIE: What you're heading for.

12 MR. STEWART: This is an area on which I have spoken to

13 Mr. Krajisnik frequently, though not recently, Your Honour, except via the

14 courtroom questions.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so. Please continue.

16 MR. STEWART: Yes.

17 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, so the particular municipalities that you mentioned

18 a moment ago, it was Novi Grad, wasn't it, just so that I'm not getting

19 mixed up about that. First of all it was Sarajevo/Novi Grad. I wanted to

20 do it the same way, Mr. Krajisnik, but as quickly as we can, as I did

21 before, by looking first at table 1M, I want to do Muslims then Serbs in

22 that -- alphabetical order so -- give me the pages reference if you can,

23 Marko. So Sarajevo/Novi Grad, appears on page 24 of the English and --

24 okay, and on page 22 of yours, you see?

25 A. Yes, I see it.

1 Q. The figures given there are that there were 55.789 Muslims living

2 there in 1991, according to those figures. By 1997 that had become

3 44.413. Now, I'm leaving aside the overall population change for a

4 moment, Mr. Krajisnik. We will come to aspects of that in a moment. But

5 so far as the Muslim population of Sarajevo/Novi Grad, (federation), which

6 identifies where it is, is concerned, is that consistent with your own

7 knowledge and observations that there was a drop from 55 -- 56.000 or so

8 in 1991 to around 44, 45.000 in 1997?

9 A. I don't think so. I think the number has remained the same but

10 the makeup has changed. Probably the other ethnicities are missing here

11 because Novi Grad, as a municipality, is completely inhabited. There is

12 no part of Novi Grad --

13 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... the other ethnicities are

14 missing here except so far as they might be able to be inferred from the

15 totals, just so there is no misunderstanding. This table is dealing with

16 the changes of Muslims. The total population figures are given but this

17 table deals with Muslims and there are separate tables dealing with the

18 other ethnicities, we are going to come on to the Serb table at the

19 moment. Do you see?

20 A. Yes. The Novi Grad municipality is all in Muslim hands. There is

21 no reason for the number of Muslims to have decreased. In fact, it has

22 increased in Novi Grad because a large number of Serb territories now

23 belongs to it and it's inhabited by Muslims, not Serbs. So I find this

24 percentage surprising.

25 Q. Well, Mr. Krajisnik, is possibly -- I don't want to dwell on this

1 particular point too long, is possibly the explanation of your reluctance

2 to accept these figures that these figures relate to the change from 1991

3 to 1997 and, after all, time had moved on three years to the point where

4 you were last in Bosnia and Herzegovina? You were there until 2000.

5 A. No. I don't think these percentages and these numbers are

6 correct. In 1996 when the Dayton Accord began to function, the Serbs left

7 the area and the Muslim population increased, because a large number of

8 Muslims moved into Serb ethnic areas. All of Rajlovac, for example, which

9 used to belong to Novi Grad, and in the urban part of Novi Grad itself.

10 For this reason, I think this piece of information cannot be correct by

11 any means.

12 Q. And if we go to table 1S, Mr. Krajisnik, page 33 of the English,

13 that's item number 26, Sarajevo/Ilijas, it's page 31. Do you see that,

14 Sarajevo/Ilijas?

15 A. Yes. Is it 34 in my version?

16 Q. 31, 31 in your version, Mr. Krajisnik. And it's number 26, they

17 are always given the same numbers, I think, municipalities. Do you see

18 there the --

19 A. Yes, yes, I can see Ilijas, yes.

20 Q. Okay. The number of Serbs shown there in 1991, it's the second

21 column of numbers, 9601, do you see that?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And go on down in 1997 to 136. It might have been already tucked

24 in one of your previous answers but is that consistent with your

25 observations of what happened in that municipality over that period 1991

1 to 1997?

2 A. Yes. That's an integral part of Sarajevo, and the Serbs left in

3 large numbers, especially in 1995 and 1996. I don't know if there is 136

4 and something but I thought there was nobody there.

5 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, do you -- this report relates to 1991 to 1997,

6 really apparently because of the raw material that was actually available.

7 Do you have from your own observation knowledge of any municipalities in

8 Bosnia and Herzegovina where a large number of Muslims left that

9 municipality between 1991 and 1997?

10 A. Well, to be quite honest, I would have to review this in order to

11 give you a proper answer. But if you tell me, I can tell you whether I

12 think it's correct or not. I can comment on any examples you can give me.

13 Q. All right. Let's look, then, at table 1M, and Mr. Krajisnik,

14 please understand here that I am -- I'm specifically looking, by looking

15 at table 1M, just as Dr. Tabeau and her colleague are doing, looking at

16 Muslims here and what numbers of Muslims left these municipalities during

17 that period. Serbs are in a different table altogether. So are Croats

18 and so on. We are not looking at those at the moment. Banja Luka, do you

19 see number -- it's page [indiscernible] in the English and it's 1M. It's

20 the first where 1M begins. It's page 20, okay?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Banja Luka --

23 A. Yes, I have found it.

24 Q. The --

25 MR. STEWART: Sorry, Your Honours wish to pursue.

1 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, which page?

2 MR. STEWART: So sorry, Your Honour, page 22.

3 Q. Banja Luka, Mr. Krajisnik, 24.297 Muslims shown there, a distinct

4 minority, clearly, but shown as living there in 1991 and by 1997, gone

5 down to under 2.000. Do you know from your own observations of Banja Luka

6 whether that is broadly correct?

7 A. Is that 24.277? 97?

8 Q. 24.297. It's the second column.

9 A. Yes. I think that a larger number of Muslims remained and that

10 there are more Muslims there than this figure would indicate.

11 Q. But broadly speaking, Mr. Krajisnik, do you -- are you able to

12 agree that the scale of movement out -- of Muslims from Banja Luka during

13 that six-year period was from the 20-something thousands down to a very

14 few thousand?

15 A. Well, I have to say quite truthfully that I cannot tell exactly

16 how many have remained. I know that a contract was signed or agreement

17 between Mr. Koljevic and Mr. Samaruga, and I don't know how many left and

18 how many stayed. I couldn't tell you even an approximate number, but I

19 know that there are many more there today.

20 Q. Do you yourself, Mr. Krajisnik, have knowledge of the scale of

21 Muslim departure, if you accept there was such departure, from Banja Luka

22 during the year 1992?

23 A. Only what I heard from Mr. Koljevic after the meeting. I didn't

24 hear anything else. I didn't know how they left, but he told me that at

25 one point he entered into an agreement with Mr. Samaruga of the ICRC and

1 that a certain number of Croats left. As for other instances of people

2 moving out, I was not informed of this. I wasn't aware of it. But as for

3 this particular instance, I learned from him that a significant number of

4 people left. This was towards the end of the war. Banja Luka had a large

5 number of Muslims. I know that for certain.

6 Q. Let's go straight to number 14 on this list, Mr. Krajisnik, Gacko.

7 Well, you can probably -- it's page 21, but we are just going down the

8 numbered list now, Mr. Krajisnik, so a page number shouldn't figure a big

9 deal. Have you got number 14, Gacko, in the same table?

10 A. 14?

11 Q. Page 22 -- sorry, page 21, page 21.

12 A. Yes, that's right.

13 Q. Now, Gacko, according to these figures, there were just over

14 3.000, 3.014 is the figure you see. Just over 3.000 Muslims in Gacko in

15 1991, and, by 1997, the number recorded is 4. Mr. Krajisnik, for working

16 purposes, with all respect to those four, the Muslims had gone from Gacko.

17 Can you tell the Trial Chamber what you know about how it was that the

18 number of Muslims in Gacko went down from 3.000 to, for all practical

19 purposes, none at all, over that six-year period?

20 A. What I know for Gacko is this: When the Muslims left, the deputy

21 said at one point that they wanted to go, that they put in a request to

22 leave, and showed a document, and I think the Trial Chamber has it, and

23 the Prosecution does too, where the SDA Executive Board had asked them to

24 go. Now, allegedly after that, the SDA said that they distanced

25 themselves from that document. They weren't in the town themselves. They

1 were in Fazlagica Kula, which is a settlement a little out of town, and

2 after that they left and went to Montenegro. So that's the story that

3 reached me, after some time. That's what I know about Gacko, that they

4 had left and asked to leave and also were given instructions to leave.

5 That's the only town in Herzegovina that I know about, having talked to

6 someone with respect to their departure.

7 Q. Then Kalinovik, the next one, there were just over 1.000, 1156

8 recorded here in 1991 and three, Mr. Krajisnik, so the same comment

9 applies as previously, do you know how it was that the number of Muslims

10 in Kalinovik went down from 1156 to 3 or for practical purposes, the

11 Muslims had gone by 1997?

12 A. Although there was a deputy from Kalinovik, I never heard from

13 him, nor did I discuss how the people from Kalinovik left, nor did I know

14 that they had left. The only thing that I did hear about was on the 12th

15 of May, at an assembly of the Serb people held in Banja Luka, that

16 Mr. Mladic, who originates from those parts, said that he was, together

17 with a government member, that he went there by helicopter and that he

18 guaranteed them all their rights and freedoms and safety, and that he had

19 a very positive meeting. And after that there were no further -- there

20 was no further information about that small town. I had no further

21 information about that small town.

22 Q. Right. Now, unless you have something special to add about

23 Nevesinje, Mr. Krajisnik, it's right next to Kalinovik and Gacko, and in

24 the interests of time I'm into the going to ask you about that. Unless

25 you say there is something special, I'm going to move on to Prijedor,

1 number 19, because that is after all in a completely different part of

2 Bosnia and Herzegovina. In Prijedor, there are 40.075 Muslims shown as

3 living there in 1991. By 1997 the figure has gone down to 397. Are you

4 able to tell the Trial Chamber what you know about how it was that around

5 40.000 Muslims, according to these figures, left Prijedor during that

6 period?

7 A. When this process was going on, I had no information at all about

8 it. But in the period after that, I received the following information:

9 That an agency, transport agency existed, which before the armed conflict

10 had taken a large number, predominantly Muslims, out of Prijedor, and

11 this -- a statement to that effect was made by one of the participants,

12 or, rather, a potential witness who was then deputy in parliament.

13 The second point is this: I heard, once again subsequently, when

14 journalists came visiting, when they came to visit Prijedor, that a

15 certain number of them had been taken prisoner, a certain number of people

16 had been taken prisoner and then the camp was disbanded. And they said

17 clearly, and I said that here, that there was a collection centre and that

18 prisons existed as well, and they were allowed to visit them quite

19 freely. And the warden of Trnopolje prison gave a statement, he has died

20 since but you can see the statement which confirms that it was a

21 collection centre and he describes everything that went on there. So I

22 learned all this later on, when I came here. What --

23 MR. TIEGER: Sorry, I know it's late in the period of examination

24 but I feel I should urge a reminder again that we -- that Mr. Krajisnik be

25 asked to refrain from references to statements that are not in evidence

1 and that may not be in evidence. And I understand that --

2 JUDGE ORIE: It's totally impossible for us to seek any

3 verification.

4 Apart from Mr. Krajisnik, Mr. Stewart, I just draw your attention

5 to it, is -- in rather general terms tells us what happened in what he

6 calls a collection centre which is the subject of quite a number of

7 adjudicated facts. So therefore, it would need a more thorough attack on

8 those adjudicated facts to get them off the record. Please proceed.

9 MR. STEWART: That's -- well that's certainly understood by us,

10 Your Honour. Thank you.

11 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, we are concentrating on the -- what you know about

12 the, according to this report, reduction -- very large reduction in the

13 Muslim population in Prijedor.

14 A. I understood it that I was supposed to tell the Trial Chamber

15 everything I knew about this, and one of the things that I did know came

16 from a statement that was not in this case, from somebody who died, and

17 I'm sure the president will remember when I said that I'd learnt from my

18 contacts that Trnopolje was a collection centre.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik, if there is an adjudicated fact, it

20 means that the Prosecution doesn't have to prove that any more because it

21 has been thoroughly looked at by another Trial Chamber. There is nothing

22 that would prevent you from leading evidence which would come to a totally

23 different conclusion. Nothing would preclude you from --

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right, yes.

25 JUDGE ORIE: But just referring to a statement of someone who died

1 as one single element where this finding is based upon a couple of months

2 of thorough litigation, really makes no sense. Again, a full attack, it's

3 certainly something you could have done, but just to make reference to

4 statements we do not have adding one little element, really makes no

5 sense.

6 Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President --

8 JUDGE ORIE: No, Mr. Krajisnik; Mr. Stewart, I allow him now to

9 continue the questioning. If there would be anything at the very end of

10 your testimony you would like to say but it seems to me, but, of course, I

11 may be wrong, that you do not fully understand the procedural context in

12 which you gave these answers.

13 Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.

14 MR. STEWART:

15 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, I'll try and help by putting a slightly different

16 question, then. By the end of 1992, what did you know about how it was --

17 well, I better preface this by saying the Tabeau report deals with the

18 period 1991 to 1997, let's bear that in mind, but by the end of 1992, what

19 did you know about any reduction of the Muslim population of Prijedor and,

20 if there was such a reduction that you knew about, how it had happened?

21 A. I didn't have any knowledge about any reduction in Prijedor. I

22 even attended an assembly meeting but we didn't discuss that matter.

23 Q. And did you know anything about killings in -- of Muslims in

24 Prijedor during 1992?

25 A. I said that from the report that was tabled by the journalists,

1 and there is a document that I wanted to highlight or rather documents

2 that speak differently, I learned there that there was a quite different

3 picture than was painted to the public. So the picture was that it wasn't

4 a camp, concentration camp, killing, well, that's the impression I gained

5 and the picture I gained from those reports.

6 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, again I'm not going to ask you about the next one,

7 Prnjavor, number 20, because we just do have limited time for everything

8 really. Number 21, Rogatica, do you see that, on the list in front of

9 you?

10 A. May I ask you something, if that's not a problem?

11 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honours, it's not conventional but

12 sometimes it helps from a practical point of view, through --

13 JUDGE ORIE: We will listen to your question and then we'll see if

14 it's appropriate to put such a question to counsel.

15 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm interested, and I talked to my

17 lawyer or counsel, does he mean to override adjudicated facts such as

18 Trnopolje, et cetera? We have a lot of documents, not just one document.

19 If he doesn't intend to do that, then I don't see the reason for this. I

20 don't know whether it's correct. I just wanted to present it as being

21 something opposite to that.

22 JUDGE ORIE: I do not think that Mr. Stewart should at this moment

23 answer that question, but it's clear that it's something that came into my

24 mind as, and that is: Whether, and by what means, it should be considered

25 to challenge adjudicated facts. That's a question that came into my mind.

1 Well, Mr. Krajisnik, I do understand that it has come to your mind as

2 well. I'm not interfering in any way in what Mr. Stewart does at this

3 moment. We leave it to him.

4 Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.

5 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.

6 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, I just was going to ask you about Rogatica. I just

7 wanted first of all, please, to make sure that --

8 A. All right. I apologise.

9 Q. No apology needed.

10 The -- item 21, still on page 21. Rogatica, the figure shown for

11 Muslims living there in 1991 is 10.851, and in 1997, 3. Mr. Krajisnik,

12 I'm going to put a slightly different form of question in relation to

13 Rogatica. What do you know, Mr. Krajisnik, if anything, about how much,

14 if any, of such a large population change of Muslims as is shown in this

15 report had occurred by the end of 1992?

16 A. I don't know about population movement in 1992, from Rogatica, but

17 the criticism I can make is that I know that there are at least more than

18 three Muslims from the contacts I've had with the Serbs, so that I find it

19 very surprising that there should be only three Muslims in Rogatica as

20 recorded here.

21 Q. Well, Mr. Krajisnik, this was three in 1997. I respectfully

22 suggest, unless we are talking about dramatically different figures from

23 the three, can we concentrate on my question, which is what you --

24 A. Very well, yes.

25 Q. For the -- what had happened by the end of 1992?

1 A. At the time I didn't know how the Muslims came to leave. Later

2 on, from contacting people, or rather from my contacts with people, I

3 don't want to mention that they gave statements or anything like that, I

4 was told that they wished to leave because the municipality was divided.

5 So the Serbs were expelled first and then, allegedly after that, the

6 Muslims left and went to Gorazde but I learned that after the end of the

7 war.

8 Q. Can we go to number 32, Sokolac? It's on page 24 of the English

9 and page 22 in your copy, Mr. Krajisnik. And you see there the number of

10 Muslims recorded as living in Sokolac in 1991 was 4.250 and only two

11 recorded as being there in 1997. Again, Mr. Krajisnik, up to -- what do

12 you know about the scale, if any, of Muslim -- reduction of the Muslim

13 population in Sokolac by the end of 1992?

14 A. I don't know. I have no information about the Muslims. And let

15 me explain about the Muslims departure. I didn't know that there were any

16 Muslims in the small town itself. There is a settlement quite a long way

17 away from Sokolac called Knezina, so probably that number of Muslims lived

18 over there. I never talked to anybody about the departure of Muslims from

19 that area, from the area of Sokolac, nor do I know under which conditions

20 they left. When I came here, and when people testified, that's when I

21 heard about it.

22 Q. And can we look at Visegrad, which is number 35? Should be on the

23 same page but it's just a few items down. Do you see that?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. 11.178 Muslims shown as living in Visegrad in 1991, and in 1997,

1 this report says only three. First of all, I'm going to go back to that

2 period 1991 to 1997. First of all, Mr. Krajisnik, are -- do you have any

3 knowledge yourself which enables you to accept or disagree with the scale

4 of the figures shown in this report for that change in population of

5 Muslims in Visegrad over that six-year period?

6 A. Yes. Absolutely, the number of Muslims has dropped. Not only

7 dropped but this report is probably quite close to the truth. There is

8 just one thing that I learnt from reading the newspapers, and that is that

9 a m mosque was built there and that a number of people returned. How

10 many, I don't know. I don't know how many returned, whether they actually

11 did return, but that the Muslims left is Visegrad en masse that was true

12 although as I say I didn't know that at the time. I learnt this on one

13 occasion after I went to Visegrad, to a Spa there after the war and I know

14 that there weren't any Muslims there. But how they came to leave, I

15 really don't know.

16 Q. When you say you didn't know that at the time, can we be clear

17 what time it is that you're talking about that you now believe they left?

18 A. 1992. I didn't know in 1992. You've already asked me that, if I

19 understood you correctly. In 1992, I did not know under what conditions

20 the number of Muslims were reduced and in what way they came to leave

21 Visegrad. What I remember now, and what I omitted to say is this: There

22 was a telephone conversation between General Kukanjac and a man called

23 Sabanovic, where Mr. Izetbegovic participated. The war had begun and he

24 was asking for the withdrawal of the JNA, et cetera, and all that was not

25 to blow up the dam. But I don't know how the Muslims left or whether they

1 left or how they left.

2 Q. Now, Mr. Krajisnik, the last one on the list is Zvornik. But what

3 I want to do with Zvornik is ask you to look, please, at both the Muslim

4 figures in table 1M and the Serb figures in table 1S. Mr. Krajisnik, I

5 can give you another copy of the report you've got so that you can have

6 the two pages alongside each other.

7 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, the pages in the English are 24 and 33.

8 And what I'm handing to you opened to page 31 has the 1S table so it's got

9 Zvornik for 1S. So you can put that alongside the Zvornik figures in

10 table 1M. Do you see? Just so we make sure we've got the right

11 documents, 1M, the bottom figure in the left-hand column on the page

12 you're looking at should be 53760. Is that right?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Okay. Well I'm sorry it's actually the same figure on the other

15 page as well. The one next to it should be 29452. Immediately to the

16 right should be a figure 29452. Do you see that?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. The other page 1 S the figure should be 22535; is that correct?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Good, we got the right pieces of paper, Mr. Krajisnik. So now, do

21 you see that on 1M -- well, Zvornik, first of all, is divided in here into

22 two sections. That bit of Zvornik, Sakanovic [phoen], fell into the

23 federation eventually, and that bit called Zvornik which fell into

24 Republika Srpska. You see that and you agree that's what happened?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Right. Now, so far as the federation bit of Zvornik is concerned,

2 at Sapna, okay? Muslim population has gone down from 7.923 in 1991 to

3 3.332 in 1997 but the whole population is reduced dramatically so that

4 Muslims are very nearly 100 per cent? Do you see that?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And then if we look at the other page so we are sticking with

7 Sapna, the Serb population which was shown as 3.209 in 1991, has gone down

8 to one in 1997. You see that?

9 A. Yes, I see that.

10 Q. And then, looking at what's called Zvornik, the Zvornik bit of

11 Zvornik, the Republika Srpska bit of Zvornik, looking at the Muslim table

12 first, 29.452 shown as living there in 1991. By 1997 that is shown as

13 having gone down to 129. So as near as perhaps doesn't make a massive

14 amount of difference, the Muslim population had gone. But if we look,

15 then, at the Serb table, 1S, 22.535 Serbs in 1991, a very similar number

16 there in 1997, 22.582 but that population overall, that part of Zvornik,

17 has also dramatically gone down so that the Serbs are nearly 100 per cent

18 in that part of Zvornik, just as the Muslims ended up as nearly 100 per

19 cent in the federation bit of Zvornik. So now, so far, Mr. Krajisnik,

20 it's important I think to confirm, you follow all that, and you're with

21 it, and you see what those figures are meaning in terms of the population

22 changes, do you?

23 A. Yes, yes.

24 Q. During 1992, did you have any idea that such a process of -- and I

25 can safely use this word, rather dramatic population changes, was

1 occurring in Zvornik?

2 A. I've already explained. I don't know whether that was 1992. But

3 very soon, I learnt - how shall I put this? - about the armed conflict,

4 and the participation of Mr. Arkan, the late Arkan, in that, in Zvornik,

5 and I was informed by deputy Jovo Mijatovic, that he said that the

6 conflict was caused first and foremost by the Muslims, that then they

7 proceeded to divide up the municipality, and that they were mistreated by

8 Mr. Arkan and that a conflict broke out after that, and that the Muslims

9 quite simply left the central area of Zvornik and moved towards the

10 peripheral part, Sapna, and the other places where they remained. I

11 learnt about there having been an armed conflict from this armed conflict

12 that came as a reaction to their barricades where they put tires and

13 things and wanted to expel the Serbs by force. And at the beginning, the

14 Serbs were pushed back to Karakaj and then after that, the Muslims were

15 pushed back or rather pushed out of Zvornik towards the periphery, the

16 suburbs. So that was a conversation or rather that was a discussion at

17 the assembly, where he explained that there had been a conflict.

18 Now, why did the Serb numbers decrease? Many Serbs left and went

19 to Serbia. Some of them went to other countries. The number that you see

20 here, there are some that moved in from Zenica, for example, so that the

21 local population was reduced in -- compared to before the war, and these

22 figures can be misleading. Many Serbs came in from Zenica and set up

23 residence there, in Zvornik. And let me also mention something else that

24 I know. I don't know whether this was in 1997 or whenever but a

25 settlement called Divac which is on the shores of the lake, a large number

1 of Muslims returned to that area. How many, I don't know. But I know

2 that there were some problems there. There was a church there, and that

3 there was certain disquiet there. I know that a significant number of

4 Muslims returned to Zvornik; whether in 1997 or before that, I'm not quite

5 sure.

6 And something else. At the assembly meeting, it was said that

7 they went as a result of fighting, that they weren't expelled, and that

8 this -- that Mr. Djokanovic said that that was so, although in the

9 courtroom here he testified differently.

10 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, during 1992, did you personally become aware of

11 anything in Zvornik which you regarded as requiring intervention from any

12 of the Bosnian Serb leadership in Pale?

13 A. I did not learn anything except for what I've just told you about,

14 that the Muslims set up roadblocks, barricades, that the Serbs fled, that

15 Arkan came in later on, and I heard nothing more than that from anybody,

16 not even from Mr. Djokanovic, except when he was here I heard that

17 Mr. Karadzic and Mr. Mladic were in Zvornik at the time but that was

18 something I didn't know on the 30th of June 1992. But I didn't receive

19 this information from them either, as to what happened in Zvornik.

20 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, you -- you regard Dr. Tabeau's report as requiring

21 some answer, response or matching by expert demographic evidence on the

22 Defence side, don't you?

23 A. Yes. I always respect professionals, and this is a major issue,

24 demographic movements, and the methodology used to arrive at certain

25 information. We can all interpret such information objectively or

1 non-objectively. However, an expert knows how to deal with it. And I

2 think that it would be a good idea for an expert to say whether this is

3 done well and to give a second opinion about it. So I am in favour of

4 calling a demographer who will present his views, because I can only give

5 you my impressions as a layperson.

6 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, it might be helpful, I hope Your Honours will think

7 this question is helpful, it might be helpful if you were to indicate to

8 the Trial Chamber where specifically such an expert might assist, bearing

9 in mind that primarily Dr. Tabeau's report gives figures for population

10 movement from the period 1991 to 1997, and I don't understand it to be

11 suggested by the Prosecution that it really does any more than that.

12 A. I know something about statistics but I'm no expert. There have

13 to be scientific methods which will tell us what happens to a population

14 when there is a war, based on experience, what percentage fled from fear,

15 what percentage left to be reunited with their families, what percentage

16 were expelled. As in any science there has to be experience.

17 And a second issue is, it has to be established exactly when these

18 movements occurred. Was it in 1991, 2, 3, and so on or in 2000 and

19 something? Statistics can be an incorrect sum of correct figures. So

20 it's important for an expert to explain why there are population movements

21 when there is a war. I don't want to talk about Muslim municipalities,

22 but science must be able to provide a reply as to why there are movements

23 of populations in wartime.

24 Q. Mr. Krajisnik --

25 A. Let me add something, please. I saw a piece of information here.

1 For example, Zvornik. The same number, 21, 27.000, but I know that these

2 are not pre-war inhabitants of Zvornik, that there is a large number of

3 people here from Zenica, whereas a large number of Serbs left. A number

4 can be misleading, if you just look at the number. So these are things

5 somebody should know about and explain. I apologise.

6 MR. STEWART: Your Honours, barring accidents, this won't be the

7 last you hear from me today but there is a respite. I'm going to invite

8 Mr. Josse to deal with one or two topics.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.

10 Examination by Mr. Josse: [Continued]

11 MR. JOSSE:

12 Q. Mr. Krajisnik I've been looking at the documents you produced

13 overnight. We have made a large number of copies which we have put

14 letters of the Latin alphabet upon. Could they be distributed to

15 everyone, including the interpreters, please? The interpreters have got

16 them, I'm told. Whilst that's being done, Your Honour, I'm going to take

17 Mr. Krajisnik to letter K, first of all. This is a document that is in

18 evidence already. It's P529, tab 243. I'm afraid I've only discovered

19 that since the last break. We don't have copies of the English

20 translation. I have found it on the JDB. So have you got --

21 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, I have a copy of the English

22 translation, only one copy, and I'm happy to give it to the usher so that

23 it can be put on the ELMO.

24 MR. JOSSE:

25 Q. Now, Mr. --

1 JUDGE ORIE: That will be put on the ELMO. I have it on the

2 screen.

3 MR. HARMON: Excuse me Your Honour, I have a number of copies that

4 can be distributed.

5 MR. JOSSE: Thank you.

6 Q. Bear in mind that this document is already in evidence. Is there

7 anything you want to say about it?

8 A. Yes. Yesterday, when answering questions put to me by counsel,

9 about what Mr. Deronjic said, I mentioned that there was a document, a

10 statement made by him, where, during the war he mentioned that he had

11 issued an instruction that Glogova should be burnt down, but in the

12 context of a statement he made when he was suspected of having assisted in

13 the death of deputy Zekic. My aim was to indicate that the military court

14 knew this at the time; and, secondly, to point out that he fetishised and

15 exaggerated his friendship with the late Mr. Zekic, trying to justify

16 himself by saying he was -- he had been close to him, in order to

17 eliminate the suspicions of his father. So he said, Well, he was my

18 mentor and so on and so forth. That's why this is important to throw

19 light on the testimony of Mr. Deronjic.

20 This is on page 2, towards the bottom, where he mentions Glogova,

21 in case somebody hasn't found it.

22 JUDGE ORIE: I have not found it yet.

23 MR. JOSSE: Well, Your Honour, it's in the body of the statement,

24 so to speak.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

1 MR. JOSSE: And --

2 JUDGE ORIE: I see something at the third line of page 3. I see

3 the word Glogova. Is that it?

4 MR. JOSSE: Yes, some -- that's right, Your Honour, summarising

5 this, as I understand it --

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Towards the bottom.

7 MR. JOSSE: This statement was clearly prepared in relation to an

8 inquiry into the death of Mr. Zekic. And it's Mr. Deronjic's explanation

9 as to why he wasn't involved in that death.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Let's just see.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can read out the sentence he said

12 in connection with Glogova, if you would like me to.

13 JUDGE ORIE: We can read it. Well, the problem is Glogova appears

14 several times, at least twice. Once on the top of page 3. Let us just

15 read it. It goes quicker than having it read out.

16 MR. JOSSE:

17 Q. Whilst that is being done, Mr. Krajisnik, perhaps you would look

18 through the bundle and decide which if any of the other documents you want

19 to draw to the attention the Trial Chamber?

20 JUDGE ORIE: I have read that page. So before we move to the next

21 document, what exactly is the issue, if Mr. Krajisnik could tell us?

22 Because what I see that Mr. Deronjic is giving a statement as a witness in

23 which he describes how he was confronted with the body of the

24 then-deceased Goran Zekic and that he was -- he did not know all the

25 circumstances yet but it was outraged by the death of Mr. Zekic and that

1 he ordered the attack on Mr. Glogova, that he did not know anything about

2 how he was killed but he heard several stories, and that someone, the

3 father of Goran Zekic, had sent a letter to Karadzic to say that he

4 suspected Mr. Deronjic of having been involved in the killing of

5 Mr. Zekic. What would you like to bring to your attention, Mr. Krajisnik?

6 Because he denies -- Mr. Deronjic denied any involvement.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wanted to draw your attention to

8 two things. One, that then, in 1994, he stated here that he had ordered

9 Glogova burnt down because of the death of Mr. Zekic. That's one thing.

10 I didn't know that. And the other thing I want to say is that afterwards,

11 Mr. Karadzic received a letter in which Goran Zekic's father accused

12 Deronjic of being to blame for Zekic's death. So he was trying to justify

13 himself saying that they had been good friends, and throughout this

14 statement he tries to give the impression that he and Zekic had been

15 close, in order to convince all listeners that the suspicion was

16 groundless. And actually it was groundless. Deronjic had nothing to do

17 with Zekic's murder.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So they may have been good friends. I mean,

19 you give an interpretation of why he did say so, which at least does not

20 appear from this document. That he did is clear, but whether that's right

21 or wrong depends on what the situation was and this Chamber has nothing

22 else at its -- than what it heard in evidence here.

23 Please, next document.

24 MR. JOSSE:

25 Q. As the learned judge has just said, Mr. Krajisnik, the next

1 document that would you like to draw to the Chamber's attention.

2 A. All right. I'll go through these documents quickly. Document

3 A --

4 Q. Sop there, please, that's D158. I was unable to find a

5 translation on the JDB. It was a document that was introduced in the

6 re-examination of Mr. Kecmanovic. D -- document B is D159. It was

7 introduced at the same time and is an extract from a book by

8 Mr. Halilovic. Perhaps you could briefly tell the Chamber why these two

9 documents are important, Mr. Krajisnik.

10 A. There are minutes of the Presidency here at the Tribunal, that's

11 why this first document bears a number. And on the 20th of June

12 Mr. Halilovic raised an issue. The issue was that there should be an

13 exchange of civilian populations in the area of Bosanska Krupa, or

14 Cazinska Krajina, and in his book, he explains that he attended this

15 session. What is very important is the place where he says that a large

16 number of Serbs moved from central Bosnia to Sarajevo, Serb Sarajevo,

17 where the combat readiness of the Serbs was increasing, and that he was

18 opposed to any agreement between the Muslims and the Serbs in the western

19 part of Bosnia and Herzegovina and he was also opposed to Serbs leaving

20 Central Bosnia and moving towards Sarajevo. He says that although there

21 was a debate, the Presidency never discussed this issue further. To him,

22 this meant that the Presidency tacitly supported it.

23 Q. As far as I'm concerned, you can move on to the next document.

24 A. The next document is C.

25 Q. As far as I know, this is not in evidence. Go on, please. What

1 is it?

2 A. This is a document dated from September 1992. It's issued by a

3 working group of the Presidency of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

4 They formed a working group to establish the criteria on the basis of

5 which the civilian population can leave areas which are under threat. And

6 they give some proposals here. Whether they abided by them or not, I

7 don't know. But at least they dealt with this question because during the

8 war, there were many problems which required that the civilian population

9 leave imperilled areas, to take shelter, and this demonstrates a

10 consistent policy that this decision was to be valid all over

11 Bosnia-Herzegovina, in the part, of course, which they controlled.

12 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, I don't want to take any more of the

13 Defence's time than necessary but may I inquire exactly how we are

14 supposed to deal with these documents? There are -- no translation, there

15 is -- we just received them, and in preparation for cross-examination, we

16 are in no position to undertake translations on our own.

17 MR. JOSSE: How do you think Mr. Tieger thinks I feel? I'm trying

18 my best.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand that. We'll later decide and

20 admission of these documents also on the basis of relevance because it

21 seems to give a picture of what is not -- at least, the primary subject of

22 this case. That's what the other party did. That that comes close to tu

23 quoque, or I'm not quite sure. But perhaps we have it first translated,

24 at least Mr. Krajisnik is there, and then look at it, see whether it even

25 could be used as a dossier document, but, of course, much depends on what

1 it is, and also to see whether any cross-examination on the matter is

2 required. But I do agree with you, and it seems that it's not in total

3 disagreement with Mr. Josse.

4 MR. JOSSE: Absolutely it was a rhetorical remark of mine.

5 MR. TIEGER: I'm just looking for a practical solution, Your

6 Honour, and I appreciate the Court's countenance.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Please proceed. Next document.

8 MR. JOSSE:

9 Q. I see you're at D, Mr. Krajisnik.

10 JUDGE ORIE: At least I can see what it is. It's a newspaper.

11 MR. JOSSE:

12 Q. It's a newspaper of, is it the 26th of -- is it August?

13 JUDGE ORIE: What about April.

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, it's April. April.

15 MR. JOSSE: Thank you, Your Honour. Thank you.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm trying to be as expeditious as

17 possible to avoid wasting time.

18 MR. JOSSE:

19 Q. Could you point to the article you're interested in? Hold up the

20 page and point to the document, the article.

21 A. This one here.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik is pointing at the three-column-wide

23 article which starts approximately at the middle of the page.

24 MR. JOSSE:

25 Q. Which publication is this, Mr. Krajisnik?

1 A. This is the Politika newspaper of the 26th of April 1992.

2 Q. And what's the significance?

3 A. There are two articles here. There is this one and the one

4 underneath it, but we'll explain that one later. But this one, the framed

5 one, is very important. However, this one here is the proposal that the

6 JNA separate the warring sides in Bosanska Krupa rejected. And I can read

7 this if I have to. There is a meeting here between Mr. Avdic, Mr. Mehmed

8 Mahic, Nenad Ibrahim Pasic, these are all Muslims from Bihac, and the

9 representative of the SDS of Bosanska Krupa, Miroslav Vjestica in Bosanski

10 Petrovac.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now at least we know what has to be translated.

12 When you said the article just underneath, is that also the three column

13 wide article in the middle of the page or is it the small one at the

14 right-hand side or is it part of the bigger one? Yes, so then we have is

15 that translated and see what it is.

16 MR. JOSSE: It's the one that has Sarajevo in the title.

17 JUDGE ORIE: The small one only?

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, this small one here, yes.

19 This article should be translated, and this other one, so these two.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

21 MR. JOSSE: We've got it at this side of the Court.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Next document, please.

23 MR. JOSSE:

24 Q. Letter E, please, Mr. Krajisnik. What's that about? E, F, G, are

25 they all related?

1 A. Yes, yes. These are statements by the president of the ICRC,

2 Cornelius Samaruga, of the 3rd of October 1992, the 4th of December 1992,

3 and the 18th of November 1993. In all these documents, what is most

4 important for us is what I will read out, that's the second bullet point,

5 where it says here page 3 and then the second bullet point.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, F is also a statement of

7 Mr. Samaruga? And where do we find that?

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. The whole statement can be

9 read out but I --

10 JUDGE ORIE: What does it say at the top? Could you please read

11 that?

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It says, saving of lives in Bosnia

13 and Herzegovina, statement of Cornelius Samaruga. The saving of lives in

14 Bosnia and Herzegovina. And the heading is the International Red Cross,

15 Geneva, the 3rd of October 1992.

16 MR. JOSSE: [Previous translation continues] ...

17 JUDGE ORIE: I was asking about the second one under F.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] F?

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Oh, yes, F.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, F is also a statement of

22 Mr. Samaruga, and could you please answer that question?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. It's his statement, too.

24 It says here speech by Jean Courten. ICRC director of operations at a

25 meeting organised by the UNHCR, Geneva, the 4th of December, 1992.

1 JUDGE ORIE: So it is not Mr. Samaruga but is this Mr. Courten.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I apologise.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. So it's --

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Do you want me to give you the title

5 of G as well?

6 JUDGE ORIE: No, I just wanted to clarify that these are not

7 three statements of Mr. Samaruga but that these are two statements of

8 Mr. Samaruga and one speech given by Mr. Courten, yes. Please proceed.

9 We wait for the translations, unless you would like to add one line on why

10 it is important to see it.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Just these two sentences. The

12 second bullet point. Facilitating the removal of the most vulnerable

13 civilians and those who wish to be reunited with their families, and

14 allowing these to reach safe territories. And the next, as stated in the

15 London agreements, the release -- the unconditional release of all

16 prisoners who should also be enabled to join their families and to settle

17 in safe areas or other countries until they are able to return to their

18 homes. I can go on reading if you like but this is what is essential

19 here.

20 JUDGE ORIE: We'll first wait for the translation.

21 Next document?

22 MR. JOSSE: I think we are up to H.

23 JUDGE ORIE: H, yes. Document dated the 8th of September 1992.

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

25 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... the president of

1 the Republika Srpska. It seems that it's signed by Mr. Karadzic. Is that

2 correct?

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

4 JUDGE ORIE: What's the reason why you would like to bring this to

5 our attention?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a letter dated the 8th of

7 September and it is encoded. It is a telegramme to all the

8 representatives of municipalities in Republika Srpska, in the Serb

9 republic. And he issues an order in keeping with the 13th of June, and

10 makes them responsible for the prisoners and camps and everything else,

11 and draws their attention to the fact that they will be held responsible

12 if they don't abide by the guidelines. It would be a good idea if we were

13 to read out the entire text, if there is enough time, and to allow the

14 humanitarian organisations to visit the prisons.

15 JUDGE ORIE: We'll see what the translation tells us.

16 Next document would be I. Sounds very much a newspaper or at

17 least perhaps a periodical. It seems to be the Kronika Krajina and dates

18 the 27th of September 1992. Which article would you like to draw our

19 attention to, Mr. Krajisnik?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What is important here are two

21 articles, the left one and the right one, the headings linked to the

22 ensuing document that I will comment on briefly.

23 MR. JOSSE:

24 Q. Read the title, please, and Mr. Sladojevic will know what you're

25 talking about.

1 A. I'm just going to indicate this. This is the first document, this

2 one here, and this is the second document, this one over there. Now I can

3 tell you what they are about.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So left and right, the at the real top of this

5 page of newspaper. Yes, please tell us why you would like to draw our

6 attention to it.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The left-hand side says there is no

8 ethnic cleansing. That is a statement by Radovan Karadzic and Radoslav

9 Vukic in a talk with journalists. After talking and meeting with Vance

10 and Owen, and they indicate that the two of them were more than satisfied,

11 and that they explained to them that there was no ethnic cleansing.

12 That's what it says there. And in the other one, in the other article,

13 Cyrus Vance and Lord David Owen, after the official talks, and now we come

14 to the heading, "it's worse than we assumed." And there, they talk about

15 president Karadzic's assertion that there was no ethnic cleansing and they

16 say, we are not ready to confirm this especially not for areas outside

17 towns, said Cyrus Vance. So there are two pieces of information there,

18 right next to each other, after the joint meeting.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do I understand, just for my understanding, is

20 the one the statement given by Mr. Karadzic of what he considered to be

21 the conclusions and opinion of Mr. Vance and Mr. Owen and next to it what

22 Mr. Vance and Mr. Owen themselves said about what their conclusions were?

23 Is that correct?

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Josse, I leave it so some extent to you but the

3 Chamber is not surprised that perhaps -- well, let me say the following

4 way: To what extent would it assist the Chamber to read from a journalist

5 a statement by Mr. Karadzic who says that Mr. Vance and Mr. Owen come to a

6 certain conclusion whereas at the same newspaper page, Mr. Vance and

7 Mr. Owen come to a different conclusion. I'm not surprised that they had

8 different opinions about the matter. I'm a bit more surprised that the

9 difference of opinion is not appearing in what Mr. Karadzic says. But if

10 you think it's of importance to be translated, then we should do so.

11 Perhaps you'll think it over.

12 MR. JOSSE: Well, I will. I see Mr. Krajisnik is indicating. I

13 imagine he would like to explain this.

14 Briefly, please.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Krajisnik, yes.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this is a statement by

17 Mr. Karadzic - it's not a statement by the journalist - in which he says

18 that Mr. Owen and Mr. Vance were satisfied and that they accepted the fact

19 that there was no ethnic cleansing. Now, this next document is a military

20 document which speaks of Vance Owen's visit.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand so we have to consider this

22 document together with the next document.

23 MR. JOSSE: The next document I notice has an ERN number upon it.

24 I could find no trace of it in the exhibit list.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps Mr. Krajisnik tells us just to keep matters

1 short. It seems to originate from the -- from the command of the 1st

2 Corps, but [B/C/S spoken], and it's dated the 25th of September 1992.

3 Yes, Mr. Krajisnik, why is it important for us to --

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, Mr. President, this is

5 the assistant commander writing about the visit by Mr. Owen and Mr. Vance.

6 And it says here, Report on the visit of the international mission headed

7 by Mr. Cyrus Vance and Mr. Robert Owen to the garrison of Banja Luka. And

8 he is sending this to the Main Staff, to the attention of General Talic.

9 Now, what is the essential point here? It is this. It says, "At the

10 meeting, when they were at the meeting, that the conclusion was highly

11 positive, that is to say Mr. Cyrus Vance's and Mr. Robert Owen's

12 conclusion with respect to ethnic cleansing and all the other problems and

13 he says that we were very satisfied but they wanted to see the Muslim side

14 as well, and they went to see the Muslim side, and I assume that after

15 talking to the Muslim side and that's quite true, they made a statement of

16 their own. So those are the facts. He says he went to see the Muslim

17 side but here he says that he's more than satisfied that he's very

18 satisfied with their understanding and visit, just as Mr. Karadzic had

19 stated, and Mr. Vukic in his statement. That is why this is all linked

20 up.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Next document?

22 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour excuse me, would it be possible to get

23 any understanding of the handwriting? If Mr. Krajisnik can shed any light

24 on that one way or another.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Which handwriting do you mean? Oh, at the top?

1 MR. TIEGER: Yes.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik, could you tell us, there is some

3 handwritten text at the top. Are you aware of what wrote that?

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This document is one that came from

5 the Prosecution. And there is a number so it was probably one of the

6 previous documents. And this was -- it says in Latin script, "to be kept

7 permanently," and then the diagonal writing, "Should be kept as an act, as

8 a document, until the end of 1990-something." I'm not quite clear on the

9 date, and then it says "14-63, the numbers." And it says another number,

10 25.093 at the top. Now, in the left-hand corner, Your Honours, it says,

11 62/13. I wrote that. That's how it was stored in my archive. And then

12 the fax number when it came from Pale. I don't know when it arrived.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's clear. Thank you for that answer. Next

14 document K.

15 MR. JOSSE: We have dealt with K already.

16 JUDGE ORIE: K, you've dealt with it.

17 MR. JOSSE:

18 Q. L, Mr. Krajisnik, what's this?

19 A. Mr. Stewart sent a request to the Presidency of Bosnia-Herzegovina

20 for them to send us all the minutes from the meetings, and we received

21 them. This is one of the documents we received from Bosnia-Herzegovina.

22 In it --

23 Q. Can I just ask you, when was this received and by whom?

24 A. It was received by our investigators, and they handed over all

25 those documents to you and I also have them.

1 Q. All right. Go on, please.

2 A. I wanted to show you a document here which refers to the military

3 administration and rule that they wanted to introduce, and they say that

4 there should be a commander and so on. And the aim was that our soldiers

5 wanted to introduce this in 1992 when they declared a state of war.

6 Mr. Abdic rejected this on the Muslim side.

7 Q. I think this requires a little bit more clarification?

8 JUDGE ORIE: That was not clear to me at all.

9 MR. JOSSE: Exactly.

10 Q. Document L was produced by whom, when, as far as you're concerned?

11 I'm told that what Mr. Krajisnik said is when they wanted to declare a

12 state of war, rather than when they declared a state of war. That in the

13 scheme of things is helpful but perhaps a minor point?

14 JUDGE ORIE: Let's try to find out.

15 This document, who gave it to you?

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a document that we received

17 from the Presidency of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

18 JUDGE ORIE: What does it say?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It says that the soldiers proposed

20 or what the soldiers proposed when the Muslim side was introducing a state

21 of war, what the regime should be like, that the situation was similar on

22 our side but we rejected it when they proposed a state of war. So I

23 wanted to give an example because I recognised the same cliches. But the

24 Muslims did not adopt this because Mr. Abdic rejected it and then they

25 changed plans. But --

1 JUDGE ORIE: It is an unsigned, undated, written proposal

2 originating from the soldiers, and it was -- and that's your testimony --

3 was rejected. Yes, please, next document.

4 MR. JOSSE:

5 Q. M.

6 A. But it's a component part of all the documents. We have all the

7 binders that we received. I can show you them, and there are signatures

8 saying that they had sent us this.

9 JUDGE ORIE: But did you discuss this with counsel whether there

10 was any need to introduce further documents either as a dossier or in

11 re-examination or -- I don't know. But whether that comes to that, but at

12 this moment we know approximately what it is. And next one would be,

13 Mr. Krajisnik, M. It looks as if it's a document giving a recording of

14 the 68th Presidency session of the Republic of.

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]

16 JUDGE ORIE: 12th of April 1992; is that correct.

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, it is.

18 JUDGE ORIE: What's the reason why you wanted to draw the

19 attention -- our attention to it. It's just a one-page document, seems

20 perhaps to be the first page of that recording. Is that ...

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right. I forgot to draw

22 your attention a moment ago to this document here which is linked to this

23 other one and it was Radio-Television Sarajevo. That's what it was about.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And you, Mr. Krajisnik, now pointed to the

25 document which we discussed under D, that's the 26th of April, Politika

1 publication, in the box at the right-bottom hand, yes? Tell us why it's

2 important.

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, because in the Politika, the

4 Yugoslav People's Army, the Tuzla corps, is complaining about the

5 unobjective information coming across through Radio-Television Sarajevo on

6 the 26th of April. And that is linked to this other document.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I take it that that then reporting or Radio or

8 television issues were discussed during this session. Is that a correct

9 understanding?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then we'll read what it says. It might not

12 come as a surprise because we heard a lot of evidence that reporting in

13 those situations was not always as objective as one would wish. Next

14 document, and unless Mr. Josse I try to do it as efficiently as possible.

15 MR. JOSSE: I'm grateful to Your Honour, I really am.

16 JUDGE ORIE: N is a document which is dated the 2nd of March 1992.

17 It looks as if it originates from the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and

18 Herzegovina, the Assembly of the Opstina of Bosanski Brod. Is that

19 correct?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, you're quite right.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Would you please tell us why you wanted to draw your

22 attention to it?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This document is the product of the

24 joint -- when it was joint Bosnia and Herzegovina and the title is Crisis

25 Staff. It is signed by the president of the Muslims, and it speaks about

1 the problems, and addresses the Crisis Staff of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the

2 Presidency. I wanted to say that the Crisis Staff was a normal --

3 something that existed normally. Nobody ordered them to be established.

4 So that was my aim.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's clear what the importance is. Next

6 document -- I've forgotten to read the subtitle, Mr. Krajisnik. Next

7 document comes from the Presidency of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina,

8 and it seems to be a record of the 94th session of the Presidency of that

9 republic dated the 18th of May 1992. Is that correct, Mr. Krajisnik?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, you're quite right.

11 JUDGE ORIE: What is it exactly that you want to draw our

12 attention to on this two-page document?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, you said or rather

14 you told the Prosecution and the Defence to try and find the two contracts

15 or agreements, the two agreements about the displacement of the barracks,

16 if you remember. Moving the barracks. No, from Sarajevo. Well, here,

17 the Presidency had a discussion on the matter and assigned people to sign

18 it and had an annex, provided an annex to both the agreements.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. When I said a two-page document, I had not yet

20 looked at the annex which is also two pages, seven articles.

21 MR. JOSSE: I'm not sure if that's the same as a document that was

22 produced last week, Your Honour, that --

23 JUDGE ORIE: Neither am I, Mr. Josse.

24 MR. JOSSE: We will obviously check that.

25 JUDGE ORIE: You check that and see whether it's a double or

1 whether it's there already. Okay, we went through the bundle.

2 MR. JOSSE: Thank you very much. What does Your Honour want to do

3 about numbers for these?

4 JUDGE ORIE: I invited Mr. Registrar to prepare numbers for all of

5 these documents and not lose more time in court because we have only left

6 less than one hour, remainder of the examination.

7 We will have a break until 25 minutes to 7.00.

8 --- Break taken at 6.17 p.m.

9 --- On resuming at 6.37 p.m.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart.

11 MR. STEWART: Your Honour.

12 Examination by Mr. Stewart: [Continued]

13 MR. STEWART:

14 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, and Your Honours, I want to go back to sessions of

15 the Presidency of the Serbian Republic, the 19th session which is dated

16 the 13th of July 1992, and that's P64A, B 25, tab 727; also P65, bundle

17 12, tab 178, ERN 00846951.

18 You see that, Mr. Krajisnik? That's the 19th session of the

19 Presidency. It states it's attended by and then it's Karadzic, Plavsic,

20 Koljevic, Krajisnik, Djeric and Mladic, and Gvero. But I want to ask you

21 about item 8. Do you see item 8, subparagraph 3, Rajka Stanisic and

22 Milijana Rasevic were charged with organising the documentation of the

23 Presidency. You see that?

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 MR. STEWART:

8 Q. Yes, Mr. Krajisnik, so what was the role of let's leave Stanisic

9 on one side for the moment. What was the role of Rasevic, Milijana

10 Rasevic?

11 A. Milijana Rasevic was Mr. Karadzic's secretary.

12 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, I want to move right on to -- well it's not that

13 far on, to be honest, but jumping over a couple of sessions. Can we go

14 please to the 23rd session, which is on the 5th of August, and that is P65

15 tab 186, bundle 13, bundle 13, tab 186, if you like. Mr. Krajisnik, while

16 we are just waiting for that, now, that says, it's the -- you have it

17 Mr. Krajisnik? It says minutes of the 23rd session of the Presidency of

18 the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 5th of August. The

19 following members of the Presidency were present. Karadzic -- I'm hoping

20 there isn't any discourtesy if I take it quickly. Karadzic, Plavsic,

21 Krajisnik, Koljevic, Djeric. Can you explain why this minute expressly

22 describes the five of you as the following members of the Presidency?

23 A. I think this is one of the first minutes written in the Latin

24 script. Probably somebody else working from the notes drew up these

25 minutes and made this list of participants saying they were members of the

1 Presidency. And this is erroneous, up to that point the minutes were all

2 in the Cyrillic alphabet, as far as I can recall. Then there were a few

3 ones following this in the Latin script and afterwards they were in

4 Cyrillic again. And the form of these minutes differs from the normal

5 ones.

6 Q. I wonder if we might go into private session just very, very

7 briefly.

8 [Private session]

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 [Open session]

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] (redacted).

21 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.

22 MR. STEWART:

23 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, you've given some explanation about the change of

24 script but how does that explain that you came to be described as -- with

25 the other four, as a member of the Presidency?

1 A. Quite simply, there were never just these people at these

2 consultative meetings. Notes were made and then somebody typed them out.

3 I never saw these minutes before my arrival here. And even if I had, I

4 wouldn't have paid any attention to this. It would have seemed

5 irrelevant, unless I had to prove here that I was not a member of the

6 Presidency. I never saw these minutes. But I remember many of the things

7 that happened at these consultative meetings.

8 Q. Then, at the 24th session, if we may go to that on the 6th of

9 August, that's P65, bundle 13, tab 187. Again, the -- it says, well there

10 it says the session was attended slightly different form of description

11 the session was attended by Dr. Radovan Karadzic, the president,

12 Dr. Biljana Plavsic, member, Momcilo Krajisnik, M.Sc., president of the

13 assembly and member.

14 A. No, no. This is another one that is -- we are talking about the

15 6th of August.

16 Q. Yes, we are.

17 A. It was the 6th of July.

18 MR. JOSSE: [Previous translation continues] ... B/C/S version

19 here. Madam Usher.

20 MR. STEWART: Thank you.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Professional pride. Please proceed.

22 MR. STEWART:

23 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, yes, 6th of August, I want to ask you about the

24 last two paragraphs, treatment of prisoners of war detained in prisons in

25 Serbian territory was discussed. The prisoners should be divided into

1 three categories, those captured on the front, those who took part in

2 arming and operations of the Territorial Defence of BH, and those who

3 assisted and financed Alija's army. It was pointed out that we should

4 abide by international conventions on the treatment of prisoners of war.

5 To that end completely humane treatment of prisoners of war is advised

6 because they are in prisons and not concentration camps. In wartime,

7 payments for their food, et cetera are made at our expense, and then it

8 was concluded the Ministry of the Interior MUP of the Serbian Republic of

9 Bosnia and Herzegovina will be ordered to examine through its municipal

10 branches the behaviour of all civilian authorities and individuals

11 guarding prisoners of war. The information will be passed to the MUP,

12 which will pass it on to the Presidency of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia

13 and Herzegovina.

14 Mr. Krajisnik, do you recall whether you received such information

15 through the municipal branches and through the MUP in relation to

16 behaviour of civilian authorities and individuals guarding prisoners of

17 war?

18 A. The previous session, as you saw, was attended by Mr. Djeric who

19 submitted a report from the Krajina, which he had visited, and what he was

20 able to learn about Banja Luka was not very detailed. He did say,

21 however, that there were certain irregularities and that detailed

22 investigations should be carried out with relation to the prisoners.

23 That's why this followed on the 6th of August, where an explicit order was

24 issued that humanitarian law be respected and that order be introduced

25 into these matters.

1 I'm emphasising the date, the 6th of August, in order to draw

2 attention to the fact that there was an assembly session scheduled for the

3 10th which shows why this was not the agenda. This is the first

4 information, somebody who arrived at the Presidency on the 5th and 6th of

5 August. And that's what the Prime Minister said. What I know is that

6 there are documents dated after this showing that the Ministry of the

7 Interior sent an urgent letter to Banja Luka and they sent the letter on

8 to Prijedor and other municipalities, saying that it should be established

9 whether there were camps or not, whether there were prisons, if so, who

10 established them, whether there were any prisoners and so on. The reply

11 that came back from Prijedor was that there were no camps and that all the

12 prisoners were in Manjaca. This means that somebody deceived Mr. Zukan

13 can and Mr. Zukan gave this feedback to Mr. Stanisic and then the

14 government set up a commission to visit all those places and make reports,

15 and after that, what followed was that all camps should be disbanded.

16 Q. And Mr. Krajisnik, then, the 25th session of the Presidency, which

17 was on the 8th of August, that's P65 binder 13, tab 188?

18 A. Of the 8th of August, did you say?

19 Q. Yes, I did. That's shown as present, Mr. Karadzic, you,

20 Mr. Djeric, Mrs. Plavsic and Mr. Subotic, and then under item 2 -- first

21 of all, under item 1 the last sentence, "Everything must be done in order

22 to enable the provision of electricity to our territory because there is

23 at present there is no electricity in Pale municipality and water supplies

24 are being cut." Was that a frequent problem or a one-off problem in

25 August 1992 in Pale?

1 A. Yes, yes. Well, generally speaking, there was the electricity

2 problem in the whole of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Republika Srpska.

3 Q. The item 2, then, about four paragraphs down, after reference to

4 flour to Han Pijesak, it says special attention was given to the question

5 of camps and ensuring a better information system. Do you see that?

6 A. Yes. Han Pijesak is mentioned here, and that flour should be sent

7 to two Muslim villages, and then after that we come to the question of

8 camps and ensuring a better information system. So these are several

9 issues in two paragraphs.

10 Q. Were you involved, Mr. Krajisnik, in any arrangements for a better

11 information system in relation to camps?

12 A. No. But perhaps the translation isn't correct. These are all

13 different topics. Special attention was given to one issue, the camps,

14 and ensuring a better information system, so these are two quite different

15 topics and somebody has enumerated various topics and joined them here,

16 because information, an information system, wasn't connected to the camps,

17 but, of course, the question of camps was discussed. Oh, no, I do beg

18 your pardon. I made the mistake, special attention was given to the

19 questions of camps and for our better information of the situation. No.

20 That's all right. Sorry. I made the mistake. I linked it up to the

21 previous point, which means that there wasn't sufficient information about

22 what was going on in the camps and prisons.

23 Q. And then the -- on the 23rd of August, there was a meeting which

24 is the minute of that is not in evidence, although most others are. This

25 one is not.

1 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, we have copies of this. So that will

2 -- it's not the most convenient thing but it will need an exhibit number

3 to take its place in the run of Presidency minutes. All the others, Your

4 Honour, have found in P64A and P65, or all the ones I think I'm going to

5 refer to.

6 Q. But this one, do you see this, Mr. Krajisnik, it's described as

7 the 26th session of the Presidency of the Serbian Republic held on the

8 23rd of August 1992, present at the session Dr. Karadzic, Plavsic,

9 Koljevic, Krajisnik, and Djeric. Do you have any comment on your being

10 recorded as present at that session on the 23rd of August 1992?

11 A. Well, I pointed that out. On the 23rd of August my wife died in

12 Belgrade so I certainly could not have attended that meeting. I assume

13 that somebody just by -- automatically recorded my presence there.

14 Q. That, Mr. Krajisnik, plainly from what you said, you were in

15 Belgrade with your wife when she died, weren't you?

16 A. Yes. And several days before and after that I wasn't in Pale.

17 But on the 23rd, I was quite certainly in Belgrade. So this could not be

18 accurate that I was present there.

19 Q. I'm told it is in evidence. We had been unable to track it. But

20 it's entirely separate from that other run. It's P1174, apparently?

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I remember the appointment of all the Judges.

22 MR. STEWART: Right.

23 Q. So Mr. Krajisnik, that's all I wanted to ask you about that one.

24 And to go then to -- I'm not going to dwell on the next two or three

25 sessions of the Presidency. Though they are there, the minutes. Go to

1 the 31st session of the Presidency which was on the 7th of September, and

2 that is P65 tab -- bundle 13, tab 197, the ERN being 00837955. 7

3 September, Karadzic, Plavsic, Koljevic, Krajisnik, Djeric, recorded as

4 present. And item 3, the Muslim side - do you see that? - is launching

5 one offensive after another. You see that, against Serbian positions and

6 territories?

7 A. Yes, I found that.

8 Q. "Massacring Serbs, conducting ethnic cleansing and torching

9 villages contrary to the Geneva Conventions, the Muslims and Croats are

10 holding Serbian civilians, women, children, the elderly, and sick in

11 camps. In Sarajevo alone the Muslims are holding about 40.000 civilian

12 Serbs as hostages, they are not allowed to leave towns controlled by

13 Muslims. Sarajevo, Zenica, Tuzla," et cetera. "We possess evidence of

14 all this which is available for viewing."

15 What was meant by the reference to which is available for viewing?

16 Viewing by whom?

17 A. Well, insight. Some people here had insight into the documents

18 because they were informed about how the Serbs were faring in Sarajevo.

19 So the conclusion was that they would show that to the international

20 community, to show the kind of conditions the Serbs were living in, in

21 Sarajevo and that they were being mistreated and not allowed to leave and

22 that to all intents and purposes they were being held as civilian

23 hostages. Now, I have to say here that I gave an opinion today that was

24 enunciated by them, that they would ensure their departure and their

25 accommodation and so on and so forth. None of that is correct. The

1 people leaving, who left Sarajevo, had to fend for themselves as best they

2 could. So this was only on paper. And the fact of the matter is that the

3 Serbs were ethnic hostages in Sarajevo throughout the war, and that is why

4 they suffered the way they did because they were exposed to various

5 arbitrary acts from uncontrolled groups.

6 Q. Now, and then I want you to go please or, could Mr. Krajisnik be

7 given the minutes of the Presidency session held on the 26th of October

8 1992? And that's P65, tab -- binder 14, tab 28, the ERN is 00837965. And

9 your -- it's the same five people noted as present, except for apologies

10 from Dr. Nikola Koljevic, and I want us to look please at item 8,

11 Mr. Krajisnik, which is a report on rumours in Herzegovina about the

12 behaviour of Branko Simic, people's deputy since April 1992, during his

13 stay in Herzegovina. Now, Mr. Simic was he -- he was not only a deputy

14 but he was a vice-president of the Republika Srpska assembly, wasn't he?

15 A. Yes. You're quite right.

16 Q. And the conclusion set out -- there was -- a letter should be sent

17 to the organs of military authority and the command to investigate

18 accusations of Mr. Simic and persons spreading these stories with the aim

19 of possibly initiating criminal proceedings. And then it goes on to

20 something else.

21 I would like you to be shown, please, Mr. Krajisnik, a document

22 which is P65, binder 14, tab 211. It says Pale, 26th of October 1992,

23 headed Republika Srpska National Assembly. And it's signed, you would

24 accept that, would you, Mr. Krajisnik, on second page I think -- well, I

25 don't think it will be. I know it is, because I've got it here. It's

1 signed by you as president of the National Assembly. There is no need for

2 it to go on the ELMO, sparse I can see, Your Honour?

3 A. Yes, that's right.

4 Q. Thank you any way. And it says underneath your signature, this

5 memorandum was adopted by the Republika Srpska Presidency at the session

6 of 26 October 1992. Just to just look not at every line of it but see

7 what it's about, the second -- in the -- going back to the heading, it

8 says, "to Republika Srpska army Main Staff, Chief of Staff, General

9 Milovanovic," then second paragraph, "within my constitutional

10 prerogatives, I hereby request the following information prior to the

11 session of the Republika Srpska assembly," and then 1, "Branko Simic,

12 vice-president of the Republika Srpska assembly, was accused by your

13 Herzegovina corps intelligence service of inviting or ordering the Serbian

14 people to leave the Neretva River valley, organising their withdrawal and

15 treason, and he was described as the traitor to the Serbian people. With

16 regard to this accusation, I ordered the Assembly Commission for National

17 Defence and Control of the Operation of State Security Service to examine

18 the political accusations made against Mr. Branko Simic. The commission

19 compiled a report which clearly shows that the accusations were

20 unsubstantiated and that Mr. Simic had been accused without grounds. As

21 Mr. Simic has suffered enormous political damage, you need to inform us

22 from which source and person you received the false accusation."

23 The assembly commission, was that, Mr. Krajisnik, as in English

24 certainly the name implies, was that a committee or a commission of the

25 Republika Srpska assembly, of which you were president?

1 A. Yes. That was the commission -- well, it was established very

2 late in the day to control the army and the police. That's one of the

3 assembly commissions.

4 Q. So when it says this memorandum -- at the end, this memorandum was

5 adopted by the Republika Srpska Presidency at the session on the 26th of

6 October, could you just clarify for the Trial Chamber, this document

7 signed by you dated the 26th of October is described in its own terms as

8 adopted by the presidency. The Presidency minutes of the 26th of October

9 say that a letter should be sent to the organs of military authority to

10 investigate accusations. Which came first? Had your order to the

11 assembly commission already happened and was then approved by the

12 Presidency? Or did you send a letter or this document following the

13 Presidency meeting?

14 A. At the assembly, the vice-president, Mr. Simic, complained that

15 the military authorities were blaming him for giving up the Neretva River

16 valley, and that he had suffered a great deal of damage. And the

17 conclusion was, whether the assembly or what should inform the Supreme

18 Command, the Presidency, and to ask the Main Staff for clarification. But

19 we first said that the commission, assembly commission, should go and

20 establish with the military authorities and with the Main Staff, that is,

21 whether or rather from which source this disinformation was being

22 disseminated. The commission was not able to establish anything because

23 the organs in question turned a blind eye to their work, and there were no

24 results. So I was in charge of informing the Presidency and I informed

25 the Presidency about what was linked to Mr. Simic. And then the

1 Presidency concluded that this should be done. And they told me it would

2 be best if you sent it to the Main Staff and you should write that it was

3 adopted at the Presidency session. So as president of the assembly, I

4 addressed the chief and I said, within the framework of my competences and

5 authorities as assembly president they were duty bound to investigate and

6 send us feedback information, because they didn't follow the guidelines of

7 the commission, and I said that this was adopted on the same day at the

8 assembly. Now, that's different from the minutes. I as president of the

9 assembly signed this, and somebody wrote that I was a member of the

10 Presidency by mistake here in the minutes.

11 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, I'd like you to be given -- well, no, I give the

12 reference. I don't think you need to be given this, P 64A, binder 24, tab

13 641 but, Your Honours, this is the transcript of the 22nd session of the

14 Republika Srpska assembly and I don't need the whole document,

15 Your Honour. It's a single page I'm going to refer to and we've got

16 copies to save time and trouble.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. When they are distributed, can I ask just for

18 one additional information? The whole initiative taken by the assembly

19 then the matter being passed to the -- and the Simic matter to be passed

20 to the Presidency, do we have any source to support this testimony in the

21 assembly session minutes or -- I mean, we have got the explanation. Is

22 there -- I just don't remember whether we ever saw any such thing.

23 Mr. Krajisnik, perhaps I'll ask you directly, does that appear in

24 the minutes of the assembly session or are there any minutes of this

25 committee where it specifically where this road is -- this route is

1 indicated for this matter to be followed? If so, we'll find it.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Branko Simic sat next to my

3 office. He would say that to me every day. Now, I can't say at what

4 session or whether there was one but it was a constant topic and the

5 conclusion was to send out a commission, whether of the club or of the

6 assembly I really don't know. If I were to leaf through the documents I

7 might find it. Actually, I haven't been able to find them but I didn't

8 look for them but I know what it's about. This was for two or three years

9 he was withdrawn from Herzegovina because of that.

10 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand the issue. I'm just wondering

11 whether we can find any documents which support your testimony in this

12 respect.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't provide you one now.

14 Perhaps I could find it if I were to look for it.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Chamber is interested, if Mr. Krajisnik

16 would find it -- that somewhere in the coming weeks, then even if the

17 examination-in-chief is over we would like then to see that.

18 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, and if we simply find it and

19 point to it. I knew we wouldn't have time. There was no chance of

20 getting into the transcript of the 23rd and 24th generally today.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

22 MR. STEWART: So I wanted to hone in on page 59 of the Serbian and

23 page 60 of the English, of the transcript of that 22nd session. And it's

24 Mr. Karadzic speaking at the top of the page in English. There is -- he

25 says, "We are working as if we were in peace." This paragraph isn't on

1 your page, Mr. Krajisnik, so just four or five lines, we are working as if

2 we were in peace. "That is a big thing that is very important but be

3 convinced, I do not know what the press will publish from what happened

4 today, from what happened yesterday in the deputies' club, and especially

5 from today's session at the assembly. Those were the discussions worthy

6 of the greatest parliament." And then this is where your page starts,

7 Mr. Krajisnik. "We are working with the feeling of responsibility and

8 honesty and here no one is defeated. Mr. Djeric is an expert. We need

9 him and he will always be a highly respected person in this country. This

10 government is historical because this is the first government of this

11 country. The government that made this country and the first to lead its

12 affairs. Therefore I ask you to understand that we have to work and we

13 have to change. I was all in favour of the Presidency instead of a

14 president, because there is a lot of work to be done. And if Mr. Koljevic

15 and I are busy, we have Biljana. And even if she is busy then we have

16 Mr. Krajisnik."

17 Now, Mr. Krajisnik, as a matter of plain reading, that does

18 suggest that Mr. Karadzic is saying that in the Presidency, that him,

19 Koljevic, Plavsic and if they are busy they've got you. What is your

20 comment on that?

21 A. Exactly as it says here. And as I have stated. Mr. Karadzic says

22 there are not enough of us. So if I'm not here, then there is Koljevic.

23 If Koljevic isn't there, then there is Plavsic. And then he goes on to

24 mention me, and says, if there -- none of them are available, then there

25 is Krajisnik. He didn't say the president of the assembly. So with

1 respect to this assembly, I mentioned the interview that you listened to,

2 that I know exactly who the members of the Presidency were. That is not a

3 contentious point at all. And I mentioned this, if you want some proof of

4 evidence making it quite clear, on the 27th of July or perhaps the 25th of

5 July, at the assembly of Jahorina, that was the second out of the 20th

6 May, the Presidency members took the oath of office, the ministers, the

7 deputies, and so on, and you can see exactly who the members of the

8 Presidency were at the end of June. So that's it.

9 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, Mr. Sladojevic tells me there may be

10 potentially quite a significant translation point on this paragraph. So,

11 Your Honour, I --

12 JUDGE ORIE: In the written document?

13 MR. STEWART: Yes. The B/C/S version that we have does not appear

14 to Mr. Sladojevic correctly to -- I'm sorry, the English does not appear

15 correctly to reflect the B/C/S.

16 MR. TIEGER: I wasn't advised to bring our copy of the 22nd, but

17 sometime back, I provided the Defence with all of the binders of the

18 sessions that we thought we would be using during the course of the

19 cross-examination, to have them all available, and mentioned that, with

20 respect to the 22nd in particular, there was a revised translation that we

21 thought was a bit improved or directed its attention to the possibility of

22 improvements. I have sent up for the binder right now, Mr. Wijermars is

23 coming down with it shortly and we can check the revised translation

24 immediately. I didn't know if the one you were using was the revised

25 translation or the original.

1 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, two points are very clear: First of

2 all, Mr. Tieger did do that, and secondly I forgot.

3 MR. TIEGER: I'll be happy to check that page right now.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

5 MR. STEWART: It's the last it's not even the whole paragraph

6 that's the problem. It's basically the last sentence or possibly the last

7 two sentences at the very most.

8 MR. TIEGER: Mr. Stewart is correct. Would you like me to hand it

9 to the Court, put it on the ELMO, read it out loud? I'm at your disposal,

10 Your Honour.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.

12 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honours we can all see it can't we, it

13 says I was always on the sides of the Presidency, not the president.

14 There are only a few of us as it is. If Koljevic and I go somewhere, then

15 Biljana stays. At least there is one of the three of us. But if Biljana

16 leaves, then Mr. Krajisnik ... But we receive calls from 50 different

17 places, we are overextended.

18 And, Your Honour, then the -- there is a minute of the Presidency.

19 Thank you very much to Mr. Sladojevic for alerting me and Mr. Tieger for

20 responding so helpfully and then we go to the minute of the 30th of

21 November 1992, which is P65, binder 14, tab 214, ERN 00767945. And it's

22 Dr. Karadzic, Mrs. Plavsic, Professor Koljevic, you, shown as present.

23 Apologise in that case from Mr. Djeric, session attended also by

24 Mr. Subotic. I want to go to item 3 in response to a parliamentary

25 question, the Presidency discussed whether it was justified to introduce a

1 war commission and an expanded Presidency. Under the current

2 circumstances, it was established that for well known reasons, a state of

3 war had not been declared and that an expanded Presidency, including the

4 president of the national assembly and the Prime Minister of Republika

5 Srpska could be introduced only under such circumstances.

6 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, did such circumstances, as could have led to the

7 establishment of an expanded Presidency, ever arise?

8 A. No, never. Such circumstances never arose and there wasn't an

9 expanded Presidency ever.

10 MR. STEWART: Your Honour it's 20 past 7.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes. We are concluding not only for the day

12 but we are also concluding your examination-in-chief, Mr. Krajisnik. Just

13 for your information, the Defence has asked for a certificate to appeal

14 the decision, the last decision the Chamber gave on the timing of your

15 evidence. We'll have to consider that request for a certificate, and we

16 will do that.

17 If the certificate will be granted, it's up for the Appeals

18 Chamber to decide whether any additional time will be given or whether we

19 have to reconsider our decision.

20 We will not sit tomorrow. We will sit again on next Monday.

21 Monday, the 29th of May, in Courtroom II and in the morning. That's at

22 9.00. But before we adjourn, I would just like to know whether the -- now

23 I'm -- the items I mentioned earlier today, that is the retranslation of

24 the documents, I think it was P1088 but not quite sure about that -- yes.

25 No, it was P824 and related documents, they -- and the double pension

1 legislation have been provided to the Registrar?

2 MR. HARMON: They are both at hand and we will provide them.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

4 MR. JOSSE: I've handed in the Defence two documents.

5 JUDGE ORIE: So we are not at this moment spending time on

6 assigning exhibit numbers on them. We will do that at a later stage. I

7 invited Mr. Registrar to prepare a list of exhibit numbers that would also

8 include the numbers to be assigned to the -- well, provisionally-accepted,

9 not say admitted yet, but the provisionally-accepted documents provided by

10 Mr. Krajisnik.

11 Any other issue, Mr. Josse?

12 MR. JOSSE: No, Your Honour, I'm simply on my feet as a matter of

13 courtesy.

14 MR. HARMON: No, Your Honour.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik?

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You promised that I could include a

17 certain number of documents.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I didn't promise that you could include a

19 certain number of documents. You were allowed to -- but what I did

20 promise to you, as a matter of fact, is at the end of your testimony, that

21 if there was anything you thought you would have to add, that an

22 opportunity should be given to you, and today there is no time for that.

23 [Trial Chamber confers]

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik, the Chamber has decided that you'll

25 have an opportunity to add what you consider relevant material. Please be

1 a bit careful with introducing all kind of new documents because it will

2 create a similar situation that we had today where we can't put any

3 questions -- we can read a few titles but that's all. And then use your

4 time, please, as efficiently as possible. We are thinking of limiting

5 your time to 30 minutes. So whatever you would like to add or what you

6 consider to be important.

7 Then I instruct you again not to speak with anyone about the

8 testimony you have given or are still about to give. That continues until

9 the examination by the Prosecution and until the moment that the Bench

10 also has put questions to you. So not to speak with anyone about your

11 testimony already given or still to be given. And we adjourn.

12 MR. JOSSE: Sorry, Your Honour, could Your Honour just clarify for

13 Mr. Krajisnik and our benefit when he will have the opportunity to use

14 those 30 minutes.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, yes. If I was not clear, I said not today but

16 Monday morning we will start with that before we start with the

17 cross-examination of Mr. Krajisnik.

18 MR. JOSSE: Thank you, that's clear.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I forgot.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So you mean I'll have the

21 opportunity on Monday; is that right?

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I wasn't clear.

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Making my statement on Monday?

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the statement, add whatever -- I mean, again,

25 you're here as a witness and sometimes the line between opinion and being

1 a witness of facts isn't always that clear but the Chamber is primarily

2 interested in facts and, of course, if you formed any opinion, for

3 example, at that time, it might be of importance for us to know but please

4 try to -- it's not a free statement as to start a kind of final argument

5 Defence.

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Whatever you think needs more light in view of what

8 has asked or what has been forgotten, you have half an hour to do that

9 next Monday.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you.

11 JUDGE ORIE: We adjourn.

12 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.28 p.m.,

13 to be reconvened on Monday, the 29th day of May,

14 2006, at 9.00 a.m.

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25