Page 5257
1 Wednesday, 2 May 2001
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.30 a.m.
6 JUDGE HUNT: Call the case, please.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. This is the case number
8 IT-97-25-T, the Prosecutor versus Krnojelac.
9 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Bakrac.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Good morning
11 to you all.
12 WITNESS: MILENKO DUNDJER [Resumed]
13 [Witness answered through interpreter]
14 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac [Continued]
15 Q. Good morning to you, Mr. Dundjer. Are you ready to continue?
16 A. Yes, I am.
17 Q. I should like to ask you to take a look at document identified
18 ID D14. The identification number is ID D14.
19 A. Yes, I have it.
20 Q. Can you tell us, please, what this document refers to?
21 A. This is a document of the Municipal Board of the Party of
22 Democratic Action for Foca, the Commission for Political and Legal
23 Questions for 1992, which gives a distribution of the activists of the
24 Democratic Party by groups and their duties according to the different
25 actions.
Page 5258
1 Q. I don't think that you'll need to read out all the names of these
2 activists to us, but could you just tell us who signed the document, that
3 is to say, whether it is signed and who signed it?
4 A. Yes, the document is signed and stamped, and it says here the
5 "President of the Committee," and there's a signature, and after that, in
6 brackets, in says "Cengic Hadj Halid," and the stamp says the "Party of
7 Democratic Action, SDA, Foca Municipal Board."
8 Q. Tell us, please, what were the duties and assignments for these
9 members, these activists?
10 A. The leaders of the groups are duty-bound to acquaint themselves
11 with the programme of activities to implement a referendum for the
12 Independent State of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
13 JUDGE HUNT: Why are you asking him to read what we can always
14 read for ourselves? We've got the translation and he's reading from the
15 document.
16 What we want to know is it's signed and it's stamped. We'd like
17 to know where the document came from into his possession. And after that,
18 if there's anything more that needs to be obtained, you obtain it. But
19 let's get the basics first and then we'll ask the Prosecution what their
20 view is.
21 So we want to know where it came from.
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Yes. That
23 will be easier for the Defence, too. I just didn't wish to be criticised
24 for having glossed over the document too quickly without ascertaining some
25 of the main points. The document is a vital one because in the first
Page 5259
1 group we see the names of individuals we have already mentioned, and in
2 Group number IV, the names of the individuals who testified here. That is
3 why the document is important to the Defence, and we would like to tender
4 these documents, ID D14, and the translation into English ID D14A.
5 JUDGE HUNT: Will you ask him where he got the document from?
6 That's what we have to know.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I was going to ask those
8 questions when the Prosecution tells us whether it accepts the document or
9 questions its authenticity, but there's no problem there. I can go ahead
10 and ask the question now.
11 JUDGE HUNT: Look, Mr. Bakrac, what we are concerned with at this
12 stage is its authenticity and, if it's challenged, its relevance. It has
13 no date to it, you see, so that may cause a problem about the relevance
14 that you had originally put forward for some of these documents.
15 You tell us that in news Group IV there are some people who have
16 given evidence. I would like if you could give us their number here so
17 that we can note who they are, instead of names what their FWS number was,
18 and -- but we still want to know its provenance. We want to know where it
19 came from.
20 Now, if you get that out of the witness for each document, then
21 we'll ask the Prosecution if they have any objection. But please don't
22 get him to read it, because we do have the document here.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
24 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you please tell me how you came by this
25 document?
Page 5260
1 A. I came by this document in the following manner. I received it
2 from a lawyer, that is to say lawyer Jovan Simic, who worked on the case
3 before as an investigator, and he explained to me the way in which he
4 himself obtained the document. And that is, he obtained it at the -- from
5 the military command, from an officer of the garrison of Foca Srbinje.
6 Q. Did he tell you who the officer was who gave him the document?
7 A. Mr. Jovan Simic, the investigator before me and myself, that is to
8 say he was the contact man with the officer in question.
9 JUDGE HUNT: What was the officer's name? Did he tell you that?
10 That's what you're being asked.
11 A. He did not tell me what his name was.
12 JUDGE HUNT: Now, Mr. Bakrac --
13 A. I can --
14 JUDGE HUNT: Yes? You wanted to add something?
15 A. All I can say is that that particular officer has the rank of
16 Captain.
17 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. Now, Mr. Bakrac, can you just give us in
18 Group IV their number by which we can identify these who gave evidence
19 here?
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Number 2 is the witness that was --
21 had the pseudonym VS 111 -- FWS-111.
22 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, are there any others there.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No.
24 JUDGE HUNT: All right. Now, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, do you have any
25 objection to the admissibility of the evidence?
Page 5261
1 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. That will be Exhibits D14 and D14A.
3 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, it would need to be under seal
4 because we used the FWS number.
5 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, thank you very much. Those exhibits will be
6 under seal. Thank you. Yes, Mr. Bakrac?
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, as we do not have a
8 date on the document, we are now going to take a look at document ID D24
9 first.
10 Q. Could you take a look, witness, at document ID D24, please, if you
11 have it? Can you find it? And tell me, please, what this document refers
12 to?
13 A. It is a decision for holding a republican referendum to determine
14 the status of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
15 Q. Could you tell us, please, in point 2, when it states that the
16 referendum shall be held, and where was the decision published, made
17 public?
18 A. The decision was made public in the Official Gazette of the
19 Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina on the 27th -- on Monday, the
20 27th of January, 1992. And point 2, it states that the referendum shall
21 be held on the 29th of February and the 1st of March, 1992.
22 Q. And how did you come by this particular document?
23 A. I obtained this document in the same way that I obtained the
24 previous document, in the same way, identical.
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
Page 5262
1 to tender into evidence ID D24 and with the translation ID D24A.
2 JUDGE HUNT: Yes. Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, any objection?
3 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE HUNT: That will be Exhibits D24 and D24A.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Mr. Dundjer, with respect to the referendum we mentioned, could
7 you now take a look at document ID D21 now, please?
8 A. Yes, I can.
9 Q. Can you tell us what this document is about?
10 A. The document numbered ID D21 is in fact an order for activities
11 for the units of the Patriotic League of the People of Bosnia-Herzegovina,
12 and it refers to the following --
13 Q. Please don't read all the points out. You said that it referred
14 to the activities of the Patriotic League of Peoples. Now, what do those
15 activities refer to?
16 A. They refer to the holding of a referendum.
17 Q. What is the date of this document?
18 A. It is the 27th of February, 1992.
19 Q. Is it signed and does it have a seal?
20 A. On the document itself, it says, "Commander, Captain 1st Class,
21 Edin Mustafic," and under that it is signed by hand, Edin Mustafic, and
22 there is also a stamp.
23 JUDGE HUNT: The translation says it is a Lukavac stamp. I don't
24 know what that is. Is the original or at least the document from which
25 all these photocopies were made any clearer as to what the stamp says?
Page 5263
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 5264
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we just have a photocopy
2 but on the stamp, you can make out the word "Lukavac" and it says
3 "certified with the SDA Lukavac stamp," and the Defence can see the word
4 "Lukavac" in the circle of the actual stamp. It can make out, discern
5 the word "Lukavac." As it is a Patriotic League -- concerns the Patriotic
6 League of Nations which was already mentioned in the newspaper article as
7 being a military unit and with respect to referendum activities, we
8 consider this exhibit to be important and linked to the previous document,
9 and therefore we would like to tender it into evidence together with the
10 translation, ID D21A.
11 JUDGE HUNT: Any objection, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
12 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I have a few questions.
13 JUDGE HUNT: Yes. Go ahead.
14 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
15 Q. First of all, it says in the header of this document, SRVS. What
16 does that stand for?
17 A. As in the text, the letters V "Shh" [phoen] occurs, I think that
18 is short for Vojinistab [phoen] or military staff. As for the SR, the
19 letters SR, I really can't say. I don't know.
20 Q. And there is also this number on top of both pages. There is a
21 long number with a very thick black -- what is it, do you have an idea
22 what the number is? Did you make this number on the document or was it
23 there?
24 A. The number was already there when I received the document. I did
25 not place that number there.
Page 5265
1 Q. And --
2 A. So I don't know how the number got to be there.
3 Q. And the quality of your copy, was it as bad as this one so that
4 you could not add what the illegible parts were saying?
5 A. Yes. Me too. I have a rather illegible copy and parts of the
6 document are illegible, difficult to read, but I haven't got a better
7 copy, I'm afraid.
8 Q. And how did you get this document?
9 A. I obtained this document from the previous investigator, lawyer
10 Jovan Simic, who told me that he had obtained it in Belgrade from a
11 military person from the General Staff.
12 Q. Can you tell me the name of this person?
13 A. I know that it was a high-ranking officer, but he did not tell me
14 the name of the individual. All I know is that he was a high-ranking
15 officer.
16 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, these were my questions, and no
17 objection.
18 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you, they'll be Exhibits D21 and D21A.
19 Mr. Bakrac.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
21 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
22 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you now find document ID D15.
23 A. I've found it.
24 Q. Could you tell us what the document is about?
25 A. It is a receipt, and it has a number - the number is 19/92 - dated
Page 5266
1 the 25th of March, 1992. It is signed by the treasurer, Nurko Nisic. It
2 says "Nurko Nisic" where it says "Treasurer."
3 Q. Was this a voluntary contribution that the Municipal Electoral
4 Committee, via the Treasurer, Nurko Nisic, gave to an individual -- a
5 donation given to an individual called Nermin, but the last name was not
6 identified with any certainty, it was illegible?
7 A. Yes, that is true.
8 Q. Is "Nermin" a Muslim name?
9 A. Yes, "Nermin" is a Muslim name.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
11 to tender into evidence this document because the individual who was a
12 treasurer is mentioned in the indictment and we consider it to be
13 relevant, with the translation into English, of course, ID D15A, so ID D15
14 and ID D15A.
15 JUDGE HUNT: What is its relevance? It seems to be some
16 government job that Mr. Nisic had. I know we've heard a lot about him,
17 but what does it mean? That he gave a receipt to somebody, a voluntary
18 donation, but you said it was the Municipal Electoral Committee. That
19 strikes me as being some government job.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour. The Municipal
21 Election Committee was not a government job. It was made up of
22 representatives of political parties. It was composed of he
23 representatives of political parties, and this exhibit could be a basis
24 for some testimonies and further evidence. And a committee never gives
25 voluntary donations unless it is for the purpose of speeding up voting at
Page 5267
1 the elections, and that is why we thought that this document would be
2 relevant.
3 But the Defence does not wish to insist on this exhibit. We don't
4 insist on having it if there are any problems.
5 JUDGE HUNT: I am not challenging it in any way. I'm just trying
6 to find out what its relevance is.
7 Now, all that you have stated will be the subject of some evidence
8 in the case, will it?
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, it is linked to the situation,
10 and in the opening statement of the pre-trial brief that the Defence
11 presented and together with the -- has to do with the organisation of the
12 Democratic Action Party and the way in which secession was planned. And
13 this individual is also mentioned in the indictment. So we thought that
14 this exhibit would be relevant.
15 JUDGE HUNT: But you haven't answered my question. My question
16 is: Will there be some evidence to support the statement you've made from
17 the bar table about who this committee is and how it operates?
18 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. We're going to
19 hear a witness, a fact witness, as to what happened before the actual
20 conflict, before the war broke out. And he's going to speak about
21 armament and the activities of the Party of Democratic Action with respect
22 to mobilisation, mobilising its members, in fact, and the Muslim people to
23 vote at the referendum. And I didn't read the previous document, but all
24 the activities were geared towards having that -- if any result was under
25 19 per cent, it would have to be considered a poor result.
Page 5268
1 JUDGE HUNT: But, Mr. Bakrac, I don't want to be too offensive
2 about this, but you still don't seem to have understood my question. Will
3 there be evidence about the matters you have stated from the bar table
4 about who this committee is and how it operates? The fact that it might
5 be referred to in your pre-trial brief does not make it evidence.
6 If you say you are going to lead evidence from some witness about
7 the matters you have stated from the bar table, I can understand how this
8 will become relevant, but unless we know that there is going to be
9 evidence which explains who the committee is and how it operates, I don't
10 see what its relevance is.
11 Now, can you understand that? Can you say yes or no to that
12 question? Will you be leading evidence from some witness as to the
13 matters you have stated from the bar table?
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. In talking to
15 witnesses, we did hear that in order to vote for secession and for victory
16 of the democratic --
17 JUDGE HUNT: You are going to lead evidence. So I can proceed
18 upon the assumption that you will lead that evidence. That's all I want
19 to know.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. I thought that I
21 was saying that we're going to ask questions, because in talking to the
22 witnesses, we learnt about this. We haven't got a witness who is going to
23 confirm that they know about this document but that they know about the
24 principle that was implemented. That is what we shall be asking the
25 witnesses about.
Page 5269
1 JUDGE HUNT: All you have to ask him is where he got the document
2 from.
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Mr. Dundjer, you have heard His Honour. Could you please tell us
5 where you got the document from?
6 A. I was given the document by the previous investigator, Jovan
7 Simic, and he told me that it came from the military command of the
8 Srbinje Garrison. And as I said, he got it from an officer, from a
9 military man, and it was a captain, in fact.
10 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you.
11 Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.
12 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I have one additional question. It is
13 actually not related to authenticity, but I don't want to return to this
14 document later on during the cross-examination.
15 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
16 Q. Mr. Dundjer, are you able to tell us, this 110.000 dinars, what
17 that amounts to in Deutschemarks or dollars? Can you give us an idea of
18 how much that is or was?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE HUNT: That will you. They will be Exhibits D15 and D15A.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Mr. Dundjer, would you now go on and take a look at document
25 ID D20?
Page 5270
1 A. Yes, I will.
2 Q. And tell us, please, what that document is about. What does it
3 state in the heading? Who is the author of the document and is it
4 signed?
5 A. It is a document which was registered in the Federal Secretariat
6 for National Defence under the number 694-1. The date is the 29th of
7 July, 1991, Belgrade. It is addressed to the President of the Presidency
8 of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and it is signed by -- it says here
9 signed by Federal Secretary for National Defence, Army General Veljko
10 Kadijevic, with a signature.
11 Q. Tell us briefly, please, what this document is about.
12 A. By this document, the Federal Secretariat for National Defence is
13 insisting, with the President of the Presidency of the Republic of
14 Bosnia-Herzegovina, to withdraw the decision on not sending recruits to
15 units and institutions of the Yugoslav People's Army outside the territory
16 of the republic itself.
17 Q. Tell us, please, who you obtained -- the way in which you obtained
18 the document.
19 A. I obtained the document from the previous investigator, Jovan
20 Simic, who in turn received it at the -- got it from the General Staff,
21 from a high-ranking officer from the legal department of the General
22 Staff. He did not disclose the identity of the individual.
23 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Bakrac, can you explain to us what the Federal
24 Secretariat for National Defence is? It seems to be something from
25 Serbia, but you might tell us, would you?
Page 5271
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 5272
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour. The Federal
2 Secretariat for National Defence was the supreme military body in the
3 former Yugoslavia, and within its composition we had the representatives
4 of all the republics, including the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. The
5 Federal Secretariat for National Defence was led by Army General Veljko
6 Kadijevic. The seat was in Belgrade, as was all -- as were the seats of
7 all the institutions -- former institutions of the Socialist Federal
8 Republic of Yugoslavia. The headquarters were all located in Belgrade.
9 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] We should like to tender this
11 exhibit, ID D20 and ID D20A, the translation, into evidence.
12 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
13 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE HUNT: They will be Exhibits D20 and D20A.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Mr. Dundjer, may we now proceed to Exhibit ID D22? Tell us
17 briefly what ID D22 is about.
18 There was a short break so I was wondering whether you had heard
19 my question but apparently you had.
20 A. This is an interview from the Ljiljan newspaper. The interview is
21 with Jiri Dienstbier UN human rights rapporteur for the former
22 Bosnia-Herzegovina.
23 Q. Tell us the title only and what newspaper was this interview given
24 to?
25 A. Every village in Bosnia waged its own civil war. It was carried
Page 5273
1 by the newspaper Ljiljan and it was actually given to the newspaper called
2 Nacional on the 15th of July and the year is stated in the text. Do you
3 want me to read this out for you?
4 Q. No, you don't have to read it out for us. Do you see the date on
5 this photocopy, the date of publication of this newspaper?
6 A. We do not have a date.
7 Q. How did you obtain this document?
8 A. I obtained it from Jovan Simic, the former investigator. He found
9 it. And he photocopied it from the Ljiljan newspaper. That's what he
10 told me. Ljiljan is published in Sarajevo.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence would like
12 to tender this document into evidence, ID D22 and the translation as well,
13 ID D22A.
14 JUDGE HUNT: What is its relevance, Mr. Bakrac?
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we believe that the
16 opinion of the special rapporteur of the United Nations, who dealt with
17 human rights, would corroborate our theory that the conflict in Foca has
18 to be viewed separately from the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina in
19 general.
20 JUDGE HUNT: Even though the statements he made are described as
21 outrageous by the magazine in which they appear? All right. Yes, Ms.
22 Uertz-Retzlaff?
23 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE HUNT: That will be Exhibits D22 and D22A. Yes,
25 Mr. Bakrac?
Page 5274
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
2 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you please move on to document ID D23?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Can you tell us what this document is?
5 A. This is from the Celebici case, Defence evidence V-D/page 000828.
6 Q. You don't have to read all of this to us, just tell us what this
7 is.
8 A. This document relates to the following: That in the KP Dom Foca,
9 there were Muslim fighters detained.
10 Q. How did you obtain this document?
11 A. I got this document from defence lawyers from the defence lawyer,
12 actually, Mr. Mihajlo Bakrac.
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the defence believes
14 that this document is relevant in terms of the date, and later on you will
15 see we will be presenting evidence that had to do with the exchange of
16 certain persons in Konjic and it says that these persons are fighting men,
17 that is to say that the President of the exchanges commission says that
18 the prisoners were exchanged for, I quote, "Our fighters from the KP Dom
19 Foca."
20 JUDGE HUNT: Well, the English translation describes them as "our
21 soldiers" but you just have to help us with some of the identities here
22 because they come at us from every direction and it's very difficult to
23 understand. The defendants, of course, in the Celebici case were both
24 Muslim and Croatian but are we to assume that the commission for the
25 exchange of prisoners of the Konjic municipality was a Muslim
Page 5275
1 organisation?
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Jasmina Dzumbur is
3 the name of the President and it's quite obvious that this is a
4 representative of the Muslim people.
5 JUDGE HUNT: Right. Thank you.
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] It says, "Our fighters."
7 JUDGE HUNT: Who is responsible for these translations? They look
8 like they have been translated by the Tribunal's translators.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE HUNT: All right. Yes, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
11 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: The Prosecution has actually obtained the
12 original -- the copy that was used in the Celebici case, and we have no
13 objection.
14 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. That will be Exhibit D23 and D23A.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
16 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you please be so kind as to move on to document
17 ID D25?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Can you tell us what this document refers to?
20 A. This document refers to the following. It is an extract from the
21 instructions for work of Crisis Staffs of the Serbian people and
22 municipalities.
23 Q. Can you tell us whether this document is signed, stamped?
24 A. Yes. It says here that this document was written by Prime
25 Minister Dr. Branko Djeric, professor, signed and stamped the Serb
Page 5276
1 Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, government, Sarajevo, the 26th of April,
2 1992.
3 Q. On page 1, in the upper right-hand corner, is there a stamp from
4 the register?
5 A. Yes, there is.
6 Q. Tell me how did you obtain this document?
7 A. The group of documents that we will be dealing with now were all
8 obtained in the same way, so with the permission of the Chamber, I would
9 like to explain in greater detail how I got all these documents.
10 Q. Go ahead, Mr. Dundjer. How did you obtain these documents?
11 A. This is the way it was. This is a document from part of the
12 archives that are in Pale, until the present day. After the presidency of
13 the government and the ministry was transferred from Pale, I personally
14 went there and I copied the documents that were there.
15 Q. So you found copies, if I understood you correctly, and then you
16 copied these photocopies for your own purposes; is that right?
17 A. Yes, that's right. And as I said, it is part of the archives.
18 Q. Who gave you access to these papers?
19 A. A colleague, Goran Neskovic, attorney at law, he brought me into
20 contact with a female person who made these documents accessible to me.
21 Q. Since you said "female person," I imagine she did not want to have
22 her identity revealed but do you know what this female person does or did?
23 A. She worked in the administration of the presidency, while the
24 presidency was in Pale, that is.
25 Q. You say the presidency, is that Republika Srpska?
Page 5277
1 A. Yes, yes, I said that, yes. When I said part of the archives, I
2 said part of the archives of the presidency of Republika Srpska and the
3 government of Republika Srpska and certain ministries.
4 Q. Thank you, Mr. Dundjer.
5 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
6 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, I have a few additional questions
7 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
8 Q. You said that you went to these archives. Did you actually pick
9 this document here and others yourself from binders or compilation of the
10 documents, or did you ask for specific documents?
11 A. I got many more documents, or actually many more documents were
12 made accessible to me, many more than what I actually brought here. They
13 were in binders, these documents were. I personally looked at what I
14 thought was relevant for this case and I took these documents out,
15 document by document, and photocopied them, so I did all of this
16 personally.
17 Q. And it says in this document, "Extract from the instructions for
18 work of Crisis Staffs," and so on. The instructions in their entirety,
19 were they also compiled there and would you be able to tell us when they
20 were adopted? The entire instructions?
21 A. This extract bears a date, that is the 26th of April, 1992, and if
22 you are asking me to make assumptions, I am doing so in a justified
23 manner, I should think. So it was before that. This document shows that
24 the Crisis Staff in wartime conditions takes over all the powers of
25 municipal assemblies.
Page 5278
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 5279
1 Q. So you didn't see these instructions in their entirety at all?
2 A. These instructions, I did not, no.
3 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, no objection.
4 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. Exhibits D25 and D25A.
5 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you please be so kind as to move on to document
8 ID D26, and could you please explain to us what kind of document this is?
9 A. This is a decision of the presidency of the Serb Republic of
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina on the formation of war presidencies and municipalities
11 in time of war or imminent threat of war.
12 Q. Is this document signed?
13 A. Yes. The document is signed. It bears a signature, namely the
14 President of the presidency of the Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina,
15 Dr. Radovan Karadzic, signed and stamped, and the stamp says the Serb
16 Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Sarajevo, it also has its number on the
17 left-hand side, PRBR 03-512. The 31st of May, 1992, Sarajevo.
18 Q. Could you please be so kind as to tell us how you obtained this
19 document?
20 A. I obtained this document the same way I got the previous one, in
21 an identical way. That is to say that I made my own selection from these
22 archives and photocopied them.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
24 to tender ID D26 into evidence as well as the translation ID D26A.
25 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
Page 5280
1 JUDGE HUNT: That will be Exhibits 26 and 26A. Mr. Bakrac, may I
2 remind you to wait for the translation to finish when the witness is
3 speaking before you say something more? Yes.
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I'll try to
5 do that.
6 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you please be so kind as to move on to -- could
7 you please move on to document ID D27-1.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Can you tell me, please, what this document pertains to?
10 A. These are the minutes of the 36th session of the government of the
11 Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, held on the 4th of July, 1992.
12 On page 2, item 3, a decision was passed to establish a house of
13 correction in Foca.
14 Q. Does this document have a date and was it signed?
15 A. Yes. It is 03768, and the date is the 9th of July, 1992, signed
16 by Prime Minister Professor Dr. Branko Djeric. And the stamp says the
17 Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Government of Sarajevo, and there is
18 also a signature of Nedeljko Lakic, the secretary of the government.
19 Q. Tell us, please --
20 JUDGE HUNT: Just a moment. We are talking about 27, are we?
21 That's what you said. None of this seems to have a date on it.
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I do apologise. I asked
23 for 27-1. Perhaps it wasn't interpreted properly. Because the Prosecutor
24 objected to the copy that had not been signed, so --
25 JUDGE HUNT: You're all right. You did say 1, now that I look
Page 5281
1 back on the transcript. I'm sorry, I'm working behind you. All right.
2 27-1, yes. You proceed. I'm sorry.
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
4 Q. Tell us, please, Mr. Dundjer, how did you obtain this document?
5 JUDGE HUNT: Was it from the archives, the Pale archives?
6 A. Yes. Yes, like the previous one. Yes. Yes.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
8 to tender this document ID D27-1 and ID D27-1A be admitted into evidence.
9 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
10 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, objection, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. That will be Exhibits D27/1, and D27/1A.
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you please be so kind as to move on to ID D29.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Tell us, please, what does this refer to?
16 A. This refers to a decision on the establishment of corrections
17 institutions on the territory of the Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina,
18 published in the Serb Gazette of the Serb people in Bosnia-Herzegovina on
19 Tuesday, on the 12th-17th of May, 1992.
20 Q. Tell us, please, did you find this document in the same way you
21 found the previous one, in the Pale archives?
22 A. Yes. I obtained this document in the same way.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.
24 JUDGE HUNT: Yes.
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
Page 5282
1 this document, ID D29, along the translation, ID D29A, be admitted into
2 evidence.
3 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.
4 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection.
5 JUDGE HUNT: That will be Exhibits D29 and D29A.
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you please be so kind as to move on to the next
8 document, ID D30, and tell us what kind of document this is.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. This document is one from the Ministry of Justice administration.
11 The number is 04/2-1/92, dated the 25th of July, 1992. This is an answer
12 sent to the KP Dom Foca, to the warden personally. This document --
13 Mr. Dundjer, was this document signed and by who?
14 A. Yes. It was signed "Minister Momcilo Mandic," signed and
15 stamped. The stamp says the "Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina,
16 Ministry of Justice, Sarajevo."
17 Q. Tell us, please, the last paragraph or, rather, could you just
18 read this last paragraph to us.
19 A. "We also hereby inform you that Milorad Krnojelac is appointed
20 warden of this correction house. Please find the enclosed the decision on
21 his appointment."
22 Q. Tell me, please, did you obtain this document the same way you
23 obtained the previous ones, from the archives?
24 A. Yes.
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
Page 5283
1 to tender this document into evidence, ID D30, along with the translation,
2 ID D30A.
3 JUDGE HUNT: Is the enclosure with that document, the decision,
4 some other document within this bundle?
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. The decision that
6 is referred to in this document by Minister Mandic is also a document that
7 we have here under number 77.
8 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff
9 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
10 Q. Just one question, Mr. Dundjer. It also says in this document:
11 "Please send this Ministry a list of employees so that salaries can be
12 ensured."
13 Did you find this list as well in the binder that you checked? Is
14 it also an exhibit?
15 A. This list was not in the documents that I looked through. I did
16 not find it.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE HUNT: They'll be Exhibits D30, D30A. This was from the
20 archives, I think. Is that correct?
21 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE HUNT: Yes.
23 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
24 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you please be so kind to move on to ID D31.
25 A. Yes.
Page 5284
1 Q. Tell us, please, what does this document refer to?
2 A. This is a decision of the government of the Serb Republic of
3 Bosnia-Herzegovina on the functioning and protection of economic and other
4 capacities in conditions of immediate threat of war in the Serb Republic
5 of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
6 Q. Does this document bear a stamp and signature?
7 A. This document does bear a seal. The number is 03-501, and the
8 document is the 2nd of June, 1992. The document is signed by Prime
9 Minister Professor Dr. Branko Djeric. And then there is another seal
10 there, the Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the government, Sarajevo.
11 Q. Mr. Dundjer, please, could you tell us whether you got this
12 document in Pale also? Did you find it in the archives that were made
13 accessible to you?
14 A. Yes. I personally found this document.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence --
16 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
17 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection.
18 JUDGE HUNT: Exhibits D31 and D31A.
19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you please be so kind as to move on to ID D32
21 and tell us what this document is.
22 A. This is a document of the Presidency of the Serb Republic of
23 Bosnia-Herzegovina, passing a decision on the organisation of enterprises
24 and other organisations of general importance for the defence of the
25 Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Page 5285
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 5286
1 Q. Is this document signed and stamped and does it also have a
2 registry stamp?
3 A. It was signed by the President of the Presidency, Dr. Radovan
4 Karadzic, and it also bears a seal, the Serb Republic of
5 Bosnia-Herzegovina, Presidency Sarajevo. And it is also registered by the
6 Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, 01-84/92, dated the 18th of June,
7 1992, Sarajevo.
8 Q. Did you get this document the same way you obtained the previous
9 ones, in the archives in Pale?
10 A. Yes. I personally found this document in the archives in Pale.
11 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
12 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection.
13 JUDGE HUNT: Exhibits D32 and 32A.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you please be so kind as to move on to ID D33
16 and tell us what it pertains to.
17 A. This document is a decree of the government of the
18 Bosnia-Herzegovina on the organisation and discharge of work obligation
19 for the needs of defence.
20 Q. Was this document signed, stamped, and also is there a stamp
21 showing that it was received?
22 A. Yes. It was signed by Prime Minister Dr. Branko Djeric, signed
23 and stamped Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, government Sarajevo. It
24 is registered as number 03505, and the date is the 2nd of June, 1992, in
25 Sarajevo.
Page 5287
1 Q. Did you find this document in the Pale archives as well like the
2 previous ones?
3 A. Yes.
4 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
5 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE HUNT: Exhibits 33 -- D33 and D33A.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you just tell me, please, whether ID D33-1, the
9 exhibit, is the Official Gazette in which this provision which we have
10 introduced into evidence, mentioned, was it published and is it the same
11 source? Did you also find it in the archives?
12 A. Yes. That is the decree on the organisation and discharge of work
13 obligation for the needs of defence. It was published in the Official
14 Gazette of the Serbian people in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The number is 8 --
15 page 311.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Very well, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
18 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE HUNT: That will be Exhibits D33/1 and D33/1A.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Mr. Dundjer, ID D33-2. Just tell me, please, is this an example
22 of a form -- of a decision on the assignment of work organisation in
23 conformity with the decree we talked about and did you find it at Pale in
24 the archives?
25 A. Yes. It is a decision on the assignment of work obligation. It
Page 5288
1 is the form -- standard form used, and I obtained it in the same way.
2 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.
3 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection.
4 JUDGE HUNT: That's D33/2 and D33/2A.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Mr. Dundjer, let's move on to Exhibit ID D34, and tell us what
7 this document is about.
8 A. This document is a decision. The number of the document -- it has
9 a registration number with the date. The number is 01/111-012-92, Foca,
10 the 26th of April, 1992.
11 Q. Is the decision signed, and if so, by who?
12 A. By the president or chairman of the executive committee, Radojica
13 Mladjenovic. It has a signature and a stamp.
14 Q. Tell us, please, how you came by this document.
15 A. This is a document I obtained from the former investigator, lawyer
16 Jovan Simic, who told me that he had obtained it in turn from the
17 Municipal Assembly of Foca, Foca Srbinje. Srbinje is the name of Foca
18 now.
19 Q. Thank you, Mr. Dundjer.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] The Defence would like to tender this
21 exhibit, ID D34, and the translation, ID D34A, into evidence.
22 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.
23 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
24 Q. I have just one additional question, Mr. Dundjer. Did your
25 colleague Mr. Simic also check the archives of the Municipal Assembly? Do
Page 5289
1 you know that?
2 A. As far as I know, he did not have access to archives, but he did
3 obtain documents.
4 Q. And one more question. In paragraph 2, item II, on the document
5 it says: "A work obligation should be imposed on workers according to the
6 list submitted Foca KP Dom."
7 Did your colleague also receive this list or did you later on
8 receive it?
9 A. I didn't receive it from my colleague, and I was unable to find it
10 myself, so no.
11 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE HUNT: Exhibits D34 and 34A.
13 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
14 Q. Mr. Dundjer, let's move on to Exhibit ID D35.
15 A. Yes, I've got it.
16 Q. Tell us, please, is that a document speaking about the
17 jurisdiction of military courts pursuant to the law on military courts
18 published in the Official Gazette of the Republika Srpska number 27/93?
19 A. Yes. It is a document on jurisdiction of military courts
20 published in the Official Gazette.
21 Q. On page 2, under Roman numeral IV, does it provide for provisions
22 of prisoners of war?
23 A. Yes, competency and authority of the military court as regards
24 prisoners of war.
25 Q. And tell us, please, under D, miscellaneous, in the first line
Page 5290
1 after that, does it say that they have authority to render decisions on
2 the status of prisoners of war?
3 A. Yes, that means that the military courts render decisions on the
4 status of prisoners of war.
5 Q. And tell me, please, is this document signed, and if so, tell us
6 who signed it, and tell us how you came by this document?
7 A. This document I obtained from my colleague, Vojo Radevic, who was
8 an investigator in a case which was underway in Foca, and he provided me
9 with this document. I think that at the time, I was there with Mihajlo
10 Bakrac, the lawyer -- my colleague, when I obtained the document.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
12 to tender document ID D35 and ID D35A into evidence.
13 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
14 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Just one question.
15 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
16 Q. Did Mr. Vojo Radevic tell you how he received the document?
17 A. I assume -- that is to say I'm fairly sure that he got the
18 document from the Army of Republika Srpska in some way, so it's an excerpt
19 from the Official Gazette published in Republika Srpska, an excerpt from
20 that Official Gazette. And it's -- it is used by the military courts in
21 Republika Srpska as a basis.
22 Q. Do you know if this particular document, as it is not -- at least
23 it's not dated, was it compiled or do you know the purpose why it was
24 compiled in this form?
25 A. As I said, I assume the document was used by the military courts
Page 5291
1 as a sort of set of instructions stating what the military courts were
2 authorised to do, their authorisation and competence to people working in
3 them, but as I say, it was taken from the Official Gazette and this is
4 sort of a summary from that Official Gazette, a precis.
5 JUDGE HUNT: The gazette is described as number 27 of 93 which
6 tends to suggest, does it not, that this was published in a gazette in
7 1993?
8 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE HUNT: Exhibits D35 and D35A.
10 Do we move into another volume now, Mr. Bakrac, or have you got
11 some more from this volume?
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes. ID D36. I think, Your Honour,
13 that you have it in --
14 JUDGE HUNT: Volume 2. Right.
15 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
16 Q. Mr. Dundjer, would you now take a look at Defence exhibit marked
17 ID D36?
18 A. Yes, I have it.
19 Q. Tell us, please, is this a decision by the supreme military court
20 of Republika Srpska?
21 A. Yes, it is, a decision of the supreme military court, yes, of
22 Republika Srpska by which criminal proceedings against the accused Djapic,
23 Radoman, son of Vukota, from Pluzine, Yugoslavia, is being discontinued
24 due to the death of the accused.
25 Q. You say the death of the accused. Tell us when the accused was
Page 5292
1 killed -- died?
2 A. The accused died on the 27th of July, 1994, in Srbinje, Foca.
3 Q. Is this decision signed? If so, who by and does it have a stamp?
4 A. Yes, the decision is signed by the President of the Trial Chamber,
5 Colonel Novak Todorovic. It has a signature and a stamp, Republika
6 Srpska, supreme military court is the logo.
7 Q. Did the decision come into force? Is it legally binding?
8 A. Yes, the decision is binding as of the 17th of September, 1994,
9 and comes into force and it has a -- it is signed and stamped, as I say.
10 Q. Tell us the source. How did you come by the document?
11 A. I obtained the document from an officer, a military man, working
12 in the Herzegovina Corps of the Army of Republika Srpska in Bileca. It
13 was an officer, as I say, and he requested that I keep his name anonymous.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, may I explain at this
15 point that it was an individual who in the witness -- a witness statement
16 is mentioned as somebody who was killed in the KP Dom, and that is the
17 reason for which the Defence would like to tender this document into
18 evidence. It shows the time, that is to say the date, when the individual
19 died. So we'd like to tender this exhibit into evidence, that is to say
20 document ID D36 plus the translation, ID D36A.
21 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE HUNT: That will be Exhibits D36 and D36A.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Mr. Dundjer, let's move on to Exhibit ID D37.
25 A. Yes, I have it.
Page 5293
1 Q. Tell us, please, what is that document about?
2 A. This document states Republika Srpska, Ministry of Justice and
3 Administration, section for enforcement of sentences, number 04/2-112/92,
4 dated the 22nd of October, 1992. It is addressed to the Minister for
5 Justice and Administration. It is a report on the situation in prisons
6 and prisoner of war collection camps.
7 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Mr. Dundjer, tell us, does the report have a signature? If so,
10 whose?
11 A. Yes, the report was compiled by Slobodan Avlijas and it has his
12 signature.
13 Q. Under point 6, does it give information about the district court
14 in Doboj?
15 A. Yes, on page 3, point 6, it says Doboj. In Doboj, in the district
16 court, prisoners have been placed there. The Doboj district prison holds
17 persons who were captured on the orders of civilian and military
18 authorities. Since military organs have no adequate facilities for the
19 accommodation of captured persons, it was arranged with the prison warden
20 that he allocate some space to the army for the accommodation of prisoners
21 of war on condition that the army provide security.
22 Q. Mr. Dundjer, in this document, do we have any information on the
23 KP Dom of Foca?
24 A. No.
25 JUDGE HUNT: Just one moment, please. The English translation
Page 5294
1 shows Doboj as number 5. Now, where the difference starts, I'm not sure.
2 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, there is twice the number 4.
3 JUDGE HUNT: Ah, in the English translation, thank you very much.
4 Now I see it. Right. I'm sorry, I was lost.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I should like to explain
6 the relevance of this exhibit. On the basis of the exhibit, we can see
7 that the situation was identical with respect to Doboj, that is to say
8 with respect to the KP Dom, and Mr. Avlijas, who was deputy minister at
9 the time, the Defence has tried to contact him and prevail upon him to
10 testify in the case. So we would like to tender this document and say
11 that Mr. Avlijas will probably be testifying. It doesn't say Foca here
12 but I think the information about the Doboj district prison would be
13 relevant in assessing what the KP Dom of Foca was because the situation
14 was identical with respect to leasing it out and so on, and that is why we
15 should like to have this exhibit tendered into evidence.
16 JUDGE HUNT: Well, that may be so but it's interesting that there
17 is no reference to Foca there, or even civilian.
18 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Quite right. And
19 I was just going to explain that. The Defence is aware of the reasons for
20 which this report does not mention that, but it cannot speak about that,
21 and that is why we would like to get Mr. Avlijas to testify as a witness.
22 So he will be testifying, we hope, and then we also hope that this
23 information about the Doboj district court -- prison, will show that the
24 situation was analogous and the practice was the same in other prisons,
25 that is to say that they were leased out to the military. So that is why
Page 5295
1 I consider the exhibit to be relevant and merit being admitted into
2 evidence even without Mr. Avlijas's testimony, although we do hope to have
3 him here as a witness to testify himself.
4 JUDGE HUNT: Has the witness told us where he got the document
5 from?
6 A. I obtained this document in the same way that I obtained the set
7 of documents at Pale, from part of the archives that are there.
8 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
9 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE HUNT: That will be Exhibits D37 and D37A.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, before I move to the
12 next exhibit, may I just explain that the Defence has included into the
13 proposals of documents, two documents that are already exhibits, have
14 already been introduced into evidence by the Prosecution, but the Defence
15 has a better copy than the Prosecution does, so we consider that perhaps
16 our copies could be tendered and admitted into evidence as being better
17 copies, more legible than the Prosecution documents, or do you want to
18 just have the one that has already been admitted? And the Defence
19 obtained these documents independently of the Prosecution in its own --
20 along its own channels.
21 JUDGE HUNT: I see no reason why you should not put them in, if
22 you could just give us a reference to the number of the Prosecution
23 Exhibit so we could cross-reference them?
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, let me just find the
25 Prosecution Exhibit. May I have the Court's indulgence for a few moments.
Page 5296
1 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: If I can assist you, I know the numbers so I
2 can add. The first one will be P4.
3 JUDGE HUNT: What are we talking about? Which ID number are we
4 dealing with?
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] We are dealing with ID D38.
6 JUDGE HUNT: Yes.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] And it is P4, Prosecution document
8 P4.
9 JUDGE HUNT: No objection, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
10 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, Your Honour. The only point I want to
11 point out that is the translation of the two documents differ slightly.
12 It's some terms simply. It's not substantive changes but it differs
13 slightly.
14 JUDGE HUNT: There is no significance in the difference?
15 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No.
16 JUDGE HUNT: Very well. Those will be Exhibits D38 and D38A.
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I should just like to
18 explain that during the break that is coming up and during the weekend, we
19 shall try to do something we weren't able to do because of the shortage of
20 time and the large number of documents, to review the translations. And
21 the Prosecution have already assisted us with their suggestions and we
22 will ask -- seek corrections for some of those slight differences and
23 omissions and then we will be handing the documents in duly corrected.
24 The next exhibit, therefore, ID D38-1, I think is Prosecution
25 Exhibit P5. That's the second of that set. And we should also like to
Page 5297
1 tender it into evidence.
2 JUDGE HUNT: No objection?
3 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, Your Honour, but I would have a few
4 general questions in relation to the documents that the witness obtained
5 from the KP Dom actually.
6 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, certainly go ahead.
7 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
8 Q. How did you receive these documents? There are many documents
9 from the KP Dom. How did you receive these documents?
10 A. Do you mean this particular one?
11 Q. I mean number 38, number 38-1, these two, how did you receive
12 them?
13 A. 38, document 38, I did not receive at the KP Dom Foca. That would
14 be my answer. Neither the other document, ID D38-1.
15 JUDGE HUNT: That wasn't the question. The question was how did
16 you receive them?
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I apologise for
18 interrupting but my learned friend, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, asked about these
19 two particular documents.
20 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, and she asked, "How did you receive the
21 documents?" And the witness says, "I did not receive them at the KP Dom
22 Foca." That's not an answer to the question. How did you receive the
23 documents?
24 A. I received these two documents from the previous investigator,
25 attorney at law Jovan Simic, not from the Dom.
Page 5298
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 5299
1 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:
2 Q. And how did Mr. Simic get this document, do you know that?
3 A. Lawyer Simic told me that he obtained the document from a military
4 person from the Srbinje Garrison.
5 Q. Is that the captain that you mentioned earlier on?
6 A. Yes, that's right, an officer with the rank of captain.
7 Q. Yes.
8 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No more questions. No objection, Your
9 Honour.
10 JUDGE HUNT: That he will be Exhibit D381 and D31/1A. Yes.
11 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
12 Q. Mr. Dundjer, would you take a look at the next exhibit, ID D39,
13 and tell us what it is about. What is the document, and is it signed? If
14 so, who by, and is it dated?
15 A. Yes. This is a document titled "Republika Srpska, Penal and
16 Correctional Facility KPD Foca." The number is 57/931, dated the 6th of
17 May, 1993.
18 It is a report on the Foca KPD regarding the order of the
19 Hercegovina Corps commander on the relocation of the prison from Bileca to
20 Foca. It is signed by the warden, Milorad Krnojelac. And on the
21 left-hand side, it has been addressed -- sent to the Hercegovina Corps,
22 command of the Foca Tactical Group.
23 Q. Before you tell us the source, could you read out the last
24 paragraph or last sentence, please?
25 JUDGE HUNT: No. It's underlined. It couldn't be more
Page 5300
1 emphasised. Let's get on with it.
2 What is the source?
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Mr. Dundjer, tell us how you obtained this document.
5 A. I obtained this document from a military person, from the Srbinje
6 Foca Garrison, a captain by rank.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
8 to tender this exhibit into evidence, that is to say, ID D39, plus the
9 translation, ID D39A.
10 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.
11 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
12 Q. I have a few questions, Mr. Dundjer. Who underlined this in the
13 original? In this paragraph, who underlined it? Do you know?
14 A. When the document was obtained, it had already been underline. It
15 was already underlined when the document was obtained.
16 Q. And --
17 JUDGE HUNT: Can we tell from the document you did obtain whether
18 it is the same ink as the signature?
19 A. I apologise. Were you asking me, Your Honour?
20 JUDGE HUNT: Yes.
21 A. May I just say that the signature and the underlining is done in
22 the same ink.
23 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:
24 Q. Do you have the original or is it just --
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise. The
Page 5301
1 witness -- the witness was just repeating the question. It appears on the
2 transcript as if it is the answer. He was just repeating the question put
3 by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, not confirming it. He was just repeating the
4 question.
5 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. Perhaps he may now answer the question.
6 Do you know from the document that you have or that you obtained
7 whether the ink for the underlining is the same as the ink on the
8 signature?
9 A. No, it's not the same.
10 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:
11 Q. Do you have the original?
12 A. No, I do not possess the original.
13 Q. Did you see the original?
14 A. No.
15 Q. And it says here you said that Mr. Krnojelac signed it. It's only
16 initials, right?
17 A. Yes. It says here, "MK", Milorad Krnojelac, abbreviated. The
18 letters "MK". It is initialled, the initials of Milorad Krnojelac, "MK".
19 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honours, it's already 11.00, but I would
20 have one more question in relation to this document.
21 JUDGE HUNT: Yes.
22 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:
23 Q. Did you see other documents where KP Dom warden writes to other
24 bodies outside the prison where he just used initials?
25 A. There are other documents, yes, and in the course of the
Page 5302
1 proceedings, I shall be presenting them, and they also have the
2 signature.
3 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE HUNT: They'll be Exhibits D39 and 39A.
5 We'll adjourn now until 11.35.
6 --- Recess taken at 11.05 a.m.
7 --- On resuming at 11.35 a.m.
8 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Bakrac?
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
10 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
11 Q. Mr. Dundjer, can we go on?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Could you please be so kind as to move on to ID D40?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Tell me, what does this document pertain to? Who was it addressed
16 to? Is there a number? Is there a date? Is there a signature?
17 A. The document comes from the Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina,
18 Serb municipality of Foca, the number is 01/Roman numeral I-01-14/92. The
19 date is the 18th of June, 1992. The operative staff, the executive
20 committee of the Serb municipality of Foca.
21 Q. Is this document signed?
22 A. Yes, yes. This is a two page document. It's signed, President of
23 the War Commission, Miroslav Stanic.
24 Q. Can you tell me how you obtained this document?
25 A. I got this document from my colleague, the former investigator,
Page 5303
1 Jovan Simic, and on that occasion, he explained to me that he obtained it
2 from the municipality, which is nowadays called Srbinje, beforehand it was
3 called Foca. He got it from a person who works, that is to say performs a
4 certain function, within the municipality of Foca, i.e., Srbinje.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
6 this document, ID D40, along with the translation, ID D40A, be admitted
7 into evidence.
8 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
9 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Just one additional question
10 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
11 Q. This person, this person that worked in the municipality, did you
12 get the name of this person? Did Mr. Simic tell you the name?
13 A. He just told me that this person works there, did not tell me the
14 name.
15 Q. What is the reason for holding back names? I mean, I can
16 understand it for the military but for just normal people working in
17 municipality offices, what is the reason for this secrecy?
18 A. I really couldn't say why this person -- I mean, why the identity
19 of this person was not disclosed to me.
20 Q. But Mr. Simic, did he know the identity? Did he just not tell
21 you?
22 A. I can just guess. The name was not told to me and I can just
23 guess as to whether he knows or not. I don't know the name of that
24 person, that is.
25 Q. Was this document, then, kind of illegally obtained? Was it --
Page 5304
1 did this person, this worker, did he actually -- did he use the official
2 channels or was it just violating his obligations? Do you know anything
3 of this?
4 A. I don't know whether by giving this document to the lawyer Simic
5 he violated his duties.
6 Q. Did Mr. Simic use official channels first? Did he officially ask
7 for documents of that kind? Do you know that?
8 A. Well, I assume that he had had talks there, and during these talks
9 with persons from the municipality, he probably asked them whether he
10 could get the document officially, and probably the way in which he
11 ultimately obtained this document hinged on that answer.
12 Q. Yes.
13 JUDGE HUNT: And the clear inference is that no, he couldn't have
14 it officially and it was stolen, I would have thought, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.
15 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes. But nevertheless, no objection, Your
16 Honour.
17 JUDGE HUNT: They will be Exhibits D40 and D40A.
18 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
19 Q. Could you please move on to ID D41.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And could you just tell us briefly what kind of document this is.
22 A. This is a document that says "The Party of Democratic Action,
23 Trebinje." It bears number 59/93. The date is the 20th of January,
24 1993.
25 This is a set of instructions as to the moving out of persons from
Page 5305
1 Trebinje.
2 Q. Was this document signed?
3 A. Yes. It was signed and stamped Secretary of the Party of
4 Democratic Action, Hasan Cengic. It say here "Signature," and there's a
5 stamp on the left-hand side, left of the signature, that is.
6 Q. And please tell us how you obtained this document.
7 A. I obtained this document in the following way: That was the way
8 in which I obtained a large group of documents - I already explained
9 that - from the Pale archives. I personally photocopied this document.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
11 to have this Defence exhibit be admitted into evidence, please.
12 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE HUNT: They will be Exhibits D41 and D41A.
14 I would like to know, however, when you got this from the Pale
15 archives, was it in a particular bundle of documents that were
16 identifiable in some way as a bundle?
17 A. Yes. When I first talked about Pale, I said that this was in
18 certain binders, that there were several binders of documents that I had
19 looked through, that is, and I copied what seemed interesting to me. So
20 there were several bundles or binders.
21 JUDGE HUNT: And those several binders or bundles, each of them
22 dealt with some sort of separate subject matter, did they?
23 A. Yes.
24 JUDGE HUNT: You see, it's a rather unusual document to find on an
25 official file unless it had been taken from somewhere else. Now, were the
Page 5306
1 documents in the same bundle as this also appear to have taken from SDA
2 sources?
3 A. Only this document was different from the rest of the documents.
4 JUDGE HUNT: Well, then I'll ask you again. What was the
5 description -- what is the general description of the other documents in
6 that same bundle or binder?
7 A. This document was either at the beginning or at the end of one of
8 the binders I looked through. I can't remember exactly right now.
9 As for the rest of the documents from these binders, it did not
10 pertain directly to your question. I mean, it did not pertain directly to
11 the Party of Democratic Action.
12 I don't know why this document was added to one of the binders.
13 JUDGE HUNT: Are you able to tell me what the nature of the other
14 documents in the bundle were? That's the third time I've asked you that
15 question. It would be helpful if you could give me an answer to it.
16 A. The nature of the other documents was as I have previously
17 explained. These were decisions of the Presidency, of the government, of
18 certain Ministries.
19 As I've already mentioned, that is decisions. And then there were
20 extracts from Official Gazettes, from meetings of the government, the
21 presidency, et cetera.
22 JUDGE HUNT: Well, Mr. Bakrac, I obviously cannot get an answer
23 from the witness. I won't pursue it any further.
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if it can be of any help
25 I was at Pale together with the witness. I was looking at other things,
Page 5307
1 and indeed, this document was together with a large number of documents
2 that we are not tendering, that is to say that had to do with Serb victims
3 in Bosnia-Herzegovina. That is to say that everything that served the
4 Serb cause so to speak was put altogether. I was there together with the
5 investigator. We went to Pale together. I talked to some people there
6 and perhaps it would be helpful if I said the following: Obviously this
7 was faxed. It was sent by fax, MIPBGU, that is to say it was sent to the
8 Ministry of Foreign Affairs of -- in Belgrade, and obviously they then
9 gave it to the government in Pale. So you can see that on the first
10 page. I don't know whether there is any need for me to go into this any
11 further to give the name, but on the first page of the document, you can
12 see the fax from which this was sent. And on the second page you can see
13 MIPBGU -- YU, that is, so that is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
14 Belgrade, Yugoslavia, and they probably sent that to Pale because that's
15 where the presidency was.
16 So this was one in a series of documents that had to do with Serb
17 victims. And the Defence has this, perhaps even here in the Hague, but
18 certainly we have it in Belgrade. These are three or four binders with
19 the names of Serb victims, and we didn't want to encumber the Trial
20 Chamber with this because this Trial Chamber does not deal with that
21 particular subject, that is to say Serb victims. However, we singled out
22 this document because it seemed of interest for this particular case and
23 this Trial Chamber.
24 JUDGE HUNT: I'm grateful to you for having stated that,
25 Mr. Bakrac. It would be far more helpful if the witness told me that.
Page 5308
1 Perhaps you'd like to ask him whether what you said is true and then it's
2 in evidence. I won't repeat the question myself. I'm sick of asking
3 questions and getting no answers from this witness. But it is a matter of
4 some interest, and if you can obtain some assent from him that what you
5 have said to me is true, then we've got it properly on the record.
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Mr. Dundjer, you've heard the Honourable Judge. Tell me, what I
8 just explained in relation to this document, is that true?
9 A. Yes. Everything you've said. Mr. Bakrac, everything is true.
10 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Mr. Dundjer -- actually, Your Honour,
12 I think that the Defence has not moved for this to be admitted.
13 JUDGE HUNT: Which ones?
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I do apologise, Your Honour, because
15 we were discussing the relevance of the document, I'm not sure whether I
16 actually tendered this into evidence and whether it has been admitted.
17 Yes, Your Honour, I see that we have got this document admitted into
18 evidence so now I can move on.
19 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, page 44 of the transcript. It's just taken so
20 long to find out that information that we had forgotten. Yes. Let's go
21 on to the next one.
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you please be so kind as to move on to ID D42?
24 And could you tell us what this is about?
25 JUDGE HUNT: Now, look, we can see what it's about. It's about a
Page 5309
1 list of detained persons, Muslims released from the Foca KP Dom. If you
2 asked this witness to say this, he goes on and reads great slabs out of
3 it. We can read it just as easily. What we want to know is where he got
4 it from and if there is any date that we can identify when it was
5 released.
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Mr. Dundjer, you have heard this, so tell me: How did you obtain
8 this document, and can you tell me something about the date that is
9 underneath the first sentence on this list?
10 A. I got this document from an officer from the garrison command in
11 Srbinje, Foca, a Captain. As for the date itself, I think that this is a
12 mistake. It says 91 here but I assume it's 92. I think it's a technical
13 error on the document itself.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
15 to have this document -- sorry just one more thing.
16 Q. Tell me who signed this document and does it have a stamp on it as
17 well?
18 A. Commander of the TG Foca, signed M. Kovac, military post code,
19 military post code 71, 41, Foca.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
21 to have this document admitted into evidence.
22 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
23 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Just one clarification.
24 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
25 Q. In the translation, it says 1991, so that obviously a mistake.
Page 5310
1 And in the date on the document, itself, there is some handwritten
2 corrections. Did you make these corrections or were they already in the
3 document when you got it?
4 A. It was sort of between 1 and 2, when I already got it. It was a
5 sort of thicker line there already, but in the translation, they also put
6 1, because 1 can be seen a bit better than -- rather than 2. That is my
7 assumption, and I don't know whether that is what you're asking me,
8 actually.
9 Q. No. I'm asking you did you make this 2? Now it's very clear in
10 the copy that I have that it is a 2. Did you make this to make it better
11 visible or was it already on the document, this handwritten number 2?
12 A. I'm sorry, I noticed immediately that this was a technical error
13 and then a correction was made. When the document was handed over, it
14 contained this technical error. I noticed the technical error. I did.
15 JUDGE HUNT: And you made the alteration?
16 A. Well, I did a bit in hand, by hand, because it's a technical
17 error.
18 JUDGE HUNT: When it came to you, it just had "1", and you changed
19 it to a "2". Is that what happened?
20 A. It's not that I turned it into a "2". I just marked it. "1"
21 remained visible as the basic number. However, I made a note for myself
22 on the document itself that there was a technical error. I did not alter
23 the "1" into a "2", but I did notice it, and that's the only thing I did.
24 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE HUNT: Well, they'll be Exhibits D42 and D42A.
Page 5311
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 5312
1 I don't know whether you want to clear that up, Mr. Bakrac, but I
2 am still left puzzling as to whether there was a "1" on it originally and
3 no alteration to it and the witness himself altered it to "2" because he
4 thought it was a technical error.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I was not following the
6 transcript, but I think that the witness confirmed what you asked him.
7 Since --
8 JUDGE HUNT: No, he hasn't. I've asked him quite specifically
9 whether there was a "1" there which he changed into a "2", and he has not
10 answered that question clearly.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I shall clarify this. I
12 understood him to have answered. I was not looking at the interpretation,
13 but let's clarify this.
14 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
15 Q. Mr. Dundjer, did you say that you noticed that number 1 or,
16 rather, 1991, and you used a pencil to correct this and did you make a
17 note of this because it was illogical?
18 A. Yes.
19 JUDGE HUNT: Yes.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you please be so kind as to move on to ID D43.
22 Is that a list of detainees to be released from the KPD Foca on the 21st
23 of October, 1992?
24 A. Yes, it is. It is a list of detainees being released.
25 Q. On that list are there 30 people and are they all Muslims?
Page 5313
1 A. Yes, from 1 to 30. Numbers 1 to 30, all of them are of Muslim
2 ethnicity.
3 Q. Is the document signed? If so, by whom? And did anybody take
4 over these individuals and how did you come by the document?
5 A. Yes, the document is signed. It is approved by Foca TG, Tactical
6 Group Command, M. Kovac, stamped by the Foca Military Post 7141, with a
7 signature. The detainees were taken over by Milenko Vukovic, Commander,
8 with a signature, of the Konjic Military Police on the 30th of October,
9 1992.
10 I obtained this document from an officer from the Srbinje Foca
11 Garrison command, a captain.
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.
13 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, any objection?
14 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE HUNT: They will be Exhibits D43 and D43A.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Mr. Dundjer, may we move on to ID D44, the next document? Tell
18 me, please, is that an order to the Military Police Platoon for the
19 transport of prisoners of war?
20 A. Yes, it is. It is an order to transport prisoners of war, and it
21 is addressed to the Military Police Platoon.
22 Q. Is the document signed and does it have a registration stamp? If
23 so, what kind?
24 A. The document has been registered under number 44-30, dated the
25 29th of October, 1992, signed by authorisation of the commander, and then
Page 5314
1 it has a signature which is Second Lieutenant Sasa Jovanovic.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have just looked at
3 the right-hand corner and see that it says, "Military Secret,
4 Confidential." May we just identify the document and keep it under seal
5 therefore? As he has explained the source, I should like to tender it
6 into evidence.
7 JUDGE HUNT: I have not heard him explain the source. I'm just
8 looking to see whether I've missed something in the transcript. We don't
9 know what the source is. I suspect it's the same source as before and
10 it's released illegally. Why should we worry about whether it's a
11 military secret or not?
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour. That was my
13 proposal because that's what it says on the document.
14 Q. Mr. Dundjer, tell us --
15 JUDGE HUNT: If it was a secret, it would not have been released
16 except illegally, but perhaps the witness can describe where he got it
17 from.
18 A. Yes. I got it from the captain from the Srbinje Garrison
19 command.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we tender this document
21 into evidence as well, with the translation.
22 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.
23 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Just a few additional questions.
24 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
25 Q. Mr. Dundjer, the captain that you just mentioned, is it the same
Page 5315
1 military officer that you mentioned yesterday, from whom you got other
2 documents as well?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And these documents related to the exchanges, did you get them all
5 together or did you get such documents on several occasions?
6 A. On several occasions.
7 Q. Did you ask this officer for these specific exchanges, for
8 documentation on the specific exchanges, or did he himself, this captain,
9 did he himself provide whatever he had?
10 A. He provided what he had or what was accessible to him. That's
11 what he gave me. I didn't know any concrete -- of any concrete exchanges
12 in what I would be given until I was actually given them.
13 Q. And did you -- what did you ask him to give you in relation to
14 exchanges?
15 A. The general sentence, whether he had any documents to exchange,
16 not any concrete particular ones.
17 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Thank you. No objection, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE HUNT: They'll be Exhibits D44 and D44A.
19 Did this captain from the Foca Garrison ask you to keep them
20 secret in some way?
21 A. He said that I could use these documents in the defence. That's
22 why he gave them to me.
23 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you.
24 Well, under those circumstances, I don't see why it should be
25 under seal, Mr. Bakrac.
Page 5316
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I was afraid of having
2 problems in supplying a document which had been noted as military secrete,
3 so that is why I thought that it might be a good idea to have it under
4 seal. That is my frank answer as to what this Defence counsel intended.
5 JUDGE HUNT: Yes. Thank you.
6 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
7 Q. Mr. Dundjer, let's move on. ID D45 is next. Is that another list
8 for exchange?
9 A. Yes. It is a list of prisoners of war, Muslims, being released in
10 order to be exchanged for the Serbian fighters captured. And the list's
11 number is 01/651-2, dated the 12th of July, 1993, Tactical Group Foca,
12 from number 1 onwards.
13 Q. Yes, we can see that. You needn't go into that. Just tell us how
14 you came by this document. Was it in the same way as the previous one?
15 A. Yes. I received this document in the same way I did the one
16 before.
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence would like
18 to tender into evidence this exhibit.
19 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
20 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE HUNT: Exhibits D45 and 45A.
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Mr. Dundjer, Defence Exhibit ID D46 is next. Is that a list as
24 well of prisoners of war to be released and exchanged?
25 A. Yes.
Page 5317
1 Q. Is it signed?
2 A. Yes. This document is signed too. It is a list of prisoners of
3 war.
4 Q. Tell us, please, was the source the same as for the previous
5 document?
6 A. Yes, it is a list of prisoners of war being released in order to
7 be exchanged for captured Serbian fighters, from one to five, it is signed
8 by the commander of the Foca TG, Tactical Group, Colonel Marko Kovac. The
9 signature says another name; it doesn't say Marko Kovac. The signature is
10 of another name. It has a stamp. We have a confirmation certificate.
11 And says that the representative of the 4th Rudo LPB took it over, that is
12 to say Dragisa Novakovic, plus a signature.
13 Q. You don't have to explain the document. I just asked you whether
14 the source was the same.
15 A. Yes, the source was the same as the previous document, thank you.
16 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, any objection?
17 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE HUNT: They will be Exhibits D46 and D46A.
19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Witness, would you look at Defence Exhibit ID D48 now?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Is it an order regarding the release of prisoners dated the 5th of
23 July, 1993, from the KP Dom Foca, from the prison, and the [redacted]
24 prison -- that is the release of [redacted]?
25 A. Yes. That is an order for the release of prisoners. This order
Page 5318
1 was issued on the basis --
2 JUDGE HUNT: You weren't asked that. Where did you get the
3 document from?
4 A. From the same source as the previous one.
5 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, any objection?
6 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, I have a few -- no objection but I have
7 a few questions.
8 JUDGE HUNT: Yes
9 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
10 Q. You just mentioned [redacted]. However, it's Mr. Avdo,
11 Sadimlija. However, did you --
12 JUDGE HUNT: No. We are dealing with 48. We haven't dealt with
13 47.
14 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Oh, sorry, Your Honour, then I have no
15 objection and no question. I missed that.
16 JUDGE HUNT: That's all right. They will be Exhibits D48 and
17 D48A.
18 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
19 Q. Mr. Dundjer, Defence Exhibit ID D49 is next. Is it a certificate
20 of release from detention for Zoran Bjekovic?
21 A. Yes, it is.
22 Q. And is it signed by Marko Kovac and does it have a stamp and did
23 you receive it from the same source as the previous one?
24 A. Yes. Everything you said is absolutely correct. For the War
25 Presidency, M. Kovac, signed.
Page 5319
1 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
2 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I have questions.
3 JUDGE HUNT: Yes
4 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
5 Q. Mr. Dundjer, you probably noticed that this document is rather
6 incomplete. There is no date. There is no register number and also
7 inside -- within the actual text, some parts are not filled in. Did you
8 inquire why this document is like this?
9 A. I received the document in this form, as I presented it. It
10 didn't have a number and it didn't have a date either.
11 Q. Did you --
12 A. I didn't ask why the document didn't have a number or date. I
13 didn't inquire.
14 Q. And you got it from the same source, this --
15 A. Yes, that's right.
16 Q. And did you ask the source if this document is related to the KP
17 Dom at all?
18 A. We didn't discuss that, whether in actual fact it did, but I
19 assume it is. All I can do is assume. If that's what you want me to do,
20 then I can say that I assume it is.
21 Q. There is nothing in the document that -- where you can base your
22 assumption on, right? Because it says here, "Military Police of the Foca
23 Serbian Police Station." It could relate to a detention, one-day
24 detention in a police station, right?
25 A. It could, right.
Page 5320
1 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, no more questions and no
2 objection.
3 JUDGE HUNT: Exhibit D49 and D49A.
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, may I skip over the
5 order and ask Mr. Dundjer whether any of --
6 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
7 Q. Anybody gave you an original of a similar document and which
8 document that is relating to this issue?
9 A. I have got a document, yes, which is in the original. I obtained
10 it from that -- the individual to whom the document refers, who will be
11 heard as a witness; that is to say, he is on the witness Defence list.
12 Let me just take a moment, if I may, to find it. There seem to be a
13 lot -- there are a lot of documents. It will just take me a while. I
14 have it, I think. It is a document which is ID D142, a certificate on
15 release from detention, which relates to Zoran Vukovic. The copy has been
16 presented to you and I have the original.
17 Q. The original and the copy, is there a -- is that lacking in a
18 register number and date? It doesn't have either, does it?
19 A. No, it does not, but the document is an original, without number
20 and date.
21 Q. Who did you get that document from?
22 A. I got the document from the person the document is about.
23 Q. You mean Zoran Vukovic?
24 A. Yes, that's right.
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence would like
Page 5321
1 to tender into evidence Defence Exhibit ID D142 plus 142A, the
2 translation, and if the Prosecution wishes to see the original, we shall
3 be happy to provide them with one. We expect to see this individual in
4 court for testimony, and he will be able to confirm whether it is an
5 original document. Perhaps that is the better path.
6 JUDGE HUNT: Any objection, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
7 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I just have -- there is something on the
8 document that I don't really understand. It says here, "Shall be
9 discharged from detention on 5th October, 1992," and in the next line it
10 says, "The above named was detained from 5th October, until 4th
11 November." This -- how -- can you explain that?
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this person will be a
13 witness, and that's what I proposed. He gave us the original, which was
14 in his possession, so perhaps it would be a better course if we were to
15 ask him because the document refers to him and it was in his possession,
16 and until that time, we can wait and tender it later on. So we don't wish
17 to tender it now.
18 JUDGE HUNT: Very well.
19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Mr. Dundjer, may we now move on to Defence Exhibit ID D50, and
21 tell us, please, whether this is a permit granting permission, granting
22 visitation rights to the prison and tell us who signed the document, what
23 date is on the document?
24 A. This document is dated the 2nd of April, 1992, for the operative
25 Staff Commander Colonel Marko Kovac, but once again we see clearly that
Page 5322
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 5323
1 the signature is S. Stanojevic, signing for the commander. That's
2 Stanojevic signed the document for the commander.
3 Q. Did you obtain the document from the same source as the previous
4 one? That is to say, from a representative of the Foca Garrison, the
5 military person, the captain that you described earlier on?
6 A. I -- just a moment, please.
7 Q. You received it from Lazar Stojanovic, the detainee who was being
8 visited?
9 A. I received this document from the person who was detained, the
10 detainee himself.
11 Q. So, in fact, you got the document from Lazar Stojanovic; is that
12 right?
13 A. Yes, it is.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Lazar Stojanovic is on
15 our witness list so he will probably be able to explain the document. I
16 therefore propose that it be tendered into evidence.
17 JUDGE HUNT: I'm not sure that I heard the witness correctly but
18 he told us it was without doubt, I think, signed by a particular person on
19 behalf of the colonel, and then I thought he gave the name of a person or
20 the initial S, the very person who was going in to visit her husband. So
21 she signed it on behalf of the colonel, did she?
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour. The witness said
23 the signature is as far as he was able to read for the commander,
24 Stanojevic not Stojanovic, Stanojevic, and the person seeking permission
25 is Stojanovic, so maybe there was an error in the transcript. So the
Page 5324
1 signature is Stanojevic, the person is Stojanovic.
2 JUDGE HUNT: I don't think there was any errors in the
3 transcript. It's just it wasn't clear. But it is a different person, is
4 it?
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, but a similar
6 surname. We should like to tender this exhibit into evidence as well.
7 JUDGE HUNT: Any objection?
8 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I have just one additional question.
9 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
10 Q. From the first names of the couple Stojanovic, they are Serbs,
11 right?
12 A. Yes.
13 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE HUNT: They will be Exhibits D50 and D50A.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours -- no.
16 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
17 Q. Mr. Dundjer, would you take a look at Defence Exhibit ID D51 next,
18 please. Is that, too, a permit, permission to visit Lazar Stojanovic, but
19 with a different date, a visit by his wife and daughter Tanja. And once
20 again for the Commander Colonel Kovac, the same person signed, this
21 S. Stojanovic person?
22 A. Yes, that's right.
23 Q. Did you obtain the document from Lazar Stojanovic, who is the
24 detainee in question for whom -- who is being visited?
25 A. Yes. I obtained the document from Lazar Stojanovic.
Page 5325
1 Q. Did you obtain it in the original, which the Defence has?
2 A. Yes, that's right.
3 Q. As we have an original, along with other permits granted, we
4 should like to tender this exhibit into evidence as well.
5 JUDGE HUNT: Any objection?
6 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE HUNT: That will be Exhibits D51 and D51A.
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Mr. Dundjer, take a look at Defence Exhibit ID D52 next, please.
10 A. Yes, I have.
11 Q. Is the subject of this document the release from detention of
12 Aleksandar Sekulovic?
13 A. Yes, it is.
14 Q. Is there the commander's signature, and in the heading, what
15 brigade are we talking about here?
16 A. Yes. In the heading it says the 12th Herzegovina Light Infantry
17 Brigade, 1st Battalion. The number of the document is 49/93.
18 Q. And for the commander, is there a signature?
19 A. Yes, there is a signature for the commander.
20 Q. Can you tell us the source?
21 A. Yes. I obtained the document -- yes. I obtained the document
22 from the officer from the garrison in Srbinje, the captain that I've
23 already mentioned.
24 Q. Is it true, Mr. Dundjer, that you received this document in its
25 original, which I have here?
Page 5326
1 A. Yes, that's right.
2 Q. I meant the previous one as well. Did you receive this document
3 in the original?
4 A. Yes.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence would like
6 to tender into evidence this exhibit as well.
7 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Just one question.
8 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
9 Q. Mr. Aleksandar Sekulovic, is he a Serb?
10 A. Judging by the first and last name, I would say he was a Serb,
11 yes.
12 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE HUNT: Exhibits D52 and 52A.
14 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
15 Q. Is it true that Defence Exhibit ID D53 is also permission granting
16 release from detention Foca, the military unit, signed by the battalion
17 commander?
18 A. Yes, that's right. It is an order for release from prison for
19 Zoran Perisic.
20 Q. Yes. You don't have to read all that. Just tell us whether what
21 I said is true.
22 A. Yes, that is true. It's correct.
23 Q. And did you get it from the same source as the previous document,
24 also in the original which the Defence counsel has?
25 A. Yes, that is correct.
Page 5327
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] The Defence would therefore like to
2 tender Exhibit ID D53 into evidence.
3 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
4 Q. The same question as before. Going from -- seeing the name, is it
5 a Serb name?
6 A. Yes. On the basis of the name, I can say it's Serb.
7 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE HUNT: Exhibits D53 and 53A.
9 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
10 Q. Mr. Dundjer, let's move on. Defence Exhibit ID D54 is next. Is
11 it true that this is an order by the Commander, Colonel Marko Kovac,
12 authorising individuals to arrest an offender and who has the authority to
13 release persons from custody or prison, and did you obtain the document
14 from the same source as the previous one?
15 A. Yes. Everything you have said is correct. This document was
16 obtained in the same way, like the previous one.
17 JUDGE HUNT: Any objection, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
18 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Just one question.
19 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
20 Q. In this case did you also receive the original or this copy?
21 A. I did receive some documents in the original, others in photocopy
22 form. This particular one I received only in copy form.
23 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE HUNT: Exhibits D54 and 54A.
25 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
Page 5328
1 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you please look at ID D55.
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Is that also an order of Colonel Marko Kovac, which was signed,
4 that a military person, Captain Momcilo Kovac, be removed from the
5 military payroll as of the 1st of June, 1993, and that he be transferred
6 to work detail at the KP Dom Foca?
7 A. Yes. Everything you've said is correct.
8 Q. Did you get this document from the captain at the Foca Garrison
9 who wished to remain anonymous?
10 A. Yes, that's correct.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
12 to have this document admitted into evidence as well.
13 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.
14 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Just one question.
15 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
16 Q. The name Momcilo Kovac is encircled or, rather, his number, the
17 number in front of his name. Do you know who made this? Did you do this,
18 the circle around the number 3?
19 A. When I got the document, the circle had already been put there,
20 and it was not specifically explained to me who had circled it.
21 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE HUNT: Exhibits D55 and 55A.
23 Perhaps I would like to ask, myself, the same question. "Momcilo
24 Kovac," is that a Serb name?
25 A. Yes.
Page 5329
1 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, Mr. Bakrac.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour
3 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
4 Q. Mr. Dundjer, could you please be so kind as to move on to document
5 ID D56. Don't tell us about the contents, just tell me whether this is a
6 statement that was taken on the 20th of April, 1992 by authorised police
7 station officials and representatives of the military command and whether
8 there are two signatures there. Was the statement given by a person who
9 is an ethnic Muslim and is the source the same, the one from the military
10 command?
11 A. Everything you've said is correct; that is to say, this is a
12 statement dated the 20th of April, 1992 --
13 Q. I do apologise, but please --
14 A. Yes. Yes. Everything is the same, and the source is the same.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
16 to have this document admitted into evidence as well.
17 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
18 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I have a few more questions.
19 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
20 Q. Did you receive -- on that same occasion when you received this
21 document, did you receive similar other statements of Muslim detainees?
22 A. Yes. Yes. I received several statements of Muslim detainees, and
23 they have been submitted to this Honourable Court. I did not get all the
24 statements at the same time.
25 Q. And what did you ask this military person to provide to you? Did
Page 5330
1 you ask for specific statements or did you ask for all statements he could
2 get hold of?
3 A. I did not ask for specific statements. I asked for statements.
4 Q. And those are actually in this binder, this one and the following
5 ones, were they the only statements that you actually got from the source
6 or did you get more than that?
7 A. I said that a few minutes ago. I got several statements.
8 Q. Yes. But I just wanted to know if all the statements that you
9 received are actually now included in the Defence exhibits or did you get
10 more than that? Did you get more statements than those provided in the
11 exhibits?
12 A. In response to your precise question, to seems to me that perhaps
13 some statements may not have been included. I'm not sure.
14 Q. Is there a possibility that you could refresh your memory? I mean
15 you have a lot of documents. Could you refresh your memory?
16 Or could Mr. Bakrac maybe say something.
17 A. Possibly. Possibly some statement was not taken into account.
18 Q. And why? What was your selection criterion to put them in here or
19 who made this decision?
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm the one who
21 decided. The question should not be put to the witness. The witness just
22 brought me, from the ground, what I had asked for. And believe me, I
23 cannot say with certainty now whether we put all the statements together.
24 Perhaps in Belgrade there are some, because we did not want to overburden
25 the binders with absolutely the same kind of thing. We think that even
Page 5331
1 what we have given is overabundant.
2 Mr. Vasic and I made the selection. The investigator was not
3 involved in this. His task was to help us collect the documents.
4 JUDGE HUNT: That seems fair enough, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, although
5 I would be curious to know what you tender this particular document for.
6 It seems to move precisely what the Prosecution is saying, is that these
7 people were sent to the KP Dom for improper purposes. But if there is
8 some reason why you selected this and not all the of them, at some stage
9 you might like to explain it.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we have already had
11 statements from witnesses who had said that they had given statements at
12 the KP Dom. They all agreed on that, but they did not all agree who they
13 had given statements to.
14 The Defence believes that there was a commission of the military
15 command, of the police and the military command, that is to say, a
16 separate commission, and we will try to move that it was not under the
17 authority of the accused Milorad Krnojelac.
18 So these statements are important for us. We do not want to evade
19 the truth. These persons gave statements. After all, all the Prosecution
20 witnesses said that they had been heard and that they had given
21 statements. The Defence did not deny this, but it is important for us to
22 prove who it was who took these statements and whether there is any
23 involvement of the accused in the actual chain of command.
24 JUDGE HUNT: Is there any objection to statement?
25 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, Your Honour.
Page 5332
1 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. They'll be Exhibits D56 and 56A.
2 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, perhaps I could speed up
4 further proceedings. So all the documents that are statements and that
5 differ only from the point of view of the name involved but the substance
6 is the same. Perhaps we could tender them all together, from ID D56
7 onwards - that's the last one that we tendered - all the way up to 61.
8 JUDGE HUNT: As all having been obtained from the same source.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] The witness said that he got several
10 documents from the same source. That is all the way up to ID D63,
11 actually.
12 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.
13 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, in relation to the documents
14 57 and A, 58 and A, 59 and A, we have no questions and objections, but in
15 relation to the following, we have actually questions and objections.
16 JUDGE HUNT: Well, they will become Exhibits D57, 57A; 58, 58A;
17 59 and 59A.
18 Right. Now you want to ask questions about the ones up to 63?
19 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes.
20 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
21 Q. Mr. Dundjer, the document ID D60 is not a statement, and I would
22 like to know if the source told you what the purpose of this document
23 was.
24 A. This is a report that the operative people submitted after the
25 interviews. That is to say that they would carry out an interview. They
Page 5333
1 would take statements, and then this is their report.
2 Q. But to whom is this report -- it doesn't say on the document for
3 whom this report was made. Did your source tell you anything about the
4 purpose of this report?
5 A. Well, I assume, since it comes from military sources, that the
6 report was made for the military, especially since the representatives of
7 the military command took statements, that is to say, authorised officials
8 from the police station and from the military command; that is to say,
9 that copies were submitted to the military command.
10 Q. Can you identify the signatures? Could you tell us who signed
11 this? There are three signatures. Do you know who signed them?
12 A. Members of the commission. I cannot say with certainty. I don't
13 want to engage in guess work. It seems to me that I may be able to
14 recognise something, but no.
15 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Bakrac, are the names here, do they correspond
16 with the statements which you are tendering? Because it doesn't say where
17 they were interviewed, it doesn't say by whom, except those three
18 illegible signatures. And the words "our service has no interest" is not
19 identified either. But they may gain some relevance if those names are
20 the names in these statements which you're tendering.
21 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Mr. Bakrac, please.
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I beg your pardon, Your Honour, if
23 you mean the names of persons who were heard or are you actually referring
24 to the names of persons who had taken statements?
25 JUDGE HUNT: No, no. I'm trying to sort out -- actually trying to
Page 5334
1 assist you here, to show how this is relevant, because it doesn't say
2 where the interviews took place, it doesn't say upon whose behalf, but if
3 the names that are listed there correspond to the statements that you are
4 tendering, and if they all say that they were interviewed at the KP Dom --
5 I'm not sure they do, but if they do, then we are getting somewhere
6 towards them being relevant. So far, the only one I have read was the
7 first of these, number 56, where he said he was taken to the KP Dom but
8 I'm not sure whether all the others do. If they do, then I can see some
9 relevance to this.
10 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, maybe I can assist --
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, ID D61 will be the next
12 to come. Actually, on ID D60, number 5 is a person whose actual statement
13 we have, Elvedin Cedic, and that is ID D61, actually. So that is the link
14 between this document and other documents. And there is yet another one.
15 On the next document, 61, just like on the previous documents, at least
16 one of the signatures is identical to the signature of authorised
17 officials of the police station and military command who took the
18 statements.
19 JUDGE HUNT: But that particular statement does not suggest that
20 it was taken at the KP Dom. I'm trying to work out what the relevance is,
21 you see. You say that this demonstrates that it was -- that the
22 statements taken at the KP Dom were taken by the military and not by any
23 civilian persons. That is relevant to your case. But nothing here in 60
24 says that these statements were taken at the KP Dom. Therefore, I'm
25 puzzling in my own mind how it is relevant. I thought it may be because
Page 5335
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 5336
1 it linked to statements which you are tendering which state that they gave
2 statements at the KP Dom, like number 56, but so far, you've only given me
3 one name where they link up, and he -- that's number 5, Cedic, and he
4 doesn't say that he was interviewed at the KP Dom.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I didn't want to analyse
6 each and every statement, but, for example, in statement 58, in the first
7 paragraph, it says that from -- that it was men from the military police
8 who encountered them and took them to the school and then to -- and then
9 he says, "They transferred me to the KP Dom Foca." Zekovic, Enes is
10 number 58. And we also have statements of persons --
11 JUDGE HUNT: Well, the trouble with that one -- that may make 58
12 admissible, but it does not assist you with 60 because that person's name
13 doesn't appear on the list.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the name of Cedic,
15 Elvedin on ID D60, under number 5, this person's statement is document
16 61.
17 JUDGE HUNT: Yes. And I may have read it too quickly but I cannot
18 see any reference there to him having given this statement at the KP Dom.
19 So I'm looking around for some link that will get Exhibit 60 in for you.
20 If you can't give me one that does link up, then we will forget it.
21 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, maybe I can be of assistance.
22 When you just compare the signatures, the signatures on the document
23 starting with 56 to -- through to the end of this series of documents, the
24 signatures actually look similar. So when you see a statement taken from
25 [redacted], that's 56, when you see this signature appears among the
Page 5337
1 three. That's why I wanted to ask -- that's why I wanted him to tell us
2 who signed. That would make a link.
3 JUDGE HUNT: Yes.
4 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: And also what we actually checked is a --
5 Mr. Lisica is the first person here on this list. And giving the date in
6 this document and comparing it with Mr. Lisica's statement, it would fit.
7 Because Mr. Lisica himself said that he was interviewed in the KP Dom
8 beginning May. So that would -- but I just wanted to clarify this with
9 the witness, if he can assist, because I was also wondering.
10 JUDGE HUNT: I'm sorry, which statement is Lisica?
11 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, the statement -- I mean he testified.
12 Mr. Lisica testified and we checked his testimony with this document here,
13 and it seems to relate to an interview in the KP Dom and not other places.
14 JUDGE HUNT: That will probably make document 60 admissible.
15 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, but I have one more question.
16 JUDGE HUNT: Yes. You go ahead with your questions.
17 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, maybe that the witness can clarify it
18 better.
19 Q. What about the statements that are listed in the report? Were
20 they attached to the report so that you received those as well?
21 A. I did not receive this report with the other statements. I did
22 not get all the statements at the same time either. I already said that I
23 got them on several occasions, the statements that is.
24 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Then just one remark in relation to the
25 translation, Your Honour. The name number 6 is misspelled. At least, as
Page 5338
1 I see it, it's misspelled in the translation. Otherwise, we would not
2 object.
3 JUDGE HUNT: Well, Elvir instead of Elvira.
4 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes.
5 JUDGE HUNT: I see. I think we might change that to Elvir rather
6 than Elvira. Then there is no objection?
7 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No.
8 JUDGE HUNT: Those will be Exhibits D60 and 60A. The next one was
9 61. You want to ask questions about 61 to 63?
10 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes.
11 Q. Witness, can you tell us something about the circumstances of the
12 interrogation of Mr. Elvedin Cedic in the KP Dom? Do you know anything
13 about the circumstances?
14 A. I can just read his statement. The one that is provided here.
15 Apart from everything he said here in this document, I don't know of any
16 other circumstances, if that is what you're asking me.
17 Q. Do you know if Mr. Cedic was tortured before he gave this
18 statement? Did you hear anything like this?
19 A. I don't know about that.
20 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, the Prosecution doesn't have any
21 problems with admitting this document into evidence, as far as it confirms
22 that Mr. Cedic was actually interviewed in the KP Dom by these people who
23 actually sign it, or this person who signs it, but we have our reservation
24 in relation to the contents of this statement because, according to the
25 evidence that we put forward, this person was tortured at the same time as
Page 5339
1 this statement was actually made, and therefore we think in relation to
2 the contents, we have this reservation.
3 JUDGE HUNT: Well, that's all right. You can note that because
4 you can refer us to the evidence later when we come to determine what
5 weight we should place upon the last statement, "I was treated properly."
6 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, Your Honours.
7 JUDGE HUNT: But it would be admissible, nevertheless, would it
8 not?
9 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, Your Honour, no objection about that.
10 JUDGE HUNT: Those will be D61 and D61A.
11 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, in relation to the documents ID
12 D62 and ID D63, the Prosecution does not have any objections and also no
13 questions.
14 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. Well, they will be Exhibits D62, D62A,
15 D63 and D63A.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence has only one
17 comment -- or rather we would like to keep the right to reply to my
18 learned friend, that is with regard to the truthfulness of the contents of
19 this document; that is to say, that he says that he was treated properly.
20 If you look at all of these statements, the last sentence is basically the
21 same in all of them. That is what the Defence shall also seek to prove in
22 relation to the allegations made by the Prosecution.
23 JUDGE HUNT: But it's not a matter that deals with its
24 admissibility, is it? At the end of the case, we will have to determine
25 whether we place any weight upon a statement such as this in the light of
Page 5340
1 other evidence in the case. We can't decide it now. And you'll be given
2 every opportunity to put your point of view, just as the Prosecution will,
3 about the weight to be given to their contents. We are concerned at this
4 stage only with the admissibility of the evidence. Yes? Well, rather
5 than start a new one, we will take lunch, I think.
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, by your leave, I hope
7 you won't mind that I've been so impatient. I pointed this out and I do
8 apologise for having done it.
9 JUDGE HUNT: There is no need to apologise, Mr. Bakrac. I think
10 we should at all times have it in our minds just what our purpose is
11 here. I can understand why you did it and I certainly wouldn't criticise
12 you for having said it. I'm only reminding you that that's a matter we
13 can deal with later, as I also said to the Prosecution. Right. 2.30,
14 we'll resume.
15 --- Luncheon recess taken at 1.00 p.m.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 5341
1 --- On resuming at 2.35 p.m.
2 JUDGE HUNT: I'm sorry for the late start. It's my fault.
3 Mr. Bakrac.
4 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
6 Q. Mr. Dundjer, good afternoon. We stopped off with Defence
7 Exhibit ID D64. Can you tell me who you obtained the document from and
8 whether the document refers to the question that the Foca Tactical Group
9 is asking the Hercegovina Corps Command with respect to a visit by the
10 International Committee of the Red Cross and gives instructions for the
11 visit which should be provided by the Hercegovina Corps, and does it have
12 a signature and stamp?
13 A. That's right. This document does relate to the fact that the Foca
14 Tactical Group under a strictly confidential number, 02-179/93, dated the
15 13th of May, 1993, sent a report to the Hercegovina Corps Command asking
16 for instructions for its work in future. The document is signed by the
17 Assistant Commander, Colonel Milko Bozovic. Then we have the signature.
18 The stamp is the Garrison Command of Foca. And I obtained the document --
19 let me explain first, because there are going to be a few documents that I
20 got from the same source and at the same place, from the same man and the
21 same place on two occasions.
22 I went together with Mr. Bakrac to Belica, to the command of the
23 corps, of the Hercegovina Corps, and we were told there that officially we
24 could not obtain any documents, officially that is. However, I did manage
25 to obtain this document from a high-ranking officer with the rank of
Page 5342
1 colonel, who asked me on the occasion not to disclose his identity.
2 So this is the document that I got from him, along with several
3 other documents. He gave me several other documents as well.
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence would like
5 to tender this Defence exhibit into evidence.
6 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
7 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I have just one additional question.
8 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
9 Q. There is the stamp that says "garrison command," and in other
10 documents we found this post number 7400 something. Do you know since
11 when they used this particular stamp? Could you see it, from the
12 documents, when this stamp was in use?
13 A. This document is dated the 13th of May, 1993, with the garrison
14 command stamp. I cannot say exactly when they began to use this stamp
15 with the "Garrison Command, Foca" written on it.
16 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objections, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE HUNT: They'll be Exhibits D64 and 64A.
18 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
19 Q. Mr. Dundjer, let's move on. The next Defence exhibit is ID D65.
20 Is that a document written on the memorandum of the International Red
21 Cross Committee and is it dated the 17th of June, 1993, Trebinje?
22 A. Yes, that's right.
23 Q. Is it also correct that it was sent to Colonel Novak Milosevic,
24 the Command of the Hercegovina Corps, with a signature, and where did you
25 come by this document?
Page 5343
1 A. Yes, that's correct. This document, in the header, says "The
2 International Committee of the Red Cross."
3 JUDGE HUNT: Sir, just answer that. The answer to it is, "Yes, it
4 is correct."
5 Don't read it out. We've got it all before us. We can read for
6 ourselves.
7 Yes. You really do -- you do invite him to do this, and he can't
8 help comply with your requests. Now, please let's get on with this.
9 We've got hundreds of documents to go yet.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I do apologise if you
11 misunderstood me, but I'm just reading this to speed it up, not to have
12 the witness read it but just me to read it out and the witness to give a
13 yes or no answer. That's why I'm reading the document, to move through it
14 quicker, and I was just going to, right before you did, to ask him to give
15 us a yes or no answer.
16 JUDGE HUNT: May I suggest that where there is no doubt on the
17 face of it where it has come from and to whom it is addressed, all we are
18 interested in is where did the witness get the document from.
19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Where did you obtain the document, please?
21 A. I obtained the document like the previous one, from the colonel
22 who gave it to me unofficially.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
24 to tender ID D65 into evidence.
25 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
Page 5344
1 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection.
2 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. They will be Exhibits D65 and 65A.
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, next we have a document
4 that we are going to move into evidence through the witness -- the accused
5 as witness, I'm sorry. And I'd just like Mr. Dundjer to take a look at
6 Defence Exhibit ID D68 now.
7 Q. Could you please tell us, is this the report on the complement of
8 soldiers sent to the command of the Herzegovina Corps and whether it was
9 signed by the Commander, Colonel Marko Kovac, yes or no, and your source,
10 please?
11 A. The answer to that -- your question is yes, and the source, as the
12 previous document, is the officer from the Herzegovina Corps Command. I
13 said that it was a colonel a moment ago.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
15 to tender this exhibit into evidence as well.
16 JUDGE HUNT: You're talking about 68, are you? You described it
17 as a complement of soldiers, which -- it seems to me food supplies,
18 equipment supplies --
19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No. Materiel and technical
20 equipment, equipment and expendable supplies.
21 JUDGE HUNT: All right. Then, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
22 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. They will be Exhibits D68 and D68A.
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Mr. Dundjer, we now come to ID D69. Can you tell us who signed
Page 5345
1 the document, is there a stamp, and how you came by the document?
2 A. Yes. This is a document of the command of the Foca TG, Tactical
3 Group, and the number is 01/502-2.
4 JUDGE HUNT: Look, really, are you doing this deliberately, sir?
5 You can answer that yes, and that's all you have to say. Now, please, we
6 do have a lot of documents to go through. Yes, go on, Mr. Bakrac.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Mr. Dundjer, I just asked you to tell me how you obtained the
9 document, and is it signed by the Commander, Colonel Marko Kovac and
10 authenticated with the stamp?
11 A. Yes, the document is signed by Colonel Marko Kovac, the
12 Commander. I obtained it from an officer by the rank of -- with the rank
13 of captain from the command of the Foca Garrison.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] The Defence would like to tender this
15 document into evidence.
16 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
17 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE HUNT: They will be Exhibits D69 and D69A.
19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Mr. Dundjer, where did you obtain Defence Exhibit ID D70?
21 A. I obtained this exhibit from an officer of the Foca Garrison
22 Command with the rank of captain.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
24 to tender into evidence this exhibit.
25 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
Page 5346
1 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE HUNT: They will be Exhibits D70 and D70A.
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Mr. Dundjer, take a look at the next Defence exhibit, ID D71, and
5 tell us where you obtained it, and in what way?
6 A. Like the previous document, the same source.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour --
8 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
9 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection.
10 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. Exhibits D71 and D71A.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Mr. Dundjer, take a look at the next Defence exhibit, ID D72.
13 Tell us, please, where you obtained the document?
14 A. Like the previous document, from the same individual.
15 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. Exhibits D72 and D72A.
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Mr. Dundjer, the next Defence exhibit is ID D73. Tell us, please,
19 is that the Official Gazette of the Serb municipality of Foca?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Is it the Official Gazette published in Foca in September -- 17th
22 of September, 1992?
23 A. Yes, it is.
24 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, just one more question.
Page 5347
1 Q. In this Official Gazette, do we have the decision of the Crisis
2 Staff of the Serb municipality of Foca?
3 A. Yes, on page 8, the decision to found the Crisis Staff of the Serb
4 municipality of Foca in Article 1.
5 Q. Of the 15 members that are listed, do you see the name of Milorad
6 Krnojelac?
7 A. No.
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
9 to tender into evidence this Defence exhibit.
10 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
11 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. Exhibits D73 and D73A.
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Mr. Dundjer, take a look at the next exhibit, please, ID D74.
15 Tell us on page 2, there is the municipality headquarters of Foca with all
16 the command cadres and the rest of the members of the operation, education
17 sector, the organisation and personnel affairs, and rear and general
18 affairs members. Amongst all these individuals, do you find the name of
19 Milorad Krnojelac?
20 A. No, the name of Milorad Krnojelac is not included.
21 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] The Defence would like to tender this
22 exhibit into evidence.
23 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. Exhibits D74 and D74A.
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
Page 5348
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 5349
1 Q. Mr. Dundjer, the next Defence exhibit, ID D75, take a look at it,
2 please, and tell us whether this is a certificate from the Ministry of
3 Defence, the Srbinje section, dated the 11th of January, 2000?
4 A. Yes, it is.
5 Q. It refers to Milorad Krnojelac and is signed by the chief of the
6 department, and how did you obtain the document?
7 A. My answer is yes to your question, and I obtained the document
8 from the lawyer Jovan Simic who was the investigator before me. He told
9 me that he succeeded in officially obtaining the document that we are
10 looking at now, and that is what it says in the header.
11 Q. Is it also true that this particular example is the original that
12 the -- we have in our possession?
13 A. Yes, that's right.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. The defence
15 would like to tender this exhibit into evidence.
16 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour the Prosecution would like to
17 object against it. First of all, as, to the contents of this document,
18 it's more or less a sort of statement of this Mr. Milojica Miletic about
19 war assignments of the accused and his position in the KP Dom. It's more
20 or less a statement and we have no indication as to the reliability and
21 the completeness of the documents that this gentleman is referring to. It
22 simply -- it doesn't give any details of the documents Mr. Miletic is
23 relying on.
24 JUDGE HUNT: It certainly is given in a situation where you would
25 expect more, but does it make it inadmissible?
Page 5350
1 It goes to the weight, doesn't it? I mean, the last paragraph is
2 fairly eloquent as to the weight to be given to it.
3 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I think it is not simply a certificate as a
4 document that you received from offices. It's actually also a -- for
5 instance, a sentence in there: "Did not have a wartime assignment in any
6 wartime units before the outbreak of war in this area."
7 It's very ambiguous what is actually meant, which time period is
8 meant, what documents Mr. Miletic checked. It amounts -- to me it amounts
9 to a kind of a statement, and there is -- in relation to Rule 92 bis,
10 there needs to be some indication for the reliability of such a
11 statement. And even if we call it "certificate," it doesn't change the
12 character of the document to call it "certificate."
13 JUDGE HUNT: But are you challenging that it was something which
14 was signed by the chief of the Ministry of Defence, Srbinje Section?
15 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, Your Honour. It's actually the contents.
16 JUDGE HUNT: But isn't that an objection that goes to the weight
17 of it?
18 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No. I think it's actually a formal objection
19 against the document as such. If we characterise it, despite the
20 headline, as a statement, I think the conditions of Rule 92 bis need to be
21 met, and I think that's --
22 JUDGE HUNT: Which particular part of 92 bis? It deals with a
23 number of different ones. If you are looking at (A) --
24 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, I would actually think it
25 relates to --
Page 5351
1 JUDGE HUNT: It would be inadmissible wholly because it goes to
2 the act or conduct of the accused as charged in the indictment and
3 therefore it would not be admissible. But I'm not sure that's the basis
4 upon which it is being put.
5 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: In paragraph (A)(ii) it says: "Factors
6 against admitting evidence in the form of a written statement include
7 whether:" under (b): "a party objecting can demonstrate that its nature
8 and source renders it unreliable, or that its prejudicial effect outweighs
9 its probative value."
10 And I think --
11 JUDGE HUNT: I'm sorry. What I was saying was something
12 supporting what you are saying. 92 bis (A) can only be used in relation
13 to the "proof of a matter other than the acts and conduct of the accused,"
14 and this goes directly to an act or conduct of the accused.
15 So it's not admissible under 92 bis (A). It hasn't been witnessed
16 in accordance with (B). There is no suggestion at the moment that it
17 falls within (C).
18 So it's certainly not admissible under 92 bis. But then that's
19 the position in relation to a lot of the other ones that have gone in.
20 I understand why you are objecting. I'm just wondering whether if
21 you don't -- if you -- if it was a record by the chief of the Ministry of
22 Defence as to what he had discovered as a result of the search through
23 documents, I would myself feel that it should be admitted, but it doesn't
24 even purport to be that. That's what your point is.
25 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes. Yes, Your Honour.
Page 5352
1 JUDGE HUNT: Well, Mr. Bakrac, how do you make this admissible?
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't agree at all
3 with the position taken by the Prosecution. First and foremost, this
4 isn't a statement or certificate by Milojica Miletic but by the
5 institution, that is to say, the Ministry whom he represents in this
6 case.
7 I don't know whether in other countries, but certificates are
8 issued of this kind in the name of the institution and the person
9 authorised to issue such certificates. So this isn't a personal
10 certificate from the Chief, Milojica Miletic, it is a certificate from the
11 Ministry of Defence, Srbinje Section. That is my first point.
12 Secondly, it was explained that the certificate is issued on the
13 basis of the official records kept by this institution. So it explains
14 why the institution is able to issue this certificate. And from that
15 sentence, you can see information is supplied based on official records
16 kept by the Ministry of Defence, Srbinje Section.
17 So it is not the certificate and statement of one individual. It
18 was just signed by an individual who represents this institution.
19 And if you do not question the authenticity, it will be up to the
20 Chamber to decide the probative value of its contents, the weight that it
21 will have, because I don't see that we're questioning authenticity. And
22 if you recall, the Defence, too, had an objection to the contents of
23 certain exhibits from the Prosecution, but we didn't have any objection to
24 its authenticity, just the contents.
25 JUDGE HUNT: Can you tell me what Article 171 of the Law on
Page 5353
1 General Administrative Procedure says?
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] It speaks of the fact that at the
3 request of the person in question -- of course I don't hold all the
4 Articles of the law in my head, but the sense of Article 171 is that on
5 the basis of a request made by the interested party, the institution can
6 issue a certificate about -- on the subject that is asked for in the
7 request.
8 And if I may add, the Srbinje Section of the Ministry of Defence
9 issues the certificate, not Milojica Miletic. It is the Srbinje Section
10 which issues the following certificate at the request and not Milojica
11 Miletic, the person who has signed it. It cannot be interpreted as being
12 his statement or his certificate.
13 JUDGE HUNT: What worries me about it, frankly, and this may be a
14 matter that goes to its weight, but I would have thought it was fairly
15 destructive of its weight, is that it's inconsistent with another document
16 which you've tendered which said simply that he was being appointed as the
17 warden of the KP Dom, without any limitation at all.
18 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Perhaps I wasn't getting the right
19 interpretation, but I didn't understand the question that way, actually.
20 JUDGE HUNT: Well, let me see if we can find the document. You
21 tendered a document this morning - I think it was this morning - in which
22 you -- it said that Mr. Krnojelac had been appointed as the warden of
23 KP Dom. It was a contemporaneous document. Do you remember that one?
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, we do have a
25 document which speaks of the fact that from the 17th of July, 1992, as
Page 5354
1 KP Doms were established by the Justice Ministry legally, the accused,
2 Milorad Krnojelac, was appointed warden. But you will see in statements
3 that have been introduced into evidence, the accused, in his interview,
4 explained that by the president of the executive council, he was appointed
5 temporary warden during that period.
6 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Bakrac, we would get along a lot more quickly if
7 you'd just answer my questions. We have had a document which said that
8 your client was appointed the warden. I have a recollection - I may be
9 wrong - that it referred to the Ministry of Justice.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, but may I just
11 explain --
12 JUDGE HUNT: No, please. I'd like to have the reference to the
13 document so that we know what we're talking about. Can you tell me what
14 exhibit number it was?
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] ID D30, is that the one you're
16 thinking of, Your Honour?
17 JUDGE HUNT: Yes. Now, that is from the Ministry of Justice and
18 it says he was appointed warden of the prison. Now, what weight can we
19 place upon a document produced by a different department, the Ministry of
20 Defence, which seeks to qualify that?
21 That is a -- Exhibit 30 is a contemporaneous document. This is
22 something which purports to be based upon official records which, if
23 they're at all accurate, would include the document which is Exhibit 30,
24 and yet seeks to qualify the very wording of the document you've
25 produced.
Page 5355
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 5356
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have Exhibit ID D77,
2 and that is a decision of the Justice Ministry, dated the 17th of July,
3 1992, on appointment, and it says that the document comes into force on
4 the day it was enacted, up until the 17th of July. And without doubt,
5 from the 18th of April, when he came to the KP Dom, Milorad Krnojelac was
6 appointed temporary warden by the Crisis Staff, and we had documents
7 seeing what the Crisis Staff were charged with doing when other organs
8 were not convened.
9 Perhaps the document is not precise enough and specific enough and
10 does not make a difference in what you have said; that is to say, that the
11 Crisis Staff of Foca municipality -- that he was assigned to the KP Dom as
12 provisional warden, but other documents and the statement of Milorad
13 Krnojelac speak about this when he was temporary warden from the 18th of
14 April to the 17th of July when he was appointed warden by the Ministry of
15 Justice after the formal and legal establishment of the KP Dom, and that
16 was number ID D77.
17 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour?
18 JUDGE HUNT: Yes.
19 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I would like to add something to this.
20 According to the document P3, it says temporary acting warden from the
21 18th the of April to the 17th of July, 1992, and then "Ministry of Defence
22 Decision." I mean --
23 JUDGE HUNT: Yes. But my concern really is one of weight. I
24 don't see what weight we can give this document at all if it seeks now, or
25 at least in January 2000, to place a limitation upon the clear wording of
Page 5357
1 documents from the relevant department appointing him as warden or even as
2 provisional warden.
3 Now, if you want us to place any weight upon it, it would have to
4 be something which describes to us what are the documents they are relying
5 upon.
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour -- Your Honour, the
7 Defence sent a request to the Ministry and this was the answer we got,
8 that they are giving the information that they have in their records.
9 Perhaps this document can remain pending as such. Perhaps we can leave it
10 for a later stage in the proceedings and the Defence will try to obtain
11 other documents in order to confirm the substance of this document.
12 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Bakrac, I understand the importance of this to
13 your case. That's why I am very anxious that this is done properly. I
14 don't regard that document, whatever importance this gentleman may have
15 with the Ministry of Defence, as doing anything that assists us in this
16 case. It is such a vital matter that one would expect there to be
17 contemporaneous records which would, you would say, justify the
18 penultimate paragraph of that certificate. And rather than have
19 somebody's interpretation placed on something which happened eight years
20 earlier, it would be preferable, from your client's point of view, to have
21 the contemporaneous documents or records upon which this gentleman relied
22 when he gave the certificate.
23 Now, there is a real problem about admissibility here because
24 Rule 92 bis seems to limit all statements to fall within the terms of that
25 Rule, but I don't want this to go off on some question of admissibility if
Page 5358
1 you can get in the contemporaneous documents. Now, I think your
2 suggestion is a very good one that you put it to one side and we will come
3 back to it. It is certainly not a matter which I would expect the
4 investigator to be producing. I thought he was meant to be producing
5 contemporaneous documents which he has discovered in the course of his
6 investigations. This one either stands or falls by itself and without
7 this witness's evidence.
8 So may I suggest that you do withdraw it at this stage but you'd
9 better see what you can get out of the Department of Justice. After all,
10 you said he was an official of the Department of Justice, not of the
11 Ministry of Defence.
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour. This relates to
13 another document but I fully agree. Let us not spend any more time on
14 this. That was my proposal anyway. The Defence is trying to bring in
15 documents from the relevant period. I hope that we are succeeding in
16 bringing in documents from the relevant period only. As for this
17 particular document, we shall do our best until the end of the proceedings
18 to see whether we can obtain any additional documents that would support
19 this document. So I withdraw my original proposal to tender this document
20 into evidence right now. However, I do retain the right to do it at a
21 later stage.
22 JUDGE HUNT: Of course, yes, you have that right entirely.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Mr. Dundjer, please look at document ID D76. Is that a request of
25 Mihajlo Bakrac, attorney at law, addressed to the municipal board in
Page 5359
1 Srbinje to obtain information as to whether Milorad Krnojelac was a member
2 of the SDS party?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Is there a signature and a stamp?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Both a signature and a stamp?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Please look at document ID D76-1?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Tell me, is this a certificate?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Of the SDS municipal board in Srbinje which ascertains that
13 Milorad Krnojelac was never a member of the SDS?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Did you get this certificate from attorney Bakrac?
16 A. Yes.
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
18 to have this document admitted into evidence as well.
19 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
20 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection against both.
21 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. They will be Exhibits D76, 76A, 76/1 and
22 76/1A.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Mr. Dundjer, please look at document ID D77 now.
25 A. Yes.
Page 5360
1 Q. Tell me, is this a decision passed by the Ministry of Justice of
2 the Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, appointing Milorad Krnojelac
3 warden of the Foca KP Dom in Foca, and is there a signature on this
4 document of Momcilo Mandic Minister of Justice? Is there also a seal?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Can you tell me how you obtained this document?
7 A. I obtained this document, as I explained for some -- in the case
8 of some previous documents in Pale, in that part of the archives that I
9 had access to.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
11 this document to be admitted into evidence as well.
12 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
13 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection.
14 JUDGE HUNT: They will be Exhibits D77 and D77A.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Mr. Dundjer, ID D78 is that also a decision of the Ministry of
17 Justice and Administration?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Dated the 1st of July, 1993, dismissing Milorad Krnojelac, the
20 warden of the KP Dom Foca to date, from duty?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Is it true that this decision enters into force on the date of its
23 adoption?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Is this signed and stamped and how did you obtain this document?
Page 5361
1 A. Yes. I obtained this document the same way I obtained the
2 previous document.
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence would like
4 to have this admitted into evidence.
5 JUDGE HUNT: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff?
6 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection.
7 JUDGE HUNT: Exhibits D78 and D78A.
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Mr. Dundjer, please look at ID D79. Is this a letter or rather a
10 document issued by the Ministry of Justice and Administration of Republika
11 Srpska?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Is the subject of this document the regulation of Milorad
14 Krnojelac's employment status?
15 A. Yes.
16 JUDGE HUNT: Was it from the Pale archives?
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. How did you obtain this document?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Like the previous sources? You just said yes?
21 A. Yes.
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we would like this
23 document to be admitted into evidence as well.
24 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE HUNT: Exhibits D79 and D79A.
Page 5362
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 5363
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, there is a set of
2 documents here now that pertain to the accused, or rather what the accused
3 requested, so we will turn to these documents later.
4 Q. So I would now like to draw your attention to ID D88, Mr. Dundjer?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Tell us, please, this document, ID D88, did you obtain that -- or
7 rather how did you obtain this?
8 A. I got it from an officer, a captain, from the Foca Garrison.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we would like to have
10 this exhibit admitted into evidence as well.
11 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I have a few questions.
12 JUDGE HUNT: Yes. Go ahead
13 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
14 Q. Mr. Dundjer, the register number of this document says "BR-SL-".
15 What does that stand for?
16 A. It means its number, "SL." There is no number. There is only two
17 letters, "SL," after number, the abbreviation for number.
18 THE INTERPRETER: Being "BR."
19 A. There is just "SL."
20 Q. Yes, and what does it refer to? The other register numbers on
21 similar documents are quite different. Therefore, can you tell us what
22 "SL" means?
23 A. Well, I can just guess what "SL" means. If you want me to say
24 what my guess is, I will. It's an abbreviation either of "Sluzbeno" which
25 means "official" or somebody's initials, but I can only guess.
Page 5364
1 Q. Okay. And then another question. Obviously someone else signed
2 for Mr. Krnojelac, or is it his signature? It looks to me as if someone
3 else signed it.
4 A. Yes. I have the same impression that you do, that this was not
5 signed by Mr. Krnojelac. It's a bit illegible. It says for temporary
6 warden and it seems to me that it says M. Vojvodic or something like that,
7 but just like you, I'm pretty sure that this was not signed by Milorad
8 Krnojelac.
9 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, no further questions and no
10 objection.
11 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. They will be Exhibits D88 and D88A.
12 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Oh, Your Honour, just -- I just overlooked a
13 note that I made in the English version. It says although the usual word
14 "Upravnik" is used in the original, it says in the translation
15 "administrator" and the Prosecution has inquired actually with the
16 translation unit and this is not a correct translation. It should be
17 "warden" and not "administrator."
18 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, that's right.
19 That's right, what the Prosecutor said.
20 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you.
21 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
22 Q. Mr. Dundjer, please tell me -- or rather please look at the -- at
23 document ID D89 and tell me where did you obtain it?
24 A. I obtained this from part of the Pale archives.
25 Q. On page 1, is there a handwritten note saying A/A and what is that
Page 5365
1 supposed to mean?
2 A. Yes, that is correct. I assume that that means that it has been
3 filed, archived, A/A.
4 Q. Tell me, Mr. Dundjer, is this document signed, and does this mean
5 that there is going to be a working meeting in Bijeljina on the 16th and
6 that it will be attended by KP Dom wardens?
7 A. Yes. This document is signed and it involves what you just
8 mentioned.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
10 to have this document admitted into evidence.
11 JUDGE HUNT: Where is this A/A that you refer to? Is that the
12 marking on the bottom of the page, 1 it?
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE HUNT: I'm glad you can read it. Both of them are meant to
15 be the same letter, are they? Both of those marks are meant to be "A" in
16 Cyrillic?
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. I just asked the
18 witness so that it wouldn't create any confusion for the Trial Chamber,
19 and for the Prosecutor, so that people wouldn't wonder what kind of a
20 marking this was on the first page, but it seems that I have created
21 confusion thereby.
22 JUDGE HUNT: I was just puzzled that it -- that each of those
23 could have been the same letter. What's the Prosecution's attitude?
24 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No objection, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. Exhibits D89 and D89A.
Page 5366
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I do apologise, Your Honour. Perhaps
2 I should say exactly what this means. A/A is an abbreviation for "ad
3 acta". That is a common abbreviation that is used in our country.
4 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Mr. Dundjer, would you please be so kind as to look at ID D90? Is
7 this document, that is a travel authorisation?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Is the date the 15th of September, 1992?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Is this an official trip to Bijelo Polje for the purpose of a
12 meeting?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Does it pertain to Milorad Krnojelac?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Tell us, how did you obtain this document?
17 A. Now I would like to explain a bit because this is a set of
18 documents that follows right now and I obtained them in a particular way
19 so I'm going to explain how I obtained all these documents very
20 precisely. I got it from Rada Sestovic Krnojelac, that is to say an
21 investigator in this case. She stated to me that she obtained this from a
22 close relative of hers who works within the KP Dom in Foca. I would like
23 to highlight something else. As for this document and the following
24 documents, I went to KP Dom Foca several times with persons who are in
25 charge now. I did not obtain any documents. And this was the only way
Page 5367
1 for us to obtain some documents. Thank you.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would like
3 to have this document admitted into evidence.
4 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I have some more questions related to the
5 source.
6 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
7 Q. You said -- I didn't get the first name of this investigator. And
8 it's also not in the transcript. Krnojelac who?
9 A. Rada Krnojelac. She has two last names. The OTP has the name in
10 its entirety on the witness statements, Rada Sestovic Krnojelac if that's
11 of any assistance.
12 Q. And how is she related to Mr. Krnojelac? You said she is a
13 relative. How close?
14 A. Are you asking me about the accused here, whether she's related to
15 him?
16 Q. Yes. Yes.
17 A. Yes, she's related.
18 Q. How?
19 A. She is his brother's daughter-in-law. I think I got it right.
20 Q. And --
21 A. I mean I think I got the kinship right.
22 Q. And you said that she is also an investigator and also her name is
23 on the statements. Did she investigate the case throughout your work or
24 even before?
25 A. We spent some time together and then other periods of time we did
Page 5368
1 not work together. I cannot tell you exactly when we worked together, but
2 we did work on certain matters together. There were different things
3 involved. Sometimes we worked together and sometimes separately.
4 Q. And you mentioned that she got this document from a relative of
5 hers who worked in the KP Dom. Are you able to give us the name? And if
6 you don't want to mention it aloud, could you write it down on a piece of
7 paper?
8 A. I was asked not to disclose this person's identity, but I know for
9 sure not that this person worked but that this person still works there.
10 Q. Can you tell us the profession of this person or write down the
11 profession of this person?
12 JUDGE HUNT: You mean the position rather than the profession?
13 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes.
14 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, the position.
15 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: The position would also -- I think would give
16 us some idea because there are not that many of that -- many with the name
17 there on the list.
18 JUDGE HUNT: It may not be a Krnojelac.
19 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, that's also possible.
20 JUDGE HUNT: Because it's -- yes.
21 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this way, this way we're
22 going to narrow the scope and basically reveal this person's identity
23 without revealing the name if we have the witness write this down.
24 JUDGE HUNT: Well, that's so, but the document will be under seal
25 and it will be a matter which only those involved in the case know.
Page 5369
1 That's what the Prosecution's after.
2 Well, Mr. Dundjer, are you prepared to write either the name or
3 the professional position of this person down on a piece of paper that
4 will not be revealed further past this case?
5 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Oh, it's Cyrillic.
6 JUDGE HUNT: That will be Exhibit P453 and it's under seal.
7 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Another question. You have to --
8 JUDGE HUNT: Are we going to have this translated in some way?
9 Perhaps we'll ask the translators outside just to write it out in English
10 for us.
11 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes. Ms. Dicklich, the case manager, could
12 do that. She told me what it said.
13 JUDGE HUNT: That's very handy. She might write on it then in
14 English what it is. Yes.
15 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Shall I continue?
16 Q. You said -- and we will come to quite a number of travel
17 authorisations that will become exhibits. Are all these travel
18 authorisations that you got or did you pick from a wider selection, a
19 wider selection?
20 A. From a broader selection of documents. Some of them were copies,
21 and I wasn't able to use them in this case and that is why we didn't
22 include some of them, but, yes, the selection was a wide one. There were
23 a lot of them. I selected the ones that I thought we could use and those
24 are the ones we picked.
25 Q. And what were your criteria to select these particular ones?
Page 5370
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, objection. If you
2 recall, I asked Ms. Thapa what the purpose of a document was, and she said
3 that she would not like to comment. I would just like to say it was not
4 our investigator who selected the documents. It was his job to collect
5 the documents, gather the documents. But my colleague Mr. Vlasic and
6 myself selected them. In fact, we didn't select them. Everything we
7 obtained in photocopy we used, with the exception of two or three photo
8 copies that were completely illegible, and we threw those away.
9 So that's what we did, my colleague Mr. Vasic and myself. And the
10 witness can say how he obtained the document and how he handed it over to
11 us, which is what happened.
12 JUDGE HUNT: What he said was, "I selected the ones that I thought
13 we could use and those are the ones we picked."
14 No, no. That's what your witness said. Not the ones which have
15 been included in here. He selected from what he had been shown. And he's
16 being asked what the basis of his selection was, not what your selection
17 subsequently was.
18 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honour. I
19 understood it a different way. I thought we were speaking about the
20 documents selected for the file and the legal proceedings.
21 JUDGE HUNT: No, no. We've already upheld your objection to that
22 on a previous one, but that wasn't what this question was.
23 You proceed, please.
24 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes.
25 Q. Could you please answer? Why did you select those who actually
Page 5371
1 found their way into the binder? What were your criteria?
2 A. I didn't select them in the register. Just the documents that I
3 was given, that I received, some documents couldn't be used, and that's
4 what I said when I said I didn't select all the documents. But I didn't
5 determine which document would be presented to you in the binder.
6 Q. But you said that you selected documents from a broader amount of
7 documents. And what were your criteria --
8 A. That's right, yes.
9 Q. And what were your criteria to select them?
10 A. Some of the documents that I received were useless.
11 Q. Because you couldn't read them or why?
12 A. That's the only -- yes, yes, because I couldn't read them.
13 Q. And this travel authorisation actually consisting of two pages.
14 The second page, is this actually the back side of the first page or are
15 these two different sheets of paper? Do you know that?
16 A. I received them in copy form. This is a form, as you can see from
17 the document. It is a form for travel authorisation, a typed form. But
18 let me also say that there is one form which -- let me just find it. Let
19 me find the others, the rest of them. For example, there is also a form
20 like that but not identical to this particular form. So there are several
21 types of forms, but they're all forms to be filled in, typed forms.
22 Q. But you cannot tell if the second page is the back side of the
23 first page in the original? You never saw the original, is that what you
24 say?
25 A. I didn't see the actual original, but I assume that you're right
Page 5372
1 when you say that it looks like this, the document. That is to say it has
2 the first page, second page, and third page, four pages, but they are
3 about this size. I'll show the Chamber. Like this, folded.
4 Q. Yes.
5 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: The witness was showing D5 format.
6 Q. But still the question is: Is it the back side? You don't know.
7 You assume it may be? Yes or no?
8 A. I have reason to assume - and that's what I said a moment ago -
9 that when you fold the copy, the copy I received and that I photocopied,
10 if you place it like this, you will in fact get four pages, two on the
11 inside, two on the outside. Am I making myself clear?
12 Q. Yes.
13 A. That's what it looks like, like this.
14 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: The witness has actually --
15 A. I assume that to be the case.
16 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: -- put one side to the other so that one
17 forms the back side.
18 Q. On the form, on actually -- at least on the form that is used the
19 most, there is a reference to a logbook. Did you see the logbook or did
20 you get parts of the logbook as well?
21 If you look, on the first page, it's in the lower part. It's the
22 last line. It says: "Serial number from the business trip logbook." Did
23 you see the logbook?
24 A. The logbook where this travel authorisation is to be found?
25 Q. Did you see the logbook?
Page 5373
1 A. I didn't see it, no, not the logbook.
2 Q. Do you know if there is only one logbook for all travelling in the
3 KP Dom or were there special logbooks for special reasons? Let's say one
4 logbook for KP Dom general, one logbook for Drina. Do you know that?
5 A. No, but what I was told, and maybe I forgot to say that, that this
6 is from the accounting one. I didn't see whether there were more
7 logbooks. I don't know.
8 Q. And there is on -- actually on all of these travel authorisations,
9 on the first page there is, of course, the logbook number, but there is
10 also a handwritten number on it. In the document number 90, it's 313/10.
11 Do you know what that refers to, what that means?
12 A. I can only assume and guess what the document means, but if you
13 want to have an answer, let me -- I would be happy to give you it.
14 Q. Yes.
15 A. In Yugoslavia, when you make entries in hand, in longhand, and
16 when you record documents - and this is done by hand, not by computer - on
17 each document, and usually you do this in pencil, the clerk places an
18 accountancy number, but I can only guess that. So the "313/10," because
19 it's different from the other number, then this is that number which the
20 clerk has written in. So the document would have one number, and when it
21 is the bookkeeping recording it, it would have another.
22 I noticed that too. It occurs in several places. Above the
23 travel authorisation there is this number which is different from the
24 number of the travel authorisation itself.
25 Q. Then I have a few questions related to just the document
Page 5374
1 number 90. First of all, the signature on this document on the first
2 page, can you identify whose initials or whose signature it is? It
3 says "Upravnik," the "warden," but could you say if it is actually
4 Mr. Krnojelac's initials? It doesn't look like it?
5 A. It doesn't look like it to me either.
6 Q. But you didn't get any information as to who might have signed it,
7 from the source?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Can you say anything about the signatures on the second page that
10 are in the lower part? There are several signatures. Can you say
11 anything about this?
12 A. I assume these are the signatures -- that is to say there are
13 two -- no, three, four signatures. Four signatures. And I assume that
14 underneath the word "Primio," "Received by," there is "M. Krnojelac" and
15 the sign of the organisational unit, and I think that that is Milorad
16 Krnojelac's signature.
17 And also I can recognise another signature where it says "M.
18 Krnojelac," the person submitting the bill, and the signature of the
19 director, whereas the other signatures in the last column I do not
20 recognise.
21 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, we do not have the translation
22 of the second page actually in the binder.
23 Q. And one more question. In relation to the date on the second
24 page - I only have now the B/C/S version - it -- can you say -- in the
25 first date on top, is it 15 September or 16 September? It's a little bit
Page 5375
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 5376
1 hard to see.
2 A. The 15th of September. I think it's the 15th of September.
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I apologise if there was a technical
4 error. We will be happy to supply that page, with the usher's
5 assistance. Here is our copy of the English translation for the
6 Prosecution to be able to follow.
7 JUDGE HUNT: I can understand the way the translators had
8 difficulty because of the way in which the witness explained the document
9 was produced. It has the whole of the front page superimposed on page 2.
10 Is that the document you want?
11 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes. We --
12 JUDGE HUNT: We may get a copy from you sometime.
13 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Because it's now easier also to see the
14 signatures, because I could only guess from the B/C/S version. Yes.
15 Yes.
16 These were my questions. No objection, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. They will be Exhibits D90 and90A.
18 Further examination by Mr. Bakrac:
19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we have a series of
20 travel authorisations of the same type so perhaps it would be useful if we
21 were to ask the Prosecution whether they have any objections or questions,
22 and we will quote the numbers, from which number to what number. So they
23 are the same type of travel authorisation. Perhaps we could tender them
24 into evidence all together as a set. That might help us, practically
25 speaking, but of course, if the Prosecution has any objections to raise,
Page 5377
1 or questions to answer, we will have to do so. Up to ID D95 the same.
2 ID D96 is a different type of document so we would have something to ask
3 the witness about that. But from ID D90 to 95, they are all the same type
4 of travel authorisation, and unless the Prosecution objects, we should
5 like to tender them into evidence as a set from 90 to 95.
6 JUDGE HUNT: 91 is a letter of discharge. I think that you may
7 have your numbers wrong.
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I do apologise, Your Honour. Yes,
9 indeed. My mistake. I stand corrected. 91 is linked to the next travel
10 authorisation, and we wanted to introduce that by the son of the accused,
11 Mr. Milorad Krnojelac. So they are letters of discharge which refer to
12 him. The next number, 92, is the travel authorisation.
13 JUDGE HUNT: That's 92 to 95 you want to tender?
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, 92 to 95.
15 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, we have -- in relation to 92, we have
16 questions.
17 Cross-examination on exhibit by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:
18 Q. Can you identify the signature of the -- who signs for the
19 director? Are you able to do that?
20 A. Let me see. I don't know what it is on your copy, but the copy I
21 have, it says, in front of the "U", it says "by authorisation" or "for."
22 I don't know if you have that word. It says "P-O," "po." And on the
23 basis of that, as far as I know the writing of Mr. Krnojelac, I would say
24 that this was not his signature. "By authorisation," the "PO," and then
25 the signature.
Page 5378
1 Q. And you had just explained to us how this form looks like, that
2 there were actually four pages, and now we have only one page. Can you
3 tell us why we have, for this travel authorisation, only one page?
4 A. That's what I received. I received it like that.
5 Q. Did Mr. Krnojelac actually travel and can you tell us how long he
6 travelled?
7 A. From this travel authorisation, I see that it says that Milorad
8 Krnojelac, working in KP Foca as temporary warden --
9 Q. You do not have to read. We can read -- what we have here we can
10 read ourselves. The question was, can you tell us?
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence would like
12 to object. The witness is not a witness to testify what happened but how
13 he found the document. How can he know whether he was or was not
14 travelling on a business trip? He is just here to tell us what the
15 document -- how he came by the document.
16 JUDGE HUNT: I agree with you. That was the question before last,
17 of course. There is no suggestion this witness has any knowledge of that
18 fact.
19 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I only wonder if the witness had got
20 additional information.
21 JUDGE HUNT: Well, that's a different matter. You can ask whether
22 there is any documentation or was there any documentation which proved
23 that he did, in fact, travel. I notice, for example, that there is one
24 document coming up where it's a hotel bill, which might help to you work
25 out what a dinar is. I don't think any hotel I can imagine charges 5.900
Page 5379
1 Deutschmarks a night.
2 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I was just actually --
3 Q. I wanted to know whether you get any additional information,
4 either from the source or in relation to other documents, that could help
5 us to find out whether Mr. Krnojelac actually travelled to Belgrade and
6 how long he was away.
7 A. This, in fact, is -- may I take a moment to find my way in these
8 documents? We have a document, BR 248/8, dated the 28th of August, 1992,
9 where money has been paid out, a sum paid out. And this relates to
10 payment to Milorad Krnojelac for -- it was an advance payment for a visit
11 to the injured -- his injured son as per decision number 55/92, dated the
12 24th of June, 1992. And the sum paid was 10.000 dinars, in digits and in
13 letters. And on the basis of this document, it was received by
14 M. Krnojelac, and I have every reason to assume that the signature is
15 his. I myself think that he did go on that trip, he did travel.
16 Q. Mr. Dundjer, in this payment note from Exhibit 92-1, it says
17 number 55/92, and in the document that we just are discussing, it says
18 register number 37/92. Did you see that? Can you see that?
19 A. Yes, I noticed that. This does not refer to -- that is the
20 number -- 37/2 is the number of the order for the travel, but I -- I read
21 out according to decision, a decision, and the other document are two
22 documents. They are different documents but linked. One document is a
23 number 37/92 and the other is 55/22.
24 Q. I only see always the number 92. That is one time it's 37/92 and
25 the other one is 55/92. You said 22. This says 55/92.
Page 5380
1 A. No.
2 JUDGE HUNT: We have lost the sound from you, I'm afraid, Ms.
3 Uertz-Retzlaff. The microphone seems to be on but you may have been too
4 far away from it.
5 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:
6 Q. Witness, if you look at the document 92/1, it says here, to me
7 clearly, 55/92 but you are talking about a 55/22.
8 A. That's right.
9 Q. Where is that --
10 A. No, no, no.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] That was a mistranslation. The
12 witness said "92." The interpretation was wrong.
13 Q. And, yes, where is the travel authorisation, 55/92?
14 A. This is the decision number. The decision number is 55/92. It is
15 the decision and not the authorisation. They are two documents, the
16 decision and the authorisation.
17 Q. How do you know that? Where does it say "decision number 55/92"?
18 A. I said that. I assume, have grounds to assume that "ODL dot" is
19 an abbreviation of "odluka," meaning decision.
20 THE INTERPRETER: The ODL letters are an abbreviation for "odluka"
21 or decision.
22 Q. Travel authorisation, is that not a decision? Doesn't the word
23 already say --
24 A. It's what we call a nalog authorisation.
25 JUDGE HUNT: What does that mean?
Page 5381
1 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:
2 Q. Yes, what is a nalog?
3 A. Authorisation to tell somebody to do something.
4 Q. Yes. An authorisation is a decision, isn't it? If I authorise
5 someone to travel somewhere, I make the decision that this person
6 travels. I don't see where you make the distinction.
7 A. I do see a distinction. And it is a vital distinction. In
8 Yugoslavia, in our country, an authorisation, travel authorisation, is one
9 form of decision, as you say, as you yourself said, but you can have a
10 decision which is quite different. Here we can see quite clearly, and I
11 described that specifically in the best possible way, to the best of my
12 ability, that this was a decision which goes hand in hand with this
13 authorisation, but as a separate document, not the same document. I don't
14 know how this is being interpreted, but we have these two terms:
15 "Odluka," decision; and "nalog," authorisation.
16 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, it's 4.00 and I will have some
17 more questions related to this issue.
18 JUDGE HUNT: You may be able to get assistance from your case
19 manager as to what the differences between them are. I'm afraid I have to
20 say I am not at all clear.
21 All right. Well, then, we will resume again at 9.30 tomorrow.
22 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at
23 4.03 p.m., to be reconvened on Thursday the 3rd day
24 of May, 2001, at 9.30 a.m.
25