1 Thursday, 18 May 2000
2 [Open session]
3 --- Upon commencing at 9.34 a.m.
4 [The accused entered court]
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Good
6 morning. You may be seated, please.
7 Good morning, ladies and gentlemen; good
8 morning to the technical booth, the interpreters, court
9 reporters, legal officers, the Prosecution, the
11 We are resuming our case, Kvocka and others,
12 and I'm going to give the floor now -- I think it was
13 Mr. Nikolic -- no, Mr. O'Sullivan. I'm sorry.
14 We still don't have the witness.
15 [The witness entered court]
16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Good
17 morning, Witness. Can you hear me?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
19 I can.
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Have you
21 had a good rest?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Thank
24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You may be
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I should
3 like to remind you that you are still under oath, and
4 today you're going to answer questions which the
5 Defence attorneys, in this case Mr. O'Sullivan, are
6 going to put to you.
7 Mr. O'Sullivan, you have the floor.
8 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Good morning, Your Honour.
9 Thank you. My first few questions will have to be in
10 closed session, Your Honour. May I ask that we go into
11 closed session. Private session.
12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Private
14 [Private session]
19 [Open session]
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] We are in
21 public session. Mr. O'Sullivan, please continue.
22 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Thank you, Your Honour.
23 Q. Sir, you told us yesterday that you received
24 a drip treatment in Mujo's room after being moved from
25 the hangar. Do you recall that?
1 A. Yes, I do.
2 Q. I believe you told us that the doctor
3 inserted the needle into your arm to administer the
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And your neighbour held the bottle from which
7 the fluid was transfused into your body.
8 A. Yes. Correct.
9 Q. Would you agree with me that at that point
10 your condition was critical?
11 A. Yes, I would.
12 Q. I think you'd agree with me that it would be
13 fair to say that before you received this drip
14 treatment your condition was getting progressively
16 A. Yes, that is correct.
17 Q. Would you also agree with me that there were
18 a number of factors that contributed to your condition:
19 the stress, not eating and drinking adequately, the
20 episode where a guard knocked your teeth out, and the
21 fact that you spent much time outside on the pista.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. As you told us yesterday, it was while you
24 were on the pista that you lost your teeth.
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. You also told us that it was during the first
2 month of your stay in Omarska that you were on the
4 A. Yes. Correct.
5 Q. You went from the pista to the hangar.
6 A. Correct.
7 Q. It's also fair to say that before you were
8 moved to the hangar, the place where you lost
9 consciousness, you were in very bad shape on the
11 A. Yes, I was in bad shape, especially until I
12 was beaten up.
13 Q. I want to move on to a different area now. A
14 moment ago you confirmed that you met twice with the
15 Prosecution in 1995 and 1998, and it's correct that you
16 told investigators from the Prosecution that based on
17 the way the person you describe as Krle, based on the
18 way he spoke, you thought that he was not from the
19 Prijedor municipality.
20 A. Yes, that was what I thought, by the colour
21 of his skin and so on, that he wasn't.
22 Q. And by the way he spoke.
23 A. Yes.
24 MR. O'SULLIVAN: With the assistance of the
25 usher, I ask that the witness be shown Prosecution
1 Exhibit 3/85D and 3/85D1, the photo boards. Can you
2 place both of those pictures in front of the witness,
4 Q. Sir, you have in front of you photographs
5 that are known as Prosecution Exhibit 3/85D1. Can you
6 take a brief moment and look at all the faces once
7 more. There's no need to focus on face number 4. I'll
8 ask you to focus on the other faces, please.
9 Have you had a chance to look at all the
10 other faces?
11 A. Yes, I have.
12 Q. Aside from photo 4, not counting photo 4, you
13 are able to recognise someone else, aren't you?
14 A. No, I am not capable of recognising anyone
15 else. I can't focus my mind back.
16 Q. Does someone look familiar to you, other than
17 number 4?
18 A. To tell you the truth, no. Possibly he may
19 have been there but I don't know.
20 Q. Who is that? What number?
21 A. All of them do not seem familiar. I can't
22 say that any one of them was there now, except the one
23 under number 4.
24 Q. All right. Thank you.
25 MR. O'SULLIVAN: You can remove the photos.
1 Q. Sir, yesterday you spoke about a man who was
2 shot, in your words, you described him as a person who
3 had lost his nerve and gone a bit crazy. Do you recall
5 A. Yes, that was my opinion, judging by the way
6 he behaved.
7 Q. You arrived in Omarska on May 30th; is that
9 A. Yes. Correct.
10 Q. You testified that this shooting occurred
11 over one month after you arrived; is that correct?
12 A. As far as I can remember, it was sometime
13 around then.
14 Q. Now, you would agree with me that you have
15 given three different dates concerning the date on
16 which you say this shooting occurred.
17 A. It's possible. But to tell you the honest
18 truth, I can't remember. It was a long time ago and we
19 lost trace of the date down there, so I can't
21 Q. In 1995 you told the Prosecution, when they
22 interviewed you, that it happened on July 24th, didn't
24 A. I might have said that, but I'm trying to
25 forget that incident. I may have said that, because
1 that interview was two or three years after the event,
2 and now it's even further back in time, so I can't be
3 certain about any date.
4 Q. In 1998 when you met with the Prosecutor, you
5 said it happened 20 days after you arrived, which is
6 June 20th. You said that, didn't you?
7 A. I may have said that, but I'm repeating: I'm
8 not certain of the date. I know that the event
9 happened and that I was present there.
10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation]
11 Mr. O'Sullivan, I apologise for interrupting you. The
12 witness has given you an answer and you are insisting,
13 so please move on to another question, please.
14 MR. O'SULLIVAN:
15 Q. Sir, you have given different details about
16 the person whom you say was shot; isn't that correct?
17 A. As far as I know, I didn't know the man,
18 whether he was from Kozarac or Skela. But regarding
19 the event I saw, I always described it in the same
21 Q. So in 1995 when you said he was from Kozarac,
22 you made a mistake; is that right?
23 A. He may have been from Kozarac or Skela. To
24 this day I don't know where he was from. He was not
25 somebody I knew.
1 Q. Well, in 1998 when you were interviewed by
2 the Prosecution, you said that saying that this man was
3 from Kozarac was a mistake. You told the Prosecution
4 that, didn't you?
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Excuse me,
6 Mr. O'Sullivan. It's the same observation I have to
7 make to you. You are insisting. The witness has given
8 you an answer.
9 Madam Hollis.
10 MS. HOLLIS: Yes, Your Honour. In addition,
11 Your Honour, the Prosecution objects to the question as
12 misleading, and on page 6 of this 1998 interview, the
13 witness says: "In my previous statement, if it states
14 that the person killed by Krle was from Kozarac, it is
15 incorrect. I did not say that." So the witness
16 doesn't say it was a mistake in the 1998 statement, he
17 says he did not say that. And that is on page 6, sixth
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation]
20 Mr. O'Sullivan, I understand that you have prepared
21 your cross in a certain order, but the second part of
22 this must be eliminated as soon as you get an answer
23 from the witness. So you mustn't insist. Please move
24 on to another question.
25 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Your Honour, Ms. Hollis
1 quite correctly points out that the witness says that
2 it was incorrect. I'm asking the witness if he made a
3 mistake. That's the basis for asking that question.
4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Continue,
5 Mr. O'Sullivan.
6 MR. O'SULLIVAN:
7 Q. So my question is, sir: When you told the
8 Prosecution it was Kozarac, were you mistaken?
9 MS. HOLLIS: Your Honour, again I'm going to
10 object. In the 1998 statement, the witness says, "I
11 never said it was Kozarac." So he's making it appear
12 as though the witness said something the witness has
13 denied in the statement saying.
14 MR. O'SULLIVAN:
15 Q. Sir, can I remind you what you said in 1995.
16 You said, and I quote, referring to the victim: "He
17 came from Kozarac." That is what you said in your 1995
18 statement. My question is: Did you make a mistake
19 when you said that?
20 A. I'm saying again: I don't remember
21 mentioning that. That may be a mistake. I still don't
22 know where that man was from, and it didn't interest
23 me. It was an astonishment for me to see a man being
24 killed in front of my very eyes, for the first time.
25 Q. Sir, I put this to you: You saw Krle in
1 Omarska when you were there, but you are mistaken when
2 you say he shot someone. Do you accept that
4 A. In my conviction, I do not accept, because he
5 came at five or six minutes later, the man went towards
6 him, he went towards the man. He raised his gun. I
7 heard the shots. The man fell. In my conviction, as I
8 was watching, it was Krle who did it.
9 MR. O'SULLIVAN: No further questions, Your
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
12 very much, Mr. O'Sullivan.
13 It is now the turn of Mr. Krstan Simic.
14 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Good morning,
15 Your Honours, and thank you.
16 Cross-examined by Mr. K. Simic:
17 Q. Witness AI, you spoke at length yesterday, so
18 we need to go over a few points to clear them up.
19 A moment ago, talking to Mr. O'Sullivan, you
20 said that you do not remember dates in view of the
21 conditions, which is quite understandable. But I do
22 appeal to you nevertheless, because dates are important
23 here for the truth, and thereby also for justice, that
24 you do make an extra effort and, regarding certain
25 events, try as best you can to place them in time, the
1 time when they occurred, of course, as far as you're
3 A. I shall do my best, but I am just not able to
4 determine the dates now, because, anyway, I'm trying to
5 forget these things. I find it hard even to think
6 about them.
7 Q. Yesterday you said that you arrived in
8 Omarska on the 30th of May, 1992, in the late
9 afternoon; is that correct?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. You also said that you came by bus.
12 A. Yes, we came with AutoTransport buses.
13 Q. Please answer me as briefly as possible
14 because that will speed things up. How many buses were
15 there in your column; can you remember?
16 A. As far as I can remember, there were three
17 buses when I was getting on but the buses were coming
18 and going. But when I got on, there were three buses,
19 and my bus was the second in the line.
20 Q. So from the starting point, there were three
21 buses, when you were getting on, and then new buses
22 arrived. Can we agree that your bus was the second?
23 A. The second, yes.
24 Q. Who escorted you, who provided security,
25 whatever you like, in your bus?
1 A. In my bus I seemed to have recognised him. I
2 don't know the name. Drazo who used to work in
3 Prijedor, he was a driver, and as far as I can see, it
4 was him.
5 Q. The person escorting you, was there only one
6 or several?
7 A. There were several, but when we got in we had
8 to bend down our heads.
9 Q. How many?
10 A. There may have been three or four, but I saw
11 him as we entered. He was the driver. And I knew him
12 from the lotto in Prijedor. And there were military
13 persons around.
14 Q. Were those people in uniform?
15 A. Drazo was in a police uniform.
16 Q. Civilian or military police? Because you do
17 understand those things.
18 A. It was the regular blue police uniform. It
19 wasn't a camouflage uniform.
20 Q. When you came to Omarska, you said that your
21 bus stopped at the level of Mujo's room.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. At that particular moment, were there any
24 other buses in front of you?
25 A. No, there were not, because our bus stopped
1 by the SUP building before going on to Omarska. I
2 forgot to say that, perhaps. And one man got out and
3 came back and joined us, and I saw that -- I didn't
4 actually see, but I saw that it was in front of the
5 SUP. And then we went off in an unknown direction, I
6 didn't know where we were going, but then we arrived in
7 Omarska. So I saw that one bus when I was there.
8 Q. Please try and answer my questions. If you
9 wish to add anything, any essential point, you can of
11 A. Well, I think that it is essential that we
12 stopped off on the way at one particular place and then
13 went on. You judge whether it's essential or not
15 Q. Thank you. But I didn't get an answer to my
16 previous question. In front of you, were there other
17 buses when you stopped in Omarska, in front of Mujo's
19 A. As far as I remember, there was only my own
20 bus. That's as far as I can remember. Just my bus,
21 the bus I got out of.
22 Q. So that means that at that point in time,
23 there was only your bus.
24 A. Yes, only my bus. And another bus arrived
25 later on, my one left, and so on.
1 Q. Thank you. What about the bus that was going
2 in front of you, that was in front of you? Where did
3 that bus go?
4 A. I don't know.
5 Q. You don't know, you say. Very well.
6 Yesterday you said that when you got out that you were
7 searched, that is to say, all the people who had been
8 taken into custody were searched, and that a list was
9 compiled, that some valuables were taken from some
10 people. Is that true?
11 A. Yes, that's correct.
12 Q. Who conducted this search? Were they the
13 individuals who escorted you or somebody else?
14 A. I said that when we came we had to stand up
15 against this wall, and I didn't see who was conducting
16 the search. We weren't allowed to look.
17 Q. Thank you. Who took a note of your names?
18 Was it one of the people who escorted you? You must
19 have seen that because you were looking at the man whom
20 you were speaking to.
21 A. At that time the man was not somebody I
22 knew. He had a blue uniform on and he wrote it all
23 down. If I knew who it was, I would tell you.
24 Q. Later on, during the time you spent in
25 Omarska, and you were there for about 66 days, I
1 believe, did you happen to see that man as being a
2 member of the Omarska police, who provided security?
3 A. I don't remember that I saw him but --
4 Q. Thank you. Thank you. You said a moment
5 ago, on two occasions, uniforms -- you said yesterday
6 that you were a member of the army and that you had the
7 rank of private first class. Does that mean that you
8 know something about uniforms?
9 A. Well, I should know something, yes.
10 Q. There is a difference between military and
11 police uniforms, is there not?
12 A. Yes, there is.
13 Q. Is that difference such that your ordinary
14 citizen can differentiate?
15 A. Yes. The militia had a light blue shirt and
16 dark blue trousers, we knew that was the civilian
17 police, whereas the military had the SMB
18 olive-green/grey uniform.
19 Q. Thank you. Yesterday you mentioned military
20 and police camouflage uniforms.
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. Was there a difference between the police
23 camouflage uniforms and the military camouflage
24 uniforms, army ones?
25 A. Yes, a difference did exist, because the SMB
1 olive-green/grey is the army type and the camouflage
2 police uniform was light blue and dark blue.
3 Q. Thank you. You were in the army. Did the
4 army have its own police force?
5 A. Yes, it did. I know that it did --
6 Q. Thank you very much, Witness. Let's just
7 keep it brief. Us ordinary citizens, especially those
8 of us who had done our military service, and 90 per
9 cent did do their military service in our country, in
10 town how were we able to differentiate between an army
11 policeman and a civilian policeman?
12 A. Well, there was an army police uniform, he
13 had the belt, the white belt. And that was the
14 difference for traffic control and so on.
15 Q. So military policemen had white belts, did
17 A. Yes, they did.
18 Q. Thank you very much. I shall return to the
19 question of uniforms in a moment, and I shall be
20 talking about Mr. Kvocka in that regard.
21 You said yesterday that when you saw him
22 first in Omarska that he was wearing a standard blue
23 police uniform; is that correct?
24 A. I didn't say "standard," I said it was a
1 Q. But you said a blue uniform?
2 A. It was a camouflage uniform.
3 Q. Very well. But was that a police camouflage
5 A. In my opinion, it was a police uniform.
6 Q. Thank you. Did he remain in that uniform
7 until his departure from Omarska?
8 A. Well, I can't remember.
9 Q. Just say yes or no.
10 A. I can't remember, but I think he did, yes.
11 Q. I mentioned Mr. Kvocka's departure. Perhaps
12 we should deal with that matter now and not go back to
13 it later on. Do you know the reason for his departure
14 from Omarska?
15 A. I do not.
16 Q. You do not?
17 A. No, I never learnt about that.
18 Q. Now let us go back once again to the question
19 of your arrival at Omarska, in the evening of the 30th
20 of May, 1992. When you were searched and your name
21 taken down, where did you go first from the bus? Where
22 were you taken and put up?
23 A. I was taken to the pista, that is to say, the
24 area between the restaurant --
25 Q. Very well. We'll clarify what we mean by the
1 pista on the basis of photographs. We'll do that later
2 on. Thank you.
3 Were there any people out on the pista when
4 you arrived?
5 A. Yes, there were.
6 Q. Very well. How many?
7 A. I can't tell you the exact number.
8 Q. Well, make a rough estimate.
9 A. Perhaps there were some 50 to 100 people at
10 that particular moment. I don't know exactly.
11 Q. While you were out on the pista, what did you
12 do there?
13 A. Well, I sat around --
14 Q. You were sitting. Very well.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Did you see the arrival of fresh buses? How
17 many other buses arrived and how many people got out?
18 A. Well, I didn't -- I don't know the number of
19 buses. Buses did arrive. There were beatings and
20 screams --
21 Q. I'm asking you how many buses.
22 A. I can't give you the exact number. I didn't
23 pay sufficient attention to that, but buses did come.
24 Q. How many people would there be per bus,
25 generally speaking?
1 A. Well, it depends, but 50 to 60 people in
2 normal times. It depends on the buses.
3 Q. Where did these new arrivals go to? When
4 they left the bus, where were they taken?
5 A. Some of them would join us, and others went
6 to other premises. I didn't follow this all the time,
7 where they were being distributed. At that moment it
8 was a surprise for me to be where I was. I didn't
9 know, actually, that I was in Omarska because I'd never
10 been to Omarska before, so I didn't pay attention to
11 details like that.
12 Q. Yesterday I reacted to one of your
13 statements, that is to say, the way in which you
14 presented it, so I'm going to clarify this point for
15 the Trial Chamber by asking additional questions
16 through this cross-examination, and try to clarify some
18 You mentioned that the buses that came later,
19 that from these buses -- that in these buses two of
20 your neighbours arrived, and that they got out of the
21 buses beaten up and that they said that they had been
22 at the police station. Is that correct?
23 A. Yes, but at that moment --
24 Q. Just give me an answer. So your answer is
25 yes there. Thank you. Could you give us their names,
2 A. Ismet Okic and Hamdija Brkic.
3 Q. Ismet Okic and Amir Brkic?
4 A. No, Hamdija.
5 Q. Hamdija?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Where were they put up?
8 A. Before that we had already been taken into
9 what had been called Mujo's room. I was in Mujo's room
10 at the time --
11 Q. Just one moment, please. At that particular
12 time you say you were in Mujo's room.
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Just slowly. I know you were taken in there,
15 but let's take it step by step. How did you see them
16 getting out of the buses beaten up?
17 A. Because they told me that their bus had
18 stopped off at the SUP.
19 Q. But you said yesterday that you saw them
20 getting out of the bus beaten up.
21 A. That's not what I said.
22 Q. You did say that. You said it again a moment
24 A. No.
25 Q. Very well. Let us go back to the question
1 that was asked by my distinguished colleague, Madam
2 Hollis, and it is page 48, line 24 of the transcript,
3 and that's how I understood his statement. "I think he
4 told us his name but I'm not sure --" no, I apologise.
5 I've made a mistake. Let us go back.
6 Madam Hollis yesterday said that they had
7 gone into the room and that they were beaten up, and so
8 the conclusion is that they were beaten up in the
9 dormitory, in Mujo's room. Were they beaten in Mujo's
10 room or not?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Very well. The answer is no, which means
13 that these two individuals did come to Mujo's room, you
14 contacted with them the first time and they told you
15 that they had been beaten up.
16 A. In the SUP.
17 Q. I see. In SUP. That evening, was anybody
18 else beaten in Mujo's room?
19 A. In Mujo's room, no.
20 Q. (redacted)
24 A. I don't remember whether he was or not,
25 because I came in late.
1 Q. Do you know Half Berek and the teacher
2 Mr. Oklopcic?
3 A. I do know him because I know him as a
4 football player. I would always watch football games.
5 Q. On the 30th of May, 1992, was he together
6 with you in Mujo's dormitory?
7 A. I don't remember whether we were there
8 together, because up until that moment we would be
9 taken out -- I don't know.
10 Q. So you don't know whether you saw him.
11 A. I didn't see him that day.
12 Q. Let us return to the question of the pista.
13 You went into Mujo's room a moment ago too quickly.
14 I'm speaking figuratively, of course.
15 Witness AI, how long were you on the pista
16 after you got out of the bus and were searched, up
17 until the time, as you state, you were addressed by
18 Mr. Kvocka?
19 A. Well, about two hours, an hour or two. I was
20 on the pista for that time.
21 Q. Did you ever see him before?
22 A. No. I didn't know him.
23 Q. That means -- can we agree that you saw
24 Mr. Kvocka for the first time, as you say, in that
25 particular contact on the pista?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. How did Mr. Kvocka address you? Did he just
3 address you yourself personally, or the whole group of
4 200, 300 people?
5 A. As far as I remember, he addressed us in the
6 following way -- I don't remember.
7 Q. I'm asking whether he addressed just you or
8 the whole group?
9 A. He addressed all of us, said that everything
10 would be all right, that we would be interrogated and
11 returned home.
12 Q. Thank you, Witness. Yesterday you said, and
13 that is page 48 now, "Yes, that is how I understood his
14 statement. I think he told us his name but I'm not
15 sure. But never mind. Later on I learnt that his name
16 was Kvocka."
17 Witness AI, are you quite sure, in view of
18 the doubt that you yourself express when asked by
19 Ms. Hollis, that he addressed you and introduced
20 himself by giving his name and surname? When you say
21 that "I later learnt of that"?
22 A. He introduced himself, Kvocka, but I didn't
23 pay much attention to him. I just remember his face.
24 And then when we talked amongst ourselves, I realised
25 that that was that man. But he did address --
1 introduce himself but he didn't say his name --
2 Q. Just one moment, please. A moment ago you
3 said "I didn't remember his image, his face."
4 A. Yes, I said that. I did say that.
5 Q. Very well. So you said that you didn't
6 notice his face that evening.
7 A. Well, I didn't remember it much. I saw the
8 face but I didn't remember it.
9 Q. Yes, you said you saw the face but didn't
10 remember it.
11 A. Yes, because it was all a surprise to me.
12 Q. Thank you very much. Thank you, Witness.
13 A. But that's the man.
14 Q. You have already confirmed that in the course
15 of August 1995 you gave a statement to the
16 representatives of the Tribunal.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Did the gentleman who took your statement
19 introduce himself by giving his name and surname and
20 his official function; yes or no, please?
21 A. He -- possibly he did introduce himself but I
22 don't know.
23 Q. So he introduced himself.
24 A. Well, yes.
25 Q. Did his associate introduce herself, who was
1 with him?
2 A. No, she did not. She just at moment --
3 Q. Very well.
4 A. She just went in and came out. Came in and
5 went out, sort of. I don't remember exactly.
6 Q. Witness AI, how long on that particular day
7 did you spend talking to, and I'm going to tell you his
8 name, to Mr. Grant Niemann, a very distinguished lawyer
9 and experienced one? How long did you discuss things
10 with him?
11 A. Not long.
12 Q. How long?
13 A. Perhaps 20 minutes to half an hour. I wasn't
14 there for long. Twenty minutes, half an hour. I don't
15 know how long exactly I was in there. But he didn't
16 abuse me in any way or anything like that.
17 Q. Therefore, that means that we can agree on
18 one point: that you and Mr. Niemann talked for about 20
19 minutes, and that during that time your statement was
20 translated, printed out, typed out, that it was read
21 back to you in English, that you signed it --
22 A. I apologise --
23 Q. Please let me finish. And that in the
24 English version, you even --
25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic,
1 I think that you are drawing too many conclusions. Ask
2 your questions of the witness and let him answer. Say,
3 "How long did --" what I was saying was the
4 following: Ask questions one by one. Don't make the
5 conclusions yourself. The witness gave you an answer,
6 and he said that he spent 20 minutes in the interview.
7 Now, leave the conclusions to the end. Ask your
8 questions first, otherwise you're going to enter into
9 an argument with the witness.
10 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you,
11 Your Honour.
12 A. I apologise. I have an answer to make. When
13 he asked me, I thought that he meant the interrogator
14 in Omarska, and that is why I said 20 minutes, half an
15 hour. I didn't understand his question. So I'd like
16 to clear that point up. I thought you were talking
17 about Omarska. I thought counsel was asking me about
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well,
20 Witness. Mr. Simic will restate his question to
21 clarify matters.
22 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Witness AI, how long did the interviews last
24 between you and Mr. Niemann on the 16th of August,
1 A. I can't tell you exactly, but it was rather a
2 lengthy conversation. I can't tell you the exact time,
3 how long it lasted.
4 Q. Well, was it one working day, for example?
5 A. Well, not the whole working day, but, you
6 know, time passes very quickly when you're doing that
7 sort of thing. I was speaking freely and so on.
8 Before that I thought you were asking about the Omarska
10 Q. Very well. I accept your explanation there,
11 on that point.
12 That was August of 1995; that means three
13 years after the end of that unfortunate Omarska
14 affair. Did you, on that occasion, remember more
15 fully, better, the events, in view of the fact that it
16 was closer to the time when it had happened?
17 A. Well, I would say I remembered it better,
19 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I should now
20 like to ask the witness to be shown the statement of
21 August 1995, and at the same time to distribute one
22 copy of the English version to the Trial Chamber.
23 Q. Witness AI --
24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic,
25 just one moment, please. Before we continue, can we
1 have the number of that exhibit? I would like to have
2 the number of the document.
3 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President,
4 we are just presenting a piece of evidence and we'll
5 later decide whether we're going to tender it into
6 evidence for admission, after the talk with the
7 witness. Yesterday you said we would assign numbers at
8 the end of the hearing. But according to our records,
9 this is D59, this document has been assigned the number
10 D59. But it is not the Defence Exhibits that have
11 already been tendered, they are the ones that have come
12 up. But let me facilitate matters for the transcript
13 and the record, we expect that the registrar will
14 assign it a definite number later on.
15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] What I said
16 yesterday was that we're going to discuss the
17 admissibility of documents at the end. But while we're
18 working with a document, we have to identify that
19 document and that is why I'm asking, now the registrar,
20 to give us a number for that document. Whether it will
21 be tendered into evidence and admitted or not, that is
22 another matter. But you're talking about a piece of
23 paper and we don't know what it is. So if we give it a
24 number, it is identified. It can be tendered later on
25 and admitted later on; that's another question. But
1 madam registrar, may have I the number, please?
2 THE REGISTRAR: It is D25/1.
3 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well.
4 Thank you. Mr. Simic, we now have the number; it is
5 D25/1. And now you can always refer to the document by
6 that number and we'll all know what document you're
7 talking about. Thank you. Please continue,
8 Mr. Simic. I apologise for interrupting you.
9 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Witness AI, would you look at page 2 of that
11 document, and you have underlined in green the portion
12 that I wish to discuss with you. In the talk with
13 Mr. Niemann, in your conversation with Mr. Niemann, in
14 paragraph 4 you state the following: [as interpreted]
15 "Some of the guards in Omarska whom I
16 remember were: Kvocka (which means hen); Pop (which
17 means Priest); Ckalja, the shift leader; Krkan; Zeljko
18 Meakic, the camp commander; Zoran Zigic; Dusko Tadic;
19 Slobodan Dosen; Vojvoda (means duke); Sasa Stjepic, he
20 only came occasionally."
21 Have you found that passage in your
23 A. Yes, I have. I was able to follow it.
24 Q. Was that statement clearly read out to you?
25 A. Yes, it was.
1 Q. Thank you.
2 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I should now
3 like to ask the usher to give me the English version
4 back again for a moment, because there's a detail that
5 I have to refer to.
6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] In the
7 meantime, Mr. Simic, in the meantime, Mr. Simic, I
8 would like to take advantage of this interruption to
9 say that it is a good idea to underline the paragraph
10 that you're working with and asking the witness about.
11 This is very good procedure for the future, to
12 identify. So it's a very good idea of yours to have
13 underlined the passage that you're concerned with for
14 the witness' and our benefit.
15 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Witness AI, did Mr. Niemann, as a highly
17 conscientious and responsible person, when the
18 statement was read out to you, did he ask you to
19 initial the correction next to the name "Zeljko
20 Meakic"? Look at the English version, please.
21 A. Yes, these are my initials. My initials,
23 Q. Thank you.
24 A. It wasn't written -- spelt correctly.
25 Q. So the only correction had to do with the
1 spelling of the name of Mr. Meakic. Thank you.
2 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I don't need
3 the document any more. Thank you.
4 Q. As we were speaking about your statement, in
5 which, of your own free will, you described Mr. Kvocka
6 as a guard that you remember, let us continue with
7 questions about Mr. Kvocka. Did he have any relatives
8 in Omarska? Did you hear about that?
9 A. There was another guard who was called
11 Q. Do you know whom Kvocka is married to?
12 A. I later learnt that he was married to someone
13 from Skela.
14 Q. What ethnicity is his wife?
15 A. That is what I heard, whether it's true or
16 not. That was in the camp.
17 Q. Witness AI, were there relatives of Kvocka's
18 wife in the camp?
19 A. I don't know. Whether there were or not, I
20 don't know.
21 Q. Do you know somebody called Trta?
22 A. Emir Trta, yes, I do know him.
23 Q. You said here that you learnt from Mr. Trta
24 that the brothers of Kvocka's wife were in Omarska.
25 A. It's possible that I did.
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] What is the
2 objection, Mr. Nikolic? I'm sorry for the
4 MR. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] The
5 transcript. In answer to a question, the witness
6 answered what ethnicity Mr. Kvocka's wife was, but it
7 didn't appear in the transcript.
8 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Very well.
9 Q. What ethnicity was Mr. Kvocka's wife?
10 A. As far as I knew, she was Muslim.
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
12 very much, Mr. Nikolic.
13 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Talking about Mr. Kvocka, let us clarify a
15 few other details. In one of your statements you
16 mentioned, or rather you stated, that Mr. Kvocka
17 occasionally came to Omarska in a white Mercedes; is
18 that right?
19 A. It's possible that it was a white Mercedes.
20 Q. What type?
21 A. One of the older models. 200D, I think, not
22 the new models.
23 Q. Witness AI, we're talking about the year
24 1992. There was a new model -- so it was an old model?
25 A. Yes. Yes, it was a classical type of old
2 Q. My assistant who knows the models said that
3 they were the old 123.
4 A. I'm afraid I don't understand the models of
5 Mercedes. I'm not in that category.
6 Q. Let's go back to your first 10- or 15-day
7 stay in Omarska. You stated yesterday that during the
8 first 10 or 15 days people were not mistreated, that
9 some people even volunteered to be interrogated, that
10 some people after those interrogations were released
11 home. Is that correct?
12 A. Correct.
13 Q. Could you try and estimate the number of
14 people who were released to go home?
15 A. I can't tell you that. At the beginning that
16 is true, some people were interrogated and then
18 Q. But can you tell us, did this happen
19 throughout those first 10 or 15 days?
20 A. To tell you the truth, I can't remember. But
21 it is true that some were released. There were cases
22 of people being released. Where they went, I don't
23 know. Whether they went home or not, I don't know.
24 Q. But, anyway, they left Omarska. As far as
25 you know, they went home, but you're not sure.
1 A. Yes. I don't know where they went.
2 Q. You spoke at length about seeing bodies in
3 Omarska. Fully appreciating your problem with
4 determining dates, in view of the terrible experiences
5 you went through which I deeply regret, could you say
6 that during those first 10 or 15 days, was there
7 violence and bodies?
8 A. Yes. I think the second or third night,
9 somebody was killed in the restaurant. I didn't
10 mention it yesterday. I don't know who did the
11 killing, and that is why I didn't mention it. A man
12 was beaten up in front of the restaurant too.
13 Q. Just a moment, please. So on the second or
14 third night after your arrival, a person was killed in
15 the restaurant.
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. I should now like to go back to an event that
18 you described in some detail yesterday.
19 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] It is Exhibit
20 P3/83. So I should like to ask the usher for his
22 Yesterday you were commenting and marking on
23 this photograph with "X", indicating one person, and
24 Mr. KV, Kvocka, as the other person; is that correct?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. You stated that you were at the pista, that
2 the situation was normal, you were talking, sitting
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Can you describe this young man "X"? As far
6 as I can see, he's coming from the entrance and going
7 towards the pista; is that correct? And can you
8 describe him?
9 A. I'm not sure about describing him. He was in
10 a military uniform. I didn't look at him closely. He
11 was yelling. He would come earlier on --
12 Q. Just a moment, please. So you can't describe
13 his face, but you can describe, or rather confirm, that
14 he was wearing a military uniform; is that correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. A moment ago we were talking about military
17 policemen or an ordinary soldier. Could you notice
19 A. As far as I can remember he was wearing a
20 military uniform.
21 Q. Did he have a belt?
22 A. No, he didn't have a white belt. No, he
23 didn't. I didn't notice that at that point.
24 Q. Did you not pay attention, or was he not
25 wearing a white belt?
1 A. I didn't really pay any attention to that.
2 Q. This area in front of you on the photograph,
3 was any other guard present there?
4 A. There were guards. Kvocka was talking to
5 some guards here at the entrance, and there were guards
6 there, the people who were watching over us.
7 Q. Did you recognise any one of them?
8 A. I can't say now which shift it was, Krle's or
9 Krkan's. I can't remember the details. I just
10 remember this man coming and yelling.
11 Q. You remember that a little bit.
12 A. Yes. It is still in my memory.
13 Q. Did you see this young man talking to anyone?
14 A. No, I did not. That is what I saw that
15 moment --
16 Q. Just a moment, please. Where is Mujo's room
17 in relation to this first "X"? Behind his back?
18 A. Towards the garage. At the end of this --
19 there's the garage and then comes Mujo's room.
20 Q. The garage and then Mujo's room, so we agree
21 on that. This person is moving from Mujo's room
22 towards the pista.
23 A. No, not from Mujo's room. When I saw him --
24 Q. Is he moving away from Mujo's room?
25 A. As far as I know, he was coming from the
1 entrance gate.
2 Q. And when you're coming from the gate, you
3 have to pass by Mujo's room and the garage. Will you
4 look at the monitor, please? Is the gate -- will you
5 show us where the gate is, to simplify matters?
6 A. In this direction [indicates], over there.
7 It's not on the photograph.
8 Q. That's what I'm saying too. So he's coming
9 from the gate, passing Mujo's room, and approaching you
10 to call out people, without talking to anyone.
11 A. I didn't see him talking to anyone.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 A. I didn't say that he went to Mujo's room, I
14 just said where I saw him. That's all.
15 Q. That's fine. Thank you. Let us now go back
16 for a moment to the mentioned -- the bodies you
18 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] And D5/61, it
19 is a photograph, and we are producing it for the first
21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Excuse me.
22 I think that we have to be quite clear now. Mr. Simic
23 mentioned D5/61. Is that the official mark of the
25 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] No, it is our
1 new marking. It is evidence that we are producing for
2 the first time.
3 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] In that
4 case, it still doesn't have an official number.
5 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] But it is our
6 number, it is the number we gave it.
7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] But that is
8 your business, but not for all of us. For us it is the
9 Registrar who has to mark it. So to avoid all
10 confusion, as you see, the registrar was looking for
11 the exhibit and it doesn't exist in the file. So let's
12 be careful. The exhibit doesn't exist in our file; it
13 is the first time that it is going to be produced.
14 Therefore, you have to give it an official marking
15 now. So in future you will say, "I wish to produce
16 this document," without giving it any number, otherwise
17 there will be disastrous confusion.
18 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Before, that
19 was how we proceeded, and I was acting in the same
21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] There is no
22 point in looking for it. Yes, you're right,
23 Mr. Simic. Never mind. Madam Registrar, how will this
24 new document be marked, the one that Mr. Simic, the
25 Defence attorney of Mr. Kvocka, wishes to produce?
1 Will you identify it now, please?
2 THE REGISTRAR: Normally if it is the
3 exhibits used for Kvocka, then it should be "/1". So
4 there is no such number like this, such as "/65".
5 MR. LUKIC: It should be D26. The last one
6 was D25.
7 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President,
8 the registrar has been notified of certain Defence
9 exhibits, but as the Defence has not started its case,
10 all the exhibits have not been produced which we intend
11 to use, and there are new ones that are coming. And
12 the Registrar is trying to find this exhibit among
13 those that I have already disclosed, but this is a
14 completely new exhibit appearing in the Tribunal for
15 the first time, and it just needs to be marked for
16 identification. That's all.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. That
18 is what we have been waiting for for some time, that
19 the registrar tells us the number of this exhibit which
20 is being produced for the first time.
21 THE REGISTRAR: Sir, are you telling me that
22 this is a new exhibit you're going to tender to the
24 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Yes, it is a
25 new document.
1 THE REGISTRAR: Okay. So the number is going
2 to be D26/1.
3 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Could the
4 document be shown to Witness AI, please.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Can I also have some more
6 copies of this? Because I only have one copy of that.
7 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I'm afraid we
8 have no further copies. We got this document from the
9 Prosecution and we didn't have the technical
10 possibility of reproducing it. But we'll deal with
11 that later.
12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, you
13 can produce copies later. But for the moment it has to
14 be registered with the Registry, and it has now been
15 marked as D26/1. So please continue, Mr. Simic.
16 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. You mentioned the pista frequently.
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Can we agree that it is an area, the edges of
20 which were marked by these concrete flower pots?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Now, let us describe the boundaries of it.
23 You see the policeman standing there; you see the
24 first, if we can call it, flower pot, concrete flower
25 pot. Does that mean that the borders of the pista, I'm
1 referring in relation to the "white house," begins from
2 the entrance to the restaurant or the central
3 administrative building?
4 A. Yes. Those flower pots were along the side,
6 Q. So the restaurant was not part of the pista.
7 I think you understand what I'm saying.
8 A. The restaurant was in front of me, and I was
9 on the pista, for instance.
10 Q. Yesterday you said that you were sitting next
11 to the wall of the hangar most often. From that
12 position, is it possible to see the "white house"?
13 A. Not really.
14 Q. Thank you. Having mentioned the "white
15 house," yesterday you stated that you never saw
16 Mr. Kvocka entering the "white house."
17 A. As far as I can remember, that is so.
18 Q. Let me go back again now to the statement you
19 gave on the 18th of September, 1998. On that occasion,
20 did the person taking the statement from you introduce
22 A. Yes, he did.
23 Q. Can you remember his name?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Do you know who was the interpreter?
1 A. Yes, I do.
2 Q. Who?
3 A. I think her name was Aida.
4 Q. Was that statement given in the same way to
5 Mr. Niemann, of your own free will, professionally,
6 without any kind of pressure?
7 A. Yes, absolutely. Without any pressure or
9 Q. Did you again sign that statement in the same
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. So the procedure was the same.
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. So as not to waste time, let me quote two
15 lines from your statement: "Many times I saw Kvocka
16 entering the white house. I don't know what he was
17 doing there. He would usually stay inside 10 to 15
18 minutes. I remember he was also escorted by a guard."
19 A. I remember saying that.
20 Q. Thank you. We don't need any explanations.
21 To finish with this statement, a moment ago you
22 explicitly stated that you saw Mr. Kvocka for the first
23 time on the 30th of May, 1992 when he came to you and
24 the other prisoners on the pista. I have to remind you
25 again of your statement from 1998. This will speed
1 things up. I want to finish by the break.
2 "The first evening when we arrived at the
3 camp, Kvocka was present, when they searched us and
4 beat us. When they beat the prisoners and took our
5 personal belongings, we had to bend our heads and we
6 were ordered not to look around."
7 Did you sign this statement?
8 A. Yes, I did.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 A. But I said that he didn't beat me. Maybe it
11 was translated differently. They were beating others
12 but not me personally.
13 Q. Thank you. Thank you. I'm just saying what
14 you stated.
15 A. I stated that, yes.
16 Q. We are back to the 30th of May, 1992. That
17 evening, did something happen which was out of the
18 usual? Did you see or hear anything?
19 A. I heard but I didn't see that there were
21 Q. So you just heard buses come and beatings.
22 That is all I asked you. Thank you.
23 A. There was shooting too, but I'm not sure of
24 that now.
25 Q. Will you repeat that?
1 A. I think there was shooting too, but I didn't
2 see where it came from. I don't want to enter into any
3 details that I'm not sure of. I want to forget much of
4 those things. I don't care about these people here.
5 It's Drazenko Predojevic who did me the worst evil, and
6 I would like to reach him.
7 Q. Let us bring things to a close. You said
8 yesterday that you saw Kvocka talking to the guards and
9 moving around.
10 A. Yes, that's -- I never said I saw him hit
12 Q. Very well. But did you ever hear that he
13 gave orders to anyone to kill or to beat or anything?
14 A. No, I never heard him say any such thing.
15 Q. Thank you. Finally, just a couple of
16 questions more. Are you familiar with the organisation
17 of the police?
18 A. What do you mean?
19 Q. How it functions, the services, the head of
20 departments, and so on.
21 A. No, I don't.
22 Q. Do you know how the chain of command goes?
23 A. I know there must be chiefs and that sort of
25 Q. Do you know how these people are appointed?
1 A. I think it was the president of the
2 municipality who would appoint them, but I don't know
3 any more than that.
4 Q. Witness AI, I have no further questions for
5 you. Thank you once again, and I must say how deeply I
6 regret what you went through once again, and I hope
7 that you will recover fully, as much as possible.
8 A. That is what I would like too, to regain my
10 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] We would like
11 to tender the statement from 1994 as an exhibit,
12 Mr. President.
13 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] We'll
14 consider that at the end of the entire
15 cross-examination. Is that all right?
16 I think now it is Mr. Fila's turn, but I
17 think we first have to have a break. I think this is a
18 good time for the break. It is two minutes to eleven.
19 So we're going to have a half hour break. Thank you.
20 --- Recess taken at 10.58 a.m.
21 --- On resuming at 11.34 a.m.
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Please be
24 We are going to resume the hearing with the
25 cross-examination of Witness AI by Mr. Fila. But I see
1 Mr. Simic on his feet.
2 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours,
3 just one comment or objection to the transcript that I
4 have received from my colleagues, and that is that it
5 wasn't introduced into the LiveNote, Witness AI's
6 statement, when he decisively stated that he had
7 nothing against Mr. Kvocka. So in order to avoid any
8 misunderstandings, I should like this to be corrected
9 in the LiveNote, or to be reinserted, reconfirmed by
10 the witness himself, perhaps.
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] We all
12 heard that, and everyone interpreted what the witness
13 said. It is true that the witness did say that, and we
14 have taken due note of it.
15 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you,
16 Your Honour.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Fila,
18 you have the floor, and you may start off with your
20 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] Thank you,
21 Mr. President. I should be brief.
22 Cross-examined by Mr. Fila:
23 Q. In your testimony -- first of all, good
24 morning, Witness, Witness AI. I don't like using the
25 initials, but anyway. You said at the start of your
1 testimony that when you came on the 30th of May, there
2 were military men and special units from Banja Luka,
3 and later on you spoke about the guards as well. Now,
4 are these three different things you're talking about,
5 or were these elite units and the army the same? Could
6 you tell me a little more about that?
7 A. I think it was the special police, the
8 special police unit that was there. And after a
9 certain amount of time they left.
10 Q. Very well. That's one point.
11 A. Second, the guards. The guards were those
12 who were wearing uniforms. Some had military uniforms,
13 others had police uniforms.
14 Q. So there were two categories: these special
15 units and the guards.
16 A. Yes. But a third category --
17 Q. Yes, well, the army. What do you mean by a
18 third category?
19 A. Yes. There was a third category, the army.
20 Q. So there wasn't anything --
21 A. Well, as I say, there was the special police
22 unit and these others in these mixed uniforms.
23 Q. Very well, we've cleared that point up. Now,
24 I'm interested in the following: These special units,
25 do you know under whose command they were?
1 A. No.
2 Q. Did the guard -- was the guard in command of
3 these special units?
4 A. I don't know.
5 Q. So that's another point. You don't know the
6 relationship between the special units who came and
7 went and the guards that were there until the end, all
8 the time you were there.
9 A. That's right. I don't know.
10 Q. Did some of these people have green uniforms,
11 camouflage uniforms or ordinary green uniforms?
12 A. Well, they had the army olive-green/grey
13 uniforms. The guards did too.
14 Q. Now, those wearing those olive-green
15 uniforms, did you see them throughout your stay there
16 or did they go off somewhere?
17 A. Well, the guards had these -- both these
19 Q. But what about the army? I'm interested in
20 the army.
21 A. Well, I can't remember. I can't remember the
22 details of who was wearing what and who belonged to
23 which forces.
24 Q. Sir, please don't tell me anything you don't
25 remember, and I don't mind if you tell me that you
1 don't remember. And I would find it very strange if I
2 were to remember anything in those circumstances
3 either, so I do understand.
4 The next question I'm interested in is the
5 following: You said that someone seems to have done
6 the schedules for the guards and shifts in advance.
7 What did you mean by that?
8 A. I think that the leader of the shift knew
9 which guard would be assigned to which position, so
10 that's what I meant, where they would be on duty, on
11 guard duty.
12 Q. Were always the same people in the same
14 A. No.
15 Q. But it wasn't as you did the thing, that you
16 would say, "You go there and you go here," but they
17 knew this in advance.
18 A. Well, as far as I remember, that's how it
20 Q. I just wanted to clarify what you meant when
21 you said that. Would you now explain the following to
22 us: What would a shift look like, that is to say, how
23 did the shifts replace each other?
24 A. Well, as far as I remember the shift would
25 come in by bus, they would walk in a column and they
1 took up their posts.
2 Q. What about the previous shift?
3 A. The previous shift would go away. And they
4 would come up towards the restaurant mostly and then
5 would go into the buses.
6 Q. You mean the shift that was leaving?
7 A. Yes, as far as I remember.
8 Q. Do you know where Krkan was standing? Where
9 did he move around? Where did you see him?
10 A. Well, I would see him walking around. He
11 didn't have any set post or position where he stood.
12 Q. Did you ever see him go to the restaurant?
13 Did you ever see him go up -- go through that
14 protrusion there on the building?
15 A. Well, yes, I saw him go there, into the
16 restaurant, he would walk around the pista, and so on.
17 He didn't have a set position.
18 Q. In that glass house, did you see him standing
20 A. Well, I didn't follow him around, of course,
21 but I would see him. When I see him, I see him,
22 depending on where he was, whether he was in the
23 restaurant or elsewhere, inside the restaurant, by the
24 restaurant, wherever.
25 Q. You mean this glass semicircular partition,
1 do you not?
2 A. Yes, I do.
3 Q. You told us that Drazenko Predojevic beat you
4 for some reason but you didn't know why?
5 A. That's right, I didn't know why.
6 Q. Did he do this following orders? Did
7 somebody come and order him to hit someone?
8 A. Well, I didn't see him ordered by anyone, by
9 the shift leader or anybody else. I can't say that. I
10 don't know.
11 Q. Was it necessary for anybody to order
12 somebody to beat one of the detainees, or did they beat
13 them at random?
14 A. Well, my conclusion is that they beat them at
16 Q. Will you agree with me, then, that it was a
17 state of anarchy?
18 A. Well, yes, but I don't know whether they were
19 told to or not. I didn't hear anybody order one of
20 them to beat the people.
21 Q. Did you complain to anybody about Drazenko
23 A. I didn't dare complain.
24 Q. Very well, then. That means you did not
1 A. That's right, I did not.
2 Q. During the time you spent in Omarska, where
3 was your family?
4 A. When I went home, I learnt that they had been
5 in the Raskovic house.
6 Q. In Prijedor, you mean?
7 A. Yes, in Prijedor.
8 Q. Were they harmed by anybody?
9 A. Well, my father told me later on that they
10 searched the house and that they looted him once and
11 that his ID card was found in another house later on.
12 So things like that did happen, and that's what my
13 father told me happened.
14 Q. When you were released, you went to that
16 A. Yes, to that house.
17 Q. In the last seven to ten days of your stay in
18 Omarska, did the situation improve at all?
19 A. Well, as far as I was able to remember, a
20 little bit. There wasn't so much beating going on.
21 Q. When did you leave Omarska?
22 A. As far as I remember, on the 6th --
23 Q. And ten days before that, the situation had
25 A. Well, yes, but the beatings did go on, the
1 roll-calls did go on, but I felt that it was slightly
2 better. I felt a little safer where I was in those
3 last days, but what actually happened, I don't know.
4 Q. When the shifts would replace each other,
5 apart from what you have just described, the
6 replacement of shifts, that is to say, one shift
7 leaving and another arriving, was there anything else
8 when you were on the pista? What did you do on the
9 pista? What did you do on the pista while the shifts
10 were taking each other's turn?
11 A. Well, it depends. We would have to lie down
12 on our stomachs --
13 Q. I'm just interested in the shifts.
14 A. Well, when the shift would come, if there had
15 been beatings, we would all be told to lie face down on
16 the pista and we would do this for hours at times. And
17 I wasn't able to see the details. I can't remember
18 anything special.
19 Q. Let me help you. Was there a ceremony of any
21 A. Well, I don't know. No.
22 Q. So it was just that one shift arrived and the
23 other shift left.
24 A. I didn't notice anything, no.
25 Q. Did this happen in the morning and in the
1 evening, that is to say, did the shifts replace each
2 other in the morning and in the evening?
3 A. When I was in the restaurant --
4 Q. I'm asking you when you saw this. If you
5 didn't see anything, don't tell us, please.
6 A. Well, had I seen anything, I would tell you,
7 but I didn't actually see anything.
8 Q. Can we then conclude that you didn't notice
9 any ceremony taking place when the shifts replaced each
11 A. That's correct.
12 Q. Thank you very much.
13 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] That's all from
14 me, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you,
16 Mr. Fila. It is now Mr. Tosic's team who has the
18 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] If I may,
19 Your Honours. The order of the cross-examination will
20 be done by myself and Mr. Tosic, we shall take turns.
21 But I will start off.
22 Cross-examined by Mr. Stojanovic:
23 Q. Let me introduce myself to the witness, I'm
24 attorney Slobodan Stojanovic from Belgrade, and I'm one
25 of the Defence counsel from Mr. Zoran Zigic.
1 MS. HOLLIS: Excuse me, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Madam
4 MS. HOLLIS: Could the Prosecution have a
5 clarification on that? Is it going to be permitted
6 that more than one counsel from a team will be
7 permitted to question a witness? Because we object to
8 that. That could permits lead to ten people examining
9 a witness.
10 In our submission it should be one person
11 from each team who is allowed to question the witness.
12 We thought that was what had already been discussed.
13 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] If I may,
14 Your Honour. Let me clarify that. No, I shall only be
15 asking questions of the witness. Just one member from
16 our team. So that was a misunderstanding. That's it.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you,
18 Madam Hollis.
19 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Witness AI, it is not customary to address
21 people in that way, but I shall respect this rule and
22 address you as "AI." And I hope you will help the
23 Defence in arriving at the truth by your answers.
24 We shall adhere to a sequence of events which
25 you talk about in both your written statements and in
1 your oral testimony. I think that in the first
2 statement it says that on the 30th of May, 1992
3 Prijedor was attacked. Can you tell us something about
4 that? Why was Prijedor attacked?
5 A. Well, to tell you the truth, why it was
6 attacked, I think it was to liberate Prijedor, and
7 power was taken over forcefully. But I wasn't
8 interested in politics so I don't know the details of
10 Q. Who attacked Prijedor? Whose forces?
11 A. Well, to tell you the truth, I don't know.
12 And later on I met -- there was this Slavko, but I
13 didn't know him, so I can't really say which army
14 attacked. I can't say.
15 Q. On that day, when your father's house -- when
16 the shooting started, I think you said that --
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. -- and I think that you said you felt safer
19 in that place. Does that mean that you expected some
21 A. No, I did not. But before that there was
22 some shooting, whether it was at Kozarac, I don't know
23 the details, so that we gathered together in my
24 father's house. We felt safer there because there were
25 women and children there, and that's why we gathered
1 there, for safety reasons.
2 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] If I may,
3 Your Honour, I should like to ask an exceptionally
4 important question now by your leave, that is to say,
5 I'd like my client Zoran Zigic to get up so that we can
6 pose a very direct question. And our client insists on
7 this especially. Do we have your permission for him to
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I don't
10 think so. I think the Prosecution carried out the
11 procedure of identification, and we must mirror this
12 procedure in the cross-examination. So you can ask the
13 witness, and there are no questions that are more or
14 less important here in this courtroom. There are only
15 questions. So please say questions without saying that
16 this is a very important question. All questions are
18 Please go ahead, Mr. Stojanovic.
19 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your
20 Honours, I was just making an explanation, but I accept
21 your ruling, of course. Therefore, my client Zoran
22 Zigic today is dressed the way the SMB olive-grey
23 uniform, and he would like to ask -- that is, I would
24 like to ask, is this gentleman here the individual who
25 called out --
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Madam
3 MS. HOLLIS: Your Honour, we object to this
4 statement that this accused is dressed like the SMB
5 uniform. That is a statement of fact. The attorney
6 cannot testify. If the attorney wishes to ask the
7 client if any -- the witness if anyone in the room is
8 dressed like that, we suggest that would be
9 appropriate. But we do object to a flat statement that
10 anyone in this room is dressed like the SMB uniform.
11 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] I
12 apologise. I didn't say he was wearing that particular
13 clothing, but that the colour is similar.
14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes,
15 Mr. Stojanovic, you can ask the witness the following
16 question: What was your client dressed like? You
17 cannot put answers into his mouth and plead instead of
18 him. So you can ask him how your client is or was
20 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Well, I
21 won't be asking that question. Let me ask a direct
22 question, then. I shall point to Mr. -- I think that
23 that is the gentleman in the first row, he is sitting
24 to the left-hand side.
25 Q. Is that the gentleman who called --
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] No. No.
2 Excuse me, Mr. Stojanovic. I think that you are
3 obstructing our work here at the moment. We have just
4 said that you cannot say that your client is dressed in
5 such and such a way. You cannot say that your client
6 is in the first row either, on the right-hand side.
7 You must ask the witness whether he sees your client or
9 Do you understand what I'm getting at? Do
10 you understand what we're trying to point out here,
11 Mr. Stojanovic? You are insisting upon the same point
12 that we have not authorised you to do. Check whole
13 exchange with SM.
14 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour,
15 let me restate the question.
16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes.
17 Please do reformulate the question. Go ahead, ask your
18 question, put your question to it, but do not elicit an
20 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Does the witness see in this courtroom the
22 individual who called Kiki, Rezak, and Began Beganovic
24 A. I don't remember his face exactly. I didn't
25 look at him too much. And I don't know him, I don't
1 recognise him, and I don't wish to speak about that.
2 Q. Thank you. In your statement of 1998, did
3 you say that Zoran Zigic has light brown hair?
4 A. Possibly I did, possibly I said that, but I
5 always said that I didn't see him properly and didn't
6 actually take note of what he looked like, so I can't
7 really say. I just heard a voice.
8 Q. If you cannot state that, then, I would like
9 to point it out in your statement.
10 A. The man didn't come all the time. He wasn't
11 in the camp non-stop, so I couldn't see -- I didn't see
12 him much, and I didn't know him so I don't want to
13 say -- talk about things I don't know. I heard some
14 things, of course. Possibly I had seen him, possibly I
15 saw him, but I wasn't -- I didn't dare look.
16 Q. I just asked a direct question. Did you
17 state in that statement of yours, dated 1998, that
18 Zoran Zigic was 40 years old?
19 A. Possibly I did say that, but different people
20 came to me and I mixed them up. But as I didn't know
21 him personally, perhaps I did say that, but once again
22 I state I did not know him personally.
23 Q. The individual with light brown hair, did
24 that individual call out Began, Kiki, and Rezak?
25 A. Well, I said, and I remember that there was
1 an individual with brown hair. Now, whether that was
2 Zigic or anybody else. But at one point I heard a
3 voice say "Kiki, Zigic wants you."
4 Q. But you said brown hair?
5 A. Yes, I did, but whether that was actually
6 Zigic or another person, I cannot confirm that at this
7 point because I didn't know him.
8 Q. You told us yesterday that Kiki did move
9 towards the "white house," as he was called out to do?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. What about the other two, Rezak and
13 A. I said that I did not know -- I just said I
14 saw Kiki. But whether that happened on that occasion
15 or another occasion, I cannot assert that.
16 Q. Is it correct that --
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I
18 apologise, Mr. Stojanovic. Could you make pauses
19 between your questions and the witness' answers,
20 otherwise we have great difficulty in the
21 interpretation because your voices overlap. Thank you,
22 Mr. Stojanovic.
23 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your
24 Honours. I do apologise, and I shall do my best.
25 Q. Did you, when the Prosecution showed you a
1 photo spread, did you recognise the individual who
2 called Kiki, Rezak, and Began out and took them off to
3 the "white house"?
4 A. I don't remember recognising them,
5 identifying them.
6 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour,
7 the Defence will not be tendering an exhibit which has
8 already been tendered by the Prosecution, but I would
9 like to refer to Exhibit 3/83A, B, C, and D, and D1,
10 which was presented yesterday by the Prosecution.
11 Q. You said that afterwards you only saw Kiki
12 all bloody, coming out of the "white house"; is that
14 A. Yes. Yes.
15 Q. How far were you able to see him? How far
16 were you able to watch him walk? Was it in a path in
17 front of the "white house"?
18 A. Well, I was lying down so I could see him
19 walk for a metre or two.
20 Q. Where was he then?
21 A. Who?
22 Q. Kiki.
23 A. He was moving towards the restaurant, on the
24 concrete flower pots.
25 Q. So he was on the pista, was he?
1 A. No, behind, because we were lying down on the
2 pista, on the concrete, the asphalt on the pista. I
3 saw that.
4 Q. I'm afraid I didn't understand. Which path
5 are you talking about?
6 A. Well, there were flowers. We were on the
7 pista, there were flowers, and he was the other side.
8 I saw him pass the other side.
9 Q. How far away from the "white house" was that?
10 A. Quite far away, I would say.
11 Q. Was he alone on the occasion?
12 A. He was followed -- escorted by a guard. I
13 saw a number of people. I saw one guard. Who else was
14 there, I don't know. As I say, we were all lying down,
15 and if a guard would notice you looking, he would beat
16 you again.
17 Q. Let us now move on to another area. You
18 received a decision on the termination of your
19 employment for your participation in the rebellion.
20 A. When I got out of the camp, I went to report
21 to my company and I was told to go to the
22 administrative department to see whether I was on the
23 list for termination of employment. And that's what I
24 got, in fact, this decision whereby my employment was
25 terminated and I was no longer able to go to work. I
1 didn't have a job anymore.
2 Q. Did you appeal against that decision?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Does that mean that you did not protest
5 against the allegation that you had taken part in an
6 armed rebellion?
7 A. I know where I was, where I had come from, I
8 knew what the situation was like. I took the decision
9 and went back home. I feared any consequences. And
10 when I read it, I signed it. I was so afraid that I
11 had to.
12 Q. After you left, did your father stay in
14 A. Yes, until 1995.
15 Q. While you were in Prijedor, after you left
16 Trnopolje, until April 1993, did you use power and the
17 telephone in your house?
18 A. I didn't use the telephone. We had
19 electricity when there was any electricity, but there
20 were power cuts often.
21 Q. Do you have in your possession any documents
22 about the fact that you had to sign off your property?
23 A. Personally I do not have possession of those
24 documents, but my wife brought them to me in Trnopolje
25 for me to be able to leave Trnopolje. I didn't dare
1 carry any other documents when I left for Croatia.
2 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] I wish to
3 thank the witness, and I have no further questions.
4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
5 very much, Mr. Stojanovic.
6 Madam Hollis, do you have any
8 MS. HOLLIS: I do, Your Honour. Thank you.
9 Re-examined by Ms. Hollis:
10 Q. Sir, you were asked questions about the drip
11 that you gave -- that you were given by the detainee
12 doctor. Do you know who gave the doctor that drip?
13 A. No, I don't know who gave it to him. But I
14 did receive it.
15 Q. Do you know if it was given to him
16 specifically to be used by you?
17 A. At the time I didn't know. How he got it, I
18 just don't know.
19 Q. Now, during cross-examination you were asked
20 if you stayed on the pista for your first month.
21 During direct examination, you said you stayed on the
22 pista more than one month. Can you tell the Court, how
23 long did you stay on the pista? Was it one month or
24 was it longer than one month?
25 A. For more than one month, but we slept
1 inside. I may have spent 10 to 20 days in the hangar,
2 and then later in Mujo's room, but I spent most of my
3 time on the pista.
4 Q. Now, you were asked today about uniforms that
5 Kvocka wore and you indicated that he wore a police
6 camouflage uniform. Are you able today to remember
7 what other uniforms, if any, Kvocka may have worn?
8 A. I cannot remember. He may have wore other
9 uniforms but I cannot remember. I can't remember what
10 kind of uniforms people wore, and I wouldn't like to
11 give an incorrect answer. So I just can't recall now.
12 Q. Now, you were also asked about two men you
13 knew who were beaten, Ismet Okic and Hamdija Brkic.
14 Now, when you were in Omarska, that first night you
15 were there, where were you when you first saw these two
17 A. In Mujo's dormitory when I saw them for the
18 first time, and they told us that they had been
20 Q. When you saw them in Mujo's room, did you
21 observe any physical signs of beating?
22 A. They were swollen, with bloodstains. It was
23 visible. One could see it on their face. Of course I
24 saw it.
25 Q. And I believe you testified they told you
1 they had been beaten at the SUP.
2 A. Yes, that's what they said. And even if they
3 hadn't said it, it was visible. They were neighbours,
4 they were there together, so he told his brother.
5 Q. Now, that night in Mujo's room, were they
6 beaten in Mujo's room?
7 A. As far as I can remember, no, they were not,
8 while I was there.
9 Q. Also, speaking about Mujo's room, you said
10 that you went into Mujo's room late that night. When
11 you went into Mujo's room, how many people were in that
13 A. Quite a number of people. I tried to find
14 the best place for myself to be able to sit down. I
15 don't know the exact figure. I couldn't even get to
16 meet all the people in the room.
17 Q. Were you able to move freely in that room
18 that night?
19 A. No. You sat down and you stayed there until
20 the morning.
21 Q. Now, you've been asked quite a few questions
22 about the incident where you heard a man calling out
23 names quite loudly, and you were asked what that man
24 was wearing and you said that you didn't look closely.
25 Why didn't you look closely when that man came, yelling
1 out those names?
2 A. Out of fear. I was afraid that he might call
3 me out too. Whenever people came from the outside,
4 they would call out people, and we were afraid. I
5 didn't know those people, so I couldn't say he was this
6 man or that man, and I feared that I might be called
8 Q. Now, you also stated, at least the transcript
9 that I read indicated you testified that this man had
10 come earlier on. What did you mean by that?
11 A. Maybe I meant that he had come to the camp
12 before. Maybe that's what I meant, something like
13 that. When I heard his voice, I might have recognised
14 him by his voice as being the same person who had come
15 there before. But I don't know now.
16 MS. HOLLIS: Now, if the witness could be
17 provided with what has been marked as D26/1.
18 Q. Could you look at this photograph, please.
19 Earlier you were asked about this photograph in
20 relation to those flower pots that you see in the
21 photograph. I would like to ask you, looking at the
22 people in that photograph, do you recognise the uniform
23 that those people are wearing?
24 A. In my mind, that is the uniform of the
25 civilian police. Dark trousers and a light blue shirt.
1 Q. So when you testified that some of the guards
2 at the Omarska camp wore the police uniform, the
3 civilian police uniform, is that what you're talking
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Now, I'd also like to ask you -- you may take
7 that, please -- some additional questions about this
8 pista area and how you defined the pista.
9 MS. HOLLIS: For those purposes, if the
10 witness could be provided the exhibit which has been
11 marked 3/82. It is a photograph of the model showing
12 various buildings.
13 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Madam
14 Hollis, I wish to remind you that the witness
15 identified on this exhibit what the pista was, but you
16 may ask your question. But I think the witness has
17 already told us that here.
18 MS. HOLLIS: I have an additional question
19 I'm going to ask in that regard, Your Honour.
20 Q. Now, you have testified, you have shown us
21 what area it is that you defined as the pista. First
22 of all, I would like you again to point to that area
23 that you defined as the pista.
24 A. I call this area here [indicates] the pista.
25 That's what I call the pista.
1 Q. Now, on Defence Exhibit 26/1, you were asked
2 about some flower pots. Looking at this area you
3 defined as the pista, can you show us, drawing a line,
4 if you can, can you show us where these kinds of flower
5 pots were placed on the pista?
6 A. I don't understand the word "Zardinjera,"
7 flower pot. Oh, I see. I see. Here [indicates] and
8 here [indicates], and there was some over there
9 [indicates] too.
10 Q. You just pointed to a line that would be the
11 hangar building and the restaurant building, on the
12 side facing the "white house"; is that correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. You have just pointed to a line that would be
15 from the hangar building to the restaurant building, on
16 the side farthest away from the "white house"; is that
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. You also pointed to another area with flower
20 pots, and where was that?
21 A. There were some here [indicates] where the
22 tap was, outside Mujo's room, in front of Mujo's
23 dormitory. There was some water there, a tap, a water
24 tap, as far as I can remember.
25 Q. So the area that you have defined as the
1 pista, the one between the restaurant building and the
2 hangar building, you define the boundaries of the pista
3 as those concrete flower pots; is that correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 MS. HOLLIS: Your Honour, I would like to
7 have the witness provided with an exhibit I'm going to
8 mark 3/87A and 3/87B, and these are English and B/C/S
9 versions of the 1998 statement, the English version
10 being "A" and the B/C/S version being 3/87B. Your
11 Honour, I also have copies for Your Honours.
12 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Your Honour, I have an
14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes,
15 Mr. O'Sullivan, what is your objection?
16 MR. O'SULLIVAN: In my submission,
17 re-examination by the Prosecution is limited to matters
18 which have arisen out of cross-examination and which
19 may be ambiguous. This witness was never presented
20 with this statement at all during cross-examination,
21 and there's no basis for showing it to him now. It's
22 beyond the scope of cross-examination, and it's not
23 appropriate for re-examination to explore these areas.
24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation]
25 Ms. Hollis.
1 MS. HOLLIS: Thank you, Your Honour. It's a
2 bit disingenuous to say that this is beyond the scope
3 of cross-examination. This witness was questioned on
4 several occasions about what he had said in his 1998
5 statement. Now, the Defence didn't choose to show him
6 that statement but they certainly brought the statement
7 into issue.
8 We submit that we have a right to not only
9 question on that but to show him the statement they
10 were using when questioning him, and we intend to offer
11 it into evidence.
12 So we believe that the objection is not
13 well-founded and that we are well within our rights to
14 present him with the statement and ask questions based
15 on this statement, because on cross-examination, he was
16 most certainly questioned about the 1998 statement and
17 the 1995 statement.
18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. I
19 have to overrule your objection, Mr. O'Sullivan. You
20 know very well that almost all the statements given by
21 the witness were discussed in the cross-examination.
22 Therefore, we overrule your objection, and we ask Madam
23 Hollis to continue with her re-examination. And we
24 should like to have the exhibit, please.
25 MS. HOLLIS:
1 Q. Sir, in cross-examination you were asked
2 about the procedure that was followed when this
3 statement was taken, and you indicated that this same
4 procedure was followed in taking this statement as was
5 followed when your 1995 statement was taken; is that
7 A. Yes. There was no pressure or anything like
8 that. I gave my statement to the best of my
10 Q. When that statement was concluded, it was
11 then read back to you in a language you understood; is
12 that correct?
13 A. Yes. It was read back to me, yes, without
14 any problems, and I understood it.
15 Q. And then you signed that statement and you
16 also initialled certain pages; is that correct?
17 A. Yes. Correct.
18 Q. Now, sir, I'd like you to look at the first
19 page of this 1998 statement. Does your signature
20 appear on that first page? Look at it in English,
22 A. Yes, there is my signature.
23 Q. And then I would like you to look at pages 2
24 through 7 and tell us if your initials appear on those
1 A. Yes, those are my initials. Yes.
2 Q. Would you please look at page 8 and tell us
3 whether your signature appears on that page.
4 A. Yes, it does, up on top.
5 Q. I would like you to look at various portions
6 of this statement in the B/C/S, so I will give both the
7 cite in English and in the B/C/S version.
8 First of all, I would like you to turn to
9 page 3 in the B/C/S, that is also page 3 in the
10 English, paragraph 5 in the B/C/S, which is paragraph 3
11 in the English. Now, on cross-examination, Defence
12 counsel referred to a portion of what is found in that
13 paragraph. I would like to refer to the entire
14 paragraph. Sir, in that paragraph, it indicates:
15 "That first night, when we got to the camp
16 and were being searched and beaten, Kvocka was there.
17 At the time when prisoners were being beaten and our
18 personal possessions were seized, we had our heads
19 bowed and instructions not to look around. Therefore,
20 I cannot say Kvocka was standing close to us during our
21 beating. However, as soon as the search and beating
22 ended, we saw him. I am positive he saw each and every
23 thing the guards did to us."
24 A. Yes, that is a correct statement. At that
25 moment I didn't see him, but he was present there. It
1 is correct. I didn't know him from before, but later,
2 when he introduced himself.
3 Q. Now, again, I would like you to look at page
4 3, the bottom of page 3 in the B/C/S, on to page 4 in
5 the B/C/S. And this is page 3, paragraph 5 in the
6 English. And again, Defence counsel referred to a
7 portion of this paragraph; I would like to refer to the
8 entire paragraph.
9 "On one such occasion I saw Kvocka speaking
10 to a guard near the entrance of the restaurant. At
11 that moment Zoran Zigic came and called out Asaf, Kiki,
12 and Began. I don't know the names of Began and Kiki.
13 Asaf and Began had restaurants in Prijedor, and Kiki
14 had his own private business by the name of Kiki. As
15 Zigic was calling out these names, guards said to the
16 prisoners on the pista to lay on the floor facing the
17 ground. Soon after we heard screams, and there was no
18 way Kvocka could not have heard it. We were facing the
19 floor for at least three hours, and during most of this
20 time we could hear screams and cries coming from the
21 direction of the 'white house.'"
22 Now, is that what you said in your 1998
24 A. Yes. Yes, I said that, but I also said that
25 Kvocka went to the corner of the restaurant, and he
1 could have prevented that. Whether that was the time
2 when Zigic came -- but there was a case when I was in
3 the restaurant. I don't remember these details, when
4 he was talking and then leaving. Whether it was Zigic
5 or one of the other guards, I can't remember now. I
6 know he was present there when Zigic came and called
7 out. But all the details -- where I was, when -- I
8 can't say whether that was that particular moment or
9 another moment.
10 Q. All right. Now, I'm talking about the moment
11 you have described to the Court. Now, I want to ask
12 you: You, in this statement, use the name Zigic; in
13 fact, you use the name Zoran Zigic. Now, how did you
14 know that name?
15 A. From the other detainees I heard the name. I
16 still don't know his name, really. That man doesn't
17 interest me at all. When he came, it was terrible. We
18 all hid. I'd rather not talk about it. Because I
19 personally didn't experience anything. I knew that he
20 was coming, and I hid. He didn't touch me personally.
21 I'm even afraid to think about it now.
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation]
23 Mr. Stojanovic, what is your objection?
24 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour,
25 I think that in this part of the proceedings we are
1 talking at much greater length about Zigic than in the
2 examination-in-chief, and we object and we appeal for a
3 ruling. There are some statements here that are
4 completely new, and we have no opportunity to respond
5 to these statements, nor to the questions asked. I
6 think that more is being said now about Zigic than
7 during the examination-in-chief. Thank you.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Madam
9 Hollis, what is your response?
10 MS. HOLLIS: First of all, there is nothing
11 new here. It's in the statements that the Defence
12 counsel have, so they could have examined about that.
13 Secondly, Your Honour, the reason that I am
14 asking about why he used the name in the statement is
15 that I want the evidence to be clear for the Court that
16 this witness did not know Zoran Zigic but that other
17 people told him about it.
18 The Prosecution believes that so the Court
19 can adequately give weight to this witness' testimony,
20 it's important that they understand that he did not
21 know the name of this witness, and the reason it's in
22 his statement is because he was repeating what others
23 had told him.
24 So it is for that reason that we were going
25 into this. And in addition, Your Honour, part of this
1 was read during the examination of this witness, and
2 identification of Zigic, of course, was raised by the
3 Defence. But we're not trying to bolster a positive
4 identification; we are explaining, through this
5 witness, to the Court, that indeed the witness never
6 knew this man as Zoran Zigic.
7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes,
8 Mr. Stojanovic.
9 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Just a brief
10 response, Your Honour. I should like to remind Your
11 Honours that the statement referred to was not tendered
12 into evidence. We drew attention to only a single
13 sentence from that statement, and that is all.
14 However, the statement, which is more than ten pages
15 long, was not tendered into evidence. Thank you.
16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation]
17 Mr. Stojanovic, you read a part of the statement. You
18 opened doors. Each one of you, through the
19 cross-examination, opens doors, and when you open such
20 doors in the cross-examination, you are opening the
21 door for the re-examination. You spoke about this.
22 You're familiar with this rule, or not?
23 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] In that
24 case, I should have a chance for a replica.
25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] No. You
1 mentioned this question. It is now up to the
2 Prosecutor to clarify and to close the door you have
3 opened. So we overrule your objection and we ask Madam
4 Hollis to continue.
5 MS. HOLLIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
6 Q. The next reference in this statement I would
7 like to turn to is on page 4, paragraph 4, in the
8 B/C/S; and it's page 4, paragraph 2, in the English.
9 Now, during cross-examination, Defence
10 counsel pointed out to you that during your testimony,
11 you said that you never saw Kvocka enter the "white
12 house." And then Defence counsel pointed out to you
13 that in the 1998 statement you said that on many
14 occasions you saw Kvocka enter the "white house." Now,
15 you wanted to explain, but you were not given the
16 opportunity to do that, so I would ask you to tell the
17 Court what it was you wanted to explain about this
19 A. I wanted to explain that I said that, but I
20 personally didn't see him enter the "white house." He
21 would go in that direction and then come back 10 or 15
22 minutes later. I didn't actually see him enter the
23 "white house." I didn't want to go into those
24 details. I didn't talk about that yesterday. I only
25 want to talk about what I actually saw with my own
1 eyes. I'd rather not talk about these other details.
2 He went in that direction. Whether he was actually
3 inside the "white house" or somewhere else, I couldn't
4 follow. As far as he's concerned, he never did
5 anything to me. I don't know about others.
6 Q. Now, again, referring to the statement, it
7 would be page 2, paragraph 6 in the English; it would
8 be the last paragraph on page 3, going on to page 4, in
9 the B/C/S. In your 1998 statement you indicated:
10 "I did not know Kvocka from before the war.
11 I remember him introducing himself, saying, 'I am
12 Kvocka and I am responsible for you.' This is how I
13 learnt of him. Later other prisoners who recognised
14 him told me he was Kvocka. He had married a Muslim,
15 and his wife's brothers were also detained in the
16 camp. I discovered all this later from his wife's
17 neighbour, by the name of Amir Trta."
18 A. Yes, I learnt that, but I didn't see her
19 brothers, I didn't know them, so I didn't want to go
20 into any other details. This is all hearsay. I heard
21 this, and that is what I said. I'm only saying what I
22 really knew. I didn't know Kvocka in person, or his
23 brothers-in-law, so I didn't go into those details.
24 MS. HOLLIS: Now, I would ask that the
25 witness be actually shown again the copy of the exhibit
1 that was marked D25/1. If the witness would look at
2 the English version, please.
3 Q. Sir, I believe you indicated that the
4 procedure for taking this statement was the same as in
5 1998; is that correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Now, sir, if you would look at that
8 statement, and tell us, looking at page 1 of that
9 statement, does your signature appear on page 1?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. If you would look at page 2, do your initials
12 appear on page 2?
13 A. Yes, they do, about the Zeljko, the name
14 Zeljko, and above that, my initials.
15 Q. And at the bottom of the page, do your
16 initials appear as well?
17 A. Yes, they do.
18 Q. On page 3, does your signature appear?
19 A. Yes. My signature, initials are there.
20 Q. Sir, when you gave that 1995 statement, did
21 you answer the questions that were asked of you, to the
22 best of your memory at the time?
23 A. Yes. I started talking, then they asked me
24 questions, then when I remembered I would say. Because
25 now, sitting here, I sometimes think of things that I
1 didn't say when I was interviewed. But I just want to
2 say that I only am answering what I actually do know.
3 I don't want to go into these minute details.
4 Q. In 1998 did you answer the questions that
5 were asked of you, based on the best of your memory at
6 that time?
7 A. Yes. Yes.
8 Q. Sir, you were asked if you ever heard Kvocka
9 give orders to kill anyone, and you said no, you did
10 not. Did you ever hear Kvocka order the guards or
11 other people in the camp not to kill detainees?
12 A. No, I didn't hear that either.
13 Q. Did you ever hear Kvocka order the guards or
14 other people in the camp to stop abusing detainees?
15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I
16 apologise, Witness. Mr. Simic has an objection to
18 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Yes,
19 objection, Your Honour. The witness gave a decisive
20 answer to that question when he was asked it, when he
21 was asked whether he had seen Mr. Kvocka ever order
22 anybody anything, and especially with respect to
23 abuse. And Witness AI said -- he didn't say -- he said
24 he didn't hear Mr. Kvocka give out any orders, and I
25 think it is a tendentious question.
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic,
2 perhaps we can wait to hear what the next question is
3 from Madam Hollis. We're repeating everything the
4 witness said. Sometimes we repeat the witness' answer
5 to be able to ask a question, so let's wait and see
6 what Madam Hollis' question is.
7 Madam Hollis, please continue.
8 MS. HOLLIS: What I would note, Your Honour,
9 that what I saw in the transcript was to the effect
10 that he never heard Kvocka give any orders to do harm.
11 I'm asking if he ever heard Kvocka give orders not to
12 do harm. I believe it is opened by the prior question,
13 and I believe it is a different question. Thank you,
14 Your Honour.
15 Q. Witness, did you ever hear Kvocka intervene
16 to stop any abuse?
17 A. As far as I remember, no.
18 Q. Now, you testified about one occasion when a
19 man came and he was calling aloud names of detainees
20 and Kvocka was present. Did you hear or see anything
21 to indicate that Kvocka questioned that man about who
22 he was or why he was in the camp?
23 A. I said they did not meet at that particular
24 moment. Whether they talked or not later on somewhere,
25 I didn't see, so -- when this man came, the other man
2 Q. You were asked why -- you were asked if you
3 ever complained about your beatings, and you indicated
4 that you did not complain. Why did you not complain
5 about these beatings you received?
6 A. Well, if I were to complain, I thought that I
7 would be treated even worse, so I didn't dare complain
8 to anybody. That was the reason. I didn't dare. I
9 always tried to hide, out of fear. I was just afraid
10 to complain.
11 Q. And why did you feel that if you complained
12 you would be treated even worse?
13 A. I didn't have the feeling that the guard
14 would be removed. I thought the guard would exert even
15 greater pressure on me, and that's why I didn't dare
17 Q. Now, these beatings that you received, were
18 these beatings that were out in the open or were you
19 taken away to some private place and beaten?
20 A. Mostly it was out in the open. On my way to
21 the restaurant, Drazenko would hit me. He did so on
22 the pista too. But I wasn't ever called out and taken
23 to a special room; just in these parts. What he had
24 against me, this Drazen, whom I didn't know, I don't
1 Q. Now, you mentioned during cross-examination a
2 man named Slavko, and you said --
3 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness repeat
4 the last part of his answer. We didn't hear it.
5 A. They said, "This is Slavko," and allegedly he
6 had taken part in the attack on Prijedor. I don't know
7 this man at all. And he was allegedly in the Green
8 Berets. They used to cry "Ustasha." But I wasn't
9 interested in that. I was afraid, so I didn't pay
10 attention to whether it was Slavko or not. I didn't
11 know him.
12 MS. HOLLIS:
13 Q. Now, this man that they said, "This is
14 Slavko," where was it that you saw him?
15 A. I was on the pista, and I saw him from the
16 pista. He was brought to us. Where he was brought
17 from, I don't know. I didn't pay attention to that.
18 Q. What was his condition when you saw him?
19 A. He was beaten up. His face was all swollen,
20 as far as I was able to see at that moment. But I
21 didn't know the man and I never differentiated between
22 Catholics, Muslims, Orthodox. I didn't know what he
23 was, whether he was an Orthodox or a Serb or a Croat,
24 or whatever. That wasn't important to me. If we were
25 friends, we were friends. I wasn't interested in that
1 kind of thing at all, and that's the same kind of thing
2 I do now.
3 Q. You also were questioned about what happened
4 when you were lying face down on the pista, and then
5 you indicated at some point you saw Kiki, when this
6 incident occurred when he and Began and the others were
7 called out. Now, if you were lying face down on the
8 pista, how were you able to see anything?
9 A. Well, if you move a little bit, and I
10 happened to move a bit and saw what I saw. You raise
11 your head up a bit, that kind of thing. That's how it
12 was. And if -- but if the guards saw you move and take
13 a look, then he would walk across us and beat us until
14 he got to that particular person, so that we did this
15 sort of secretly.
16 Q. You were asked about the decision to
17 terminate you from your employment, and you were asked
18 if you appealed that. You said you did not appeal
19 that. Why did you not appeal that decision to
20 terminate you?
21 A. Well, I said: I had come out of the camp.
22 It was from fear that I would not be returned. So I
23 went home, I talked to my father, asked him what he
24 thought I should do. He said, "Well, stay here. We've
25 got enough food and money." And when this disappeared,
1 he said, "Well let's get the papers together." And I
2 couldn't, because my children didn't have anything to
3 eat, so I had to leave Prijedor. And had I not left, I
4 don't know what would have happened, because I didn't
5 have anything to live on. I had no means of
6 livelihood, no food, no money.
7 MS. HOLLIS: No further questions, Your
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic.
10 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Just one
12 moment, please. Have you got something important?
13 Because it's time for the Judges' questions, as you
14 know full well, at this point.
15 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Bearing in
16 mind that Madam Hollis left the door slightly ajar, I
17 should like to ask you to enable me to ask only two
18 questions in regard to what Madam Hollis brought up.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Identify
20 the door, please, Mr. Simic. What door would you like
21 to open?
22 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Madam Hollis
23 spoke about the possibility of Kvocka hearing this, and
24 I'd just like to clarify that question, and the
25 question related to the orders. Just two brief
1 questions, if you would, please.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Madam
4 MS. HOLLIS: Your Honour, our position is
5 it's a follow-on to the questions that he asked, so we
6 don't think we're opening any doors. But if Your
7 Honours feel it would assist you, we certainly have no
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well.
10 As there are no objections on the side of the
11 Prosecution, and even if there are the Trial Chamber
12 feels that there are rules to follow, but what we are
13 interested in is arriving at the truth and the whole
14 truth. So we're going to authorise you to put your
15 questions, but be quick, please, Mr. Simic.
16 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I should like
17 to express my gratitude, Your Honour. To speed up
18 things, I shall be asking them from this position here
19 and not come up.
20 Further cross-examination by Mr. K.
22 Q. Witness AI, on several occasions you said
23 today that you only wish to speak about what you know.
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Is that right?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. In connection to Ms. Hollis' question and the
3 transcript, please answer the following: Do you know
4 whether Mr. Kvocka heard what you spoke about?
5 A. If he was in the building, if we heard them,
6 he could hear them too. And I would see him five or
7 ten minutes previously. He had to hear, as far as I'm
8 concerned, just in the same way that we heard them. He
9 had to hear voices, and so on.
10 Q. And if he was in a closed premises?
11 A. Well, he could have heard too, because I was
12 inside and I heard what was going on, so he must have
13 heard too.
14 Q. My second question linked to the orders. Did
15 you ever see Mr. Kvocka issuing any orders whatsoever?
16 A. No, I did not. I have already said that.
18 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you,
19 Your Honours.
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Fila.
21 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] I have no
22 objection. Just to clear something up, and it is a
23 matter of interpretation.
24 When I receive the B/C/S interpretation, it
25 says that Madam Hollis, who asked her question as she
1 should have, that is to say, whether the witness was
2 beaten publicly or whatever, and it turned out that
3 Madam Hollis was asking in the plural, whether "they"
4 beat him, which means several people, in the plural.
5 That is the interpretation I got into Serbian. And the
6 witness is clearly speaking about one man, saying that
7 one man beat him and that only one man -- he was beaten
8 by only one man. I don't know what the interpretation
9 will be like in French, so I'd like to clarify that
10 point. Thank you.
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Madam
13 MS. HOLLIS: Your Honour, the Prosecution's
14 position is I think ultimately you need to look at the
15 transcript. The Prosecution's recollection of the
16 transcript is that the witness said that it was mostly
17 Predojevic who beat him, "mostly." Not that it was
18 only Predojevic, but mostly. Again, I think we're
19 getting into areas here that are differences of
20 recollection on the transcript, and the transcript
21 should be definitive. But anyway, the Prosecution's
22 recollection is that he never said it was only
23 Predojevic but that it was mostly Predojevic.
24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Fila,
25 do you have any objections to the fact that Madam
1 Hollis can repeat the question and hear the witness'
2 answer again?
3 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] No, I have no
4 objections to make. I just say that there are
5 differences in the interpretation. To our answers, he
6 said in Serbian in the singular. Madam Hollis heard
7 something else.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I'm going
9 to ask Madam Hollis, could you please repeat the
10 question. Put it to the witness again and we're going
11 to record the answer, now that we're all here, and
12 we're going to pay attention to this.
13 Madam Hollis, go ahead.
14 Further re-examination by Ms. Hollis:
15 Q. Sir, I want to ask you a question about the
16 beatings, in the plural, that you received while you
17 were in the Omarska camp. The question is: Did these
18 beatings, in the plural, did these beatings occur in
19 public areas, or were you taken away to some private
20 area for these beatings?
21 A. There were several beatings when I went to
22 get food; more than one guard beat at that time.
23 Drazenko Predojevic beat me especially, but I got it
24 from other guards too. Depending on how I would pass
25 them by, I would either be beaten once or five or six
1 times, depending on your luck. And so those beatings
2 were when we went to get food. I didn't go to get food
3 often because I was sick and so on, all the things that
4 happened to me afterwards, because I was afraid of the
5 beatings. But personally Drazenko did it most.
6 Q. These beatings you referred to when you went
7 to get food were in public areas, is that correct,
8 areas where other people were?
9 A. Yes, of course. Thirty of us would be going
10 in a column, and they would be at the corridor and they
11 would start to beat us until we got our food. So it
12 depends who got what in passing. You might get more or
14 MS. HOLLIS: Thank you.
15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Is that
16 clear now, Mr. Fila?
17 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] It is clear,
18 Mr. President, that there is a difference between to
19 beat and to beat up, or to inflict blows and to beat.
20 The Defence maintains that Drazenko beat him, but here,
21 the 30 of them were going by and they would receive the
22 odd blow. So there's a difference there.
23 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes,
24 Mr. Fila, I think that that goes beyond the conditions
25 that the witness has described. We, of course, are all
1 intelligent individuals and we know the consequences of
2 this. But thank you anyway, Mr. Fila.
3 To round off that question, I should like to
4 take advantage of this opportunity, and I apologise to
5 my colleague, Judge Riad, I'm going to ask the
6 question: Are you able to identify the people, the
7 persons, who beat you, apart from Drazenko?
8 A. No, I'm not able. I have a face in my mind,
9 Drazenko, his face. But everything was very fast, go
10 and take the food, get it back, and that sort of
12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
13 very much for the moment.
14 I give the floor to Judge Fouad Riad. Thank
16 JUDGE RIAD: [Interpretation] Thank you,
17 Mr. President.
18 Questioned by the Court:
19 JUDGE RIAD: Witness AI, good morning.
20 A. Good morning.
21 JUDGE RIAD: I have a few questions to ask
22 you perhaps to help me understand more clearly certain
23 points which came in your testimony.
24 The first question which I'd like you to try
25 to clarify is how you could reconcile, really, two
1 things which you mentioned: One, which you repeated,
2 especially when you were cross-examined by Mr. Fila,
3 that prisoners were beaten at random according to the
4 whim of the guard, of the guardians or the prison
5 keepers; and at the same time, when you were in the
6 interrogation room and this guard wanted to hit you,
7 they ordered him not to hit you, while another one, who
8 is Sefik, went into the interrogation room and came
9 out -- was carried out beaten to death. So in fact
10 there was somebody in control, somebody who could tell
11 them, "Don't hit. Don't kill," otherwise they wouldn't
12 have stopped beating you in the interrogation room.
13 What was your assessment in that case? Was there a
14 higher authority that could decide?
15 A. As far as I am able to understand, there was
16 someone there to decide. But when they were
17 interrogating me, I don't know who actually
18 interrogated me, but they might have known my parents,
19 for example, according to my statements that I wasn't
20 guilty, and I'd already lost quite a lot of weight so
21 he probably said, "Don't beat him" because I was
22 telling the truth, so perhaps that is the reason why he
23 didn't allow the other person to beat me, depending on
24 who was being interrogated at that time. So I don't
25 know the reason, actually.
1 JUDGE RIAD: No, I'm not asking you for the
2 reason. But there could be someone saying, "Don't
3 beat. Stop."
4 A. I don't know. At that particular moment, it
5 was that person interrogating me who said that.
6 JUDGE RIAD: Good. Now, speaking about the
7 discipline, you mentioned that the guards came in in a
8 line and the superiors were standing on the side. So
9 did it look like a disciplined prison or camp, or was
10 it something out of any order?
11 A. Upon arrival it looked as if there was some
12 discipline in this order and that somebody did have
13 some authority over the guards, as far as I was able to
14 make out at that time.
15 JUDGE RIAD: You even said that upon arrival
16 there was no beating, and then after that, in the
17 cross-examination, you said that you were beaten and
18 you were searched. I think in the cross-examination
19 with Mr. Simic you said that Kvocka was present when
20 you arrived and you were beaten and you were searched.
21 Is that right? So you were beaten when you arrived and
22 you were searched.
23 A. No, not in my bus, no beating, but maybe the
24 other bus. Perhaps I explained this in a different
25 way. Me personally, nobody beat me, but when the other
1 bus came, they did. Who was there, whether Kvocka
2 or ...
3 JUDGE RIAD: No. You said that Kvocka was
4 present in this case when there was beating. Is that
5 right, or I understood wrong?
6 A. I didn't know that person. I saw him when I
7 got there, and then he introduced himself, when we were
8 supposed to go into the dormitory. So that person was
9 there in that compound. I didn't know him before
10 that. I heard that people had been beaten but I didn't
11 see that. So he must have known. He could not have
12 suddenly turned up and left again. So he was in that
13 circle. But I didn't know him personally so ...
14 JUDGE RIAD: And then you knew afterwards
15 that it was Kvocka.
16 A. Yes, when he introduced himself, then I
18 JUDGE RIAD: But you also said that he did
19 not do any beating by himself.
20 A. That's right. I didn't see that, no.
21 JUDGE RIAD: You did not see that.
22 A. No, he did not beat.
23 JUDGE RIAD: But you noticed that he was a
24 person of authority.
25 A. Yes, because that's how he introduced
1 himself, that he was the chief there and that
2 everything would be okay. He introduced himself. He
3 wasn't terrible in any way, so as far as he's
4 concerned, I haven't got a bad opinion about him, as
5 concerns myself, towards me, that is.
6 JUDGE RIAD: No, I'm just asking you what he
7 did. He did not give any order to stop. He did not
8 beat but he did not give any order to stop.
9 A. As far as I know, he didn't. Had he given
10 that order, it would have stopped.
11 JUDGE RIAD: He would have had the authority
12 to stop.
13 A. According to the way he introduced himself,
14 he did have. Whether there was anybody above him, I
15 can't know that.
16 JUDGE RIAD: Good. I mean, when he was
17 there, was there somebody above him at that moment?
18 A. No, I don't remember that there was anybody.
19 JUDGE RIAD: Also concerning the same thing,
20 concerning Mr. Kvocka, you said when you were sitting
21 in the pista, I won't repeat what you said, Kvocka was
22 close to the man calling the names and he turned
23 afterwards and went to the restaurant, or something,
24 and he could hear, he could hear the cries of the
25 people being beaten. Did I understand you rightly?
1 And he did not interfere.
2 A. Yes. He did not interfere. He went away
3 from the entrance where he was standing, but I don't
4 think he left the building. Perhaps he went outside
5 the camp. I don't know. I didn't see him any more.
6 But if he was present there, then he had to have
8 JUDGE RIAD: But he had nothing to do with
9 the man calling the names.
10 A. I didn't see that they met and had an
11 agreement of any kind.
12 JUDGE RIAD: Now, apparently Mr. Drazenko
13 Predojevic was the man giving you this hard time. Was
14 there anything between you and him, or did he apply
15 this to everybody?
16 A. He beat others mostly too, but he beat me
17 mostly because of my shoes, because I had those
18 worker's boots, or perhaps the guard who took me to
19 interrogation and came back and told me, "You'll pay
20 for that." I don't know. I don't know why, actually.
21 I didn't know him personally so I don't actually know
23 JUDGE RIAD: And there was no chance of
24 complaining to the higher authorities. You were
25 completely at his mercy. Because, as you said, at the
1 interrogation room you were protected and somebody
2 protected from that, so nobody could protect you from
4 A. Well, possibly they could have but I didn't
5 dare complain.
6 JUDGE RIAD: Now, you mentioned that
7 Mr. Krkan, Krkan's shift was the most cruel, and that
8 he was there from 7.00 in the morning until 7.00 at
9 night. So in a way, he could see completely what was
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I
12 apologise, Mr. Fila, but I don't think we ought to
13 interrupt at this point.
14 A. He was there. He had to have known what was
15 going on.
16 JUDGE RIAD: Was he also on a higher grade?
17 Did he look like also, as you mentioned about Kvocka,
18 that he was the head of this division and he could
19 exert orders on them in any form?
20 A. As far as I know, he was under Kvocka, a
21 lower position, but he was superior to the guards.
22 JUDGE RIAD: And you saw him giving orders to
23 the guards in any form and being obeyed?
24 A. I personally did not see him issue anything,
25 but I saw him walking around with the guards, talking
1 to them. Now, whether he issued orders for beatings of
2 any kind, I can't say I heard that. I didn't see it.
3 JUDGE RIAD: No, he did not issue orders for
4 beating. But he did not issue orders for not beating,
6 A. No. I didn't notice that.
7 JUDGE RIAD: Now, concerning Krle, you said
8 that you saw him shooting the man before your eyes.
9 Was this man trying to run away?
10 A. I think that there was something wrong with
11 his nerves. He had a sort of breakdown. Krle told him
12 to sit down, and then afterwards he jumped out of the
13 "white house." What happened, I don't know. But
14 Krle's shift was one of the best, and I was surprised
15 that that happened then, that is to say, the best, they
16 beat less. So I was surprised to see that because a
17 couple of times I asked him if I could go to the toilet
18 and he let me, so this was a surprise for me, this
19 reaction. Who knows what he thought at that moment and
20 what actually went on and what actually happened. I
21 don't know. But that's what happened, that's all I can
22 say, as far as I was able to see myself.
23 JUDGE RIAD: Was it customary for anybody
24 trying to run away to be shot? Did you notice anything
25 like that?
1 A. No. That was the first time that I saw this
2 shooting and a man killed. It was the first time.
3 JUDGE RIAD: You did see it clearly. You saw
4 it clearly. You were at enough distance to know what
5 was happening?
6 A. Well, I was where I was. And I saw the man
7 get up. First of all he told him to sit down. Then he
8 took him to the "white house." And they were waiting
9 for a shift to turn up. At that point the man might
10 have jumped out and moved towards the pista and the
11 shot was fired. I don't know the reasons. That's what
12 I saw. That's what I saw happening. Before that, the
13 man cried out, "Stop" to the other one, he didn't stop,
14 and then that's what I saw.
15 JUDGE RIAD: Thank you very much.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I think
18 this is a convenient time to break. Judge Wald has
19 some questions, I do too, but I think we'll have a
20 30-minute recess and resume after that.
21 --- Recess taken at 1.00 p.m.
22 --- On resuming at 1.34 p.m.
23 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Judge Wald,
24 please. Just a moment, please. Please be seated.
25 Judge Wald.
1 JUDGE WALD: Witness AI, you testified, I
2 believe, that Mr. Kvocka addressed the group of
3 detainees on the first evening that you were at
4 Omarska. My question to you is: When he did that, did
5 he in any way identify his own role or position in the
6 camp? I think that when you answered Judge Riad's
7 question you said, "He said he was chief," but earlier
8 you said that he said he was responsible for them. And
9 I just want to clarify exactly how he identified his
10 role when he addressed you that evening.
11 A. He said that he was responsible for us, so
12 this would imply that he was camp commander or a
13 chief. If he says that he is responsible for us, then
14 that means that he is the main person there.
15 JUDGE WALD: Okay. Was that the only time
16 during your stay at Omarska that any camp official
17 addressed the entire group or a large group of
18 detainees, or were there other occasions when other
19 camp officials or Mr. Kvocka again addressed large
20 groups of detainees?
21 A. As far as I can remember, he was the only one
22 who addressed us, introducing himself by name.
23 JUDGE WALD: Thank you. Now, you said, I
24 believe, that things tended to be better around the
25 camp for the detainees when the interrogators were
1 there, the ones that came in the morning and left at
2 5.00. I was wondering how that could be so if so much
3 of the beatings took place on the way to get meals,
4 which you told us happened during the daytime. Maybe
5 you could help me understand that.
6 A. If somebody came from the outside, he
7 wouldn't come during the working hours of the
8 interrogators, and there were fewer call-outs. That's
9 what I was talking about. But the blows as we went to
10 eat, these were happening all the time.
11 JUDGE WALD: In your experience at Omarska,
12 did you ever hear cries or see people coming out of the
13 interrogation rooms, the daytime interrogations, that
14 looked like or sounded like they were being beaten?
15 A. I did hear noise up there, cries. And when
16 they came out, one would see them covered in blood, and
17 I saw one neighbour going up there and he was carried
18 out of there. So what exactly happened in there, I
19 don't know.
20 JUDGE WALD: After the -- thank you. After
21 the interrogators that came from outside the camp and
22 left at the end of the day left, and when people were
23 called out at night, was that supposedly -- were they
24 told they were being called out for interrogations, or
25 did everybody know it was just a call-out for
1 beatings? When the call-outs came at night, what did
2 everybody think or know the reason for the call-outs?
3 A. If they would tell you to take your things
4 with you, that would mean that you would be taken
5 somewhere outside the camp. And if it was just to come
6 out, then we knew it was beatings. So that if you were
7 told to take your things, you knew you wouldn't come
9 JUDGE WALD: Okay. At one point in your
10 testimony you said there were three groups in the camp;
11 there were the outside unit of police which left
12 after -- a special police which left after, I think it
13 was, a few weeks; there were the guards which you said
14 included both military and army police; and then you
15 said there was the army. Now, this third group, this
16 third group, the army, were they -- they didn't do
17 guard duty? What did they do around the camp, this
18 third group that you referred to as the army? Were
19 they separate from the guards, and what functions did
20 they perform?
21 A. When I say "the army," I meant a guard
22 wearing a uniform of the Yugoslav People's Army, and if
23 he was a wearing a blue uniform he was a policeman. So
24 maybe there was a misunderstanding. I was just
25 referring to the uniforms the guards were wearing.
1 JUDGE WALD: Okay. That helps clarifies it,
2 but just to pin it down. In other words, there were
3 people wearing regular army uniforms who were in the
4 guard shifts; right? Is that right? Who were part of
5 the guard shifts.
6 A. Yes.
7 JUDGE WALD: Okay. My last question to you
8 is: At any time when you were there, were you ever
9 told that -- or did you ever learn that there were
10 certain times or certain shifts where you weren't
11 supposed to talk or you must be much more quiet than
13 A. We knew amongst ourselves that if Krkan's
14 shift was on duty, and it was one of the worst, so
15 amongst ourselves we agreed to keep quiet. Nobody told
16 us, but we were more fearful than otherwise at night.
17 JUDGE WALD: All right. Thank you, Witness.
18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
19 very much, Judge Wald.
20 Witness AI, I have a few questions too. Are
21 you able to repeat a conversation using the same words,
22 the words that Kvocka used when he introduced himself?
23 Are you able to quote him?
24 A. As far as I can recollect, I'm not sure
25 whether he uttered his name. He said, "I am
1 'something' Kvocka. I am responsible for you while
2 you are here. You will be interrogated and everything
3 will be all right and then you will be spent back
4 home." That is what he said to us.
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well.
6 Thank you. We now have the words, more or less.
7 Another question. You mentioned when the
8 shifts changed, next to the line of guards was the
9 guard leader, on the side. Was he at that moment
10 giving orders?
11 A. I didn't notice that. But when he reached a
12 certain guard post, the other guard would take over. I
13 didn't notice them exchanging any words. I just saw
14 them changing places. I didn't hear anyone saying "You
15 go there," "You go here," or anything like that.
16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Generally
17 speaking, you spoke either of Krkan or Krle or Kvocka
18 who were moving around a little, at least you watched
19 them move about in relation to a particular place, or
20 did they move all around the camp? Was there a
21 difference, or did the same apply to Krkan, Krle, and
22 Kvocka? Was there any difference in their movements?
23 A. They moved around normally. They would tour
24 the compound. I saw them walking around, not any
25 particular position. They would go upstairs, to the
1 premises above the restaurant, and so on.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Now, the
3 bodies that you saw behind the "white house" and next
4 to the red building, did Krkan, Krle, or Kvocka, while
5 walking around the camp, could they see those bodies?
6 A. Those next to the "white house," they could
7 have seen, as we saw them from the pista. Also if they
8 went up close down there, they could have seen them. I
9 only saw them when I went to urinate there. It
10 depended on which position they held at the time.
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] In relation
12 to the "white house," where was the entrance to the
14 A. It was in the direction of the hangar, the
15 pista there and then the hangar. So it depended where
16 you sat on the pista. If you were on the side, then
17 you could see those bodies, if you were on that same
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Tell me,
20 please, considering where you are now and where I am,
21 the entrance in relation to the model that we have
22 between us, the main gate, was it on your side or on my
24 A. On my side, the main gates to the camp.
25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Could you
1 please get up and point out the main entrance to the
2 camp, with the help of the usher.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Sorry. The witness is a
4 protected witness, so it is not possible.
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
6 very much for drawing my attention to that point. So
7 the main entrance to the camp was on your side.
8 A. Yes.
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So the
10 people who were entering and coming out of the camp did
11 not pass by the "white house."
12 A. No.
13 MS. HOLLIS: Excuse me, Your Honour, but it
14 may assist you if, perhaps, the witness were shown
15 3/82, that's a photo of the model, and then he could
16 perhaps point to where you would like him to point.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes.
18 That's a very good suggestion. Thank you.
19 Could you put that exhibit on the ELMO,
20 please, Mr. Usher.
21 Thank you very much, Ms. Hollis.
22 Witness, could you please point to the main
23 entrance on that exhibit for us, the main entrance to
24 the camp.
25 A. It was here [indicates], in this direction.
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So on the
2 side of the restaurant building. It was through that
3 gate that you entered the camp in the bus.
4 A. I didn't see it. Yes, but that is where I
5 got off.
6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
7 very much, Mr. Usher. Thank you.
8 Another question. How many people were in
9 the bus that brought you to the Omarska camp? You have
10 already given an answer to Mr. Simic, saying that there
11 were between 40 and 50. Let me put the question
12 differently. The bus, did it have more persons than
13 sitting space, or was there one person to each seat, or
14 one seat to each person?
15 A. As far as I can recollect, I think we were
16 all sitting. It was a bus belonging to the public
17 transportation system, so that is why I said there were
18 between 40 and 50. I was in the fifth or sixth row,
19 and I was sitting.
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You said
21 that you were not in a position to see the people who
22 searched you, but you said that you heard them speak.
23 A. I couldn't see them, yes, but I heard them.
24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] After the
25 search and during your stay in the camp, did you hear
1 that voice or those voices again or not?
2 A. At that moment I was afraid, so I didn't pay
3 much attention. I may have heard a similar voice later
4 but I can't claim that with any certainty.
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Fine. On
6 the 30th of May, 1992, you were sitting on the pista.
7 How much time did you spend in that position?
8 A. It was already nightfall. It became cool
9 when they moved us to Mujo's room. I don't know what
10 time it was, but it was getting cooler, and we were
11 moved inside.
12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I should
13 now like to go back with you to the semicircular
14 glassed-in entrance to the restaurant. Was Krkan there
15 always, or did he move away from there?
16 A. He moved around, as I said. He didn't have
17 any particular post. All of those leaders of the camp
18 moved around. They didn't have a particular position
19 to hold. I never saw them in one place all the time.
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] During your
21 stay at the Omarska camp, did anyone visit you from the
23 A. Not me personally. But there was a colleague
24 of mine from work; whether he came to look for somebody
25 or not, I didn't call his attention to myself.
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] But
2 generally speaking, did anybody visit the detainees?
3 A. I don't know.
4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] No one from
5 the International Red Cross came to visit the camp?
6 A. Once I heard that a journalist had come but I
7 wasn't there to see them. I was in the hangar at the
8 time so I didn't see anyone. Whether they came or not,
9 I don't know.
10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So Witness
11 AI, you have just completed your testimony here at the
12 International Criminal Tribunal. We thank you very
13 much, and we hope that you will be able to recover from
14 your suffering. You may now leave, and we thank you
15 very much.
16 I think the blinds have to be pulled down,
17 Mr. Usher, the blinds.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you all,
19 Your Honours, if I have been of any assistance. Maybe
20 it will make my life easier too later.
21 [The witness withdrew]
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Hollis
23 or Mr. Keegan.
24 MS. HOLLIS: Your Honour, may we deal with
25 the exhibits at this time?
1 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
2 MS. HOLLIS: May be deal with the exhibits at
3 this time, Your Honour?
4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes.
5 You're quite right, Ms. Hollis. Let's do that.
6 MS. HOLLIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
7 Your Honour, the Prosecution would offer the
8 following exhibits into evidence:
9 Exhibits 3/80A and B, those were photographs
10 showing vehicles, including what were identified as
11 police vehicles; 3/81, a picture of individuals in what
12 were described as regular camouflage uniforms,
13 including the man identified as Drljaca; 3/82, which is
14 a photograph of the model of Omarska; 3/37, which was a
15 previously marked exhibit which had been filed with the
16 Chamber but was not offered into evidence, that was a
17 photograph of the truck that was identified as the type
18 of truck that carried the dead bodies; 3/83, which was
19 a photograph of the portion of the administration
20 building with the circular portion and the glass facing
21 toward the pista and the hangar, and the witness made
22 annotations on that exhibit; 3/84A through D, that was
23 the photo board exhibit, the composite exhibit dealing
24 with the accused Kvocka, "A" being the notice of
25 procedures, "B" being the interpreter's certification,
1 "C" being the report, and "D" being the copy of the
2 photo board; 3/85A through Delta1, A through D1, this
3 was the composite exhibit of the photo board display
4 dealing with Krle, "A" being the notice of procedures,
5 "B" being the interpreter's certification, "C" being
6 the report, "D" and "D1" being the photo boards.
7 Your Honours, at this time the Prosecution
8 would also stipulate that the third photo array shown
9 to the witness contained the photograph of accused
10 Zigic and that the witness indicated he did not
11 recognise anyone on that photo array.
12 Your Honours, the Prosecution further offers
13 into evidence 3/86A and B, being the decision on
14 termination of employment of this witness, "A" being
15 the English and "B," the B/C/S. We also offer 3/87A
16 and B, that being the 18 September 1998 Office of the
17 Prosecutor statement taken of Witness AI, "A" being the
18 English and "B" being the B/C/S.
19 The Prosecution would give notice to the
20 Court at this time that if the Defence does not
21 introduce into evidence what has been marked D25/1,
22 that is, the 1995 statement of Witness AI, the
23 Prosecution wishes to offer that into evidence as a
24 Prosecution Exhibit.
25 At this moment, those are the exhibits we
1 would move admitted into evidence, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes,
3 Mr. Fila, are you going to speak on behalf of all
5 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] No, I speak in my
6 own name.
7 Your Honour, there are two points: First of
8 all, a question that the Defence feels needs to be
9 addressed, and that is showing the witness what they
10 said previously. With all due respect for Judge Riad,
11 he said to the witness that he had said that Krkan's
12 shift was the cruelest. I looked through the
13 transcript and I didn't find that statement.
14 So my first question is what are the
15 possibilities of the Defence to respond in view of
16 Article 5 and Rule 85? This is being repeated several
17 times. That is the first issue.
18 The second has to do with the exhibit
19 tendered by my learned friend Ms. Hollis, regarding
20 3/87A and B. This is the statement of Witness AI of
21 the 18th of September, 1998. As you know,
22 Mr. President, in the examination-in-chief, the
23 Prosecution did not use that statement. In the
24 cross-examination, by some Defence counsel it was
25 mentioned but not by me.
1 I have no objection that it be admitted as
2 evidence in relation to Defence counsel who did refer
3 to it. I think it is not fair that what others do
4 should apply to me. I did not open that door, and I
5 move that if that evidence is admitted that all mention
6 of the accused Mladjo Radic be redacted from it,
7 because I didn't refer to it in the cross-examination;
8 it was not mentioned in the examination-in-chief. It
9 is not fair and my Defence will be prejudiced if the
10 consequences of the examination by other Defence
11 counsel are imposed upon me. Therefore, the parts in
12 which Mladjo Radic is mentioned should be redacted.
13 And I wish to underline that Ms. Hollis did not use
14 that statement with reference to Mladjo Radic, not even
15 after the cross-examination by the Defence. She did
16 not mention it in the examination-in-chief, nor in the
18 So it is a specific situation, and I would
19 like that part of the statement to be redacted.
20 Otherwise, the rights of the accused to a fair trial
21 would be in jeopardy. Thank you.
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Fila,
23 we have heard well, but this was not the moment for you
24 to speak. When you stood on your feet and I gave you
25 the floor, I thought you were speaking on behalf of the
1 Defence. The rule is to give the floor to the Defence
2 in the order of the indictment, so it's Mr. Simic who
3 should speak first.
4 But in any event, regarding the first point,
5 I have to respond in the way I have already done: The
6 transcript speaks for itself and it will show whether
7 the witness said or did not say what Judge Riad
9 Another point is that you may draw
10 conclusions about this at the end and you can bring
11 witnesses to deny this, and anyway you can also
12 appeal. But in any event it is not possible to
13 interrupt the Judges when they are asking questions,
14 and that is something that I have to tell you now,
15 Mr. Fila, otherwise --
16 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the
17 only point I wanted to make is that there is no grounds
18 in the Rule for my objection -- and you're quite right,
19 there's no question about that -- but I don't know how
20 to deal with it. Because if you say to the witness,
21 "You said so and so" and he says yes --
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Fila,
23 you always have the transcript and you can prove that
24 the witness did not say that.
25 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] Yes, but then it's
1 too late.
2 JUDGE RIAD: [Interpretation] Mr. President,
3 may I for a moment.
4 I was listening to the English translation,
5 and I noted that the witness said that he avoided going
6 to the toilet so as not to be beaten by the guards, and
7 above all that they were fiercest under Krkan's shift.
8 He said this when talking about going to the toilet
9 because during that time it was worse, the situation
10 was worse. If I am wrong, I apologise, and if that is
11 the case -- but if I am right, I should like the
12 attorney to apologise.
13 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] I do apologise,
14 but the difference is something else. The question
15 referred to going to lunch.
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] In that
18 case, there is a second side to your intervention,
19 Mr. Fila, which we will treat together after we hear
20 the comments by other Defence. In any event, thank you
21 for your remarks.
22 Mr. Simic.
23 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you,
24 Your Honour.
25 We have already said that we should like to
1 tender into evidence the statement of 1995, D25/1, and
2 on this occasion we should like, as the Defence, with
3 regard to the inconsistencies of statements, would like
4 to tender the 18th of September statement, 3/87A and B,
5 because this statement was taken by the same
6 interviewer one month after the Kvocka interview.
7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So
8 Mr. Simic, do I understand you correctly, you have no
9 objection to the tendering into evidence of the
10 exhibits that Madam Hollis asked to be tendered and
11 admitted into evidence; is that right?
12 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Yes. We
13 propose them too, and we do not object to them, or the
14 other proposals either.
15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
16 very much.
17 Mr. Nikolic, will it be Mr. O'Sullivan who
18 will be taking the floor? That's just what I wanted to
19 know. Thank you.
20 So Mr. O'Sullivan has the floor.
21 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Yes, Your Honour.
22 In regards to admission of exhibits, without
23 commenting or detracting from the objection of
24 Mr. Fila, we have no objection to the admissibility of
25 the exhibits.
1 As to the second point, if I can make a
2 general observation and not limit it to this specific
3 instance raised by Mr. Fila. Your Honours, under Rule
4 85(B), it is clear that the parties, as well as Your
5 Honours, may question a witness. Rule 5(A) is equally
6 clear to the extent that an objection must be made at
7 the earliest opportunity.
8 In my submission, when a witness is
9 questioned and a party has an objection to the form of
10 questioning, regardless of who the questioner is, Rule
11 5 clearly states that that objection must be made as
12 soon as possible, and Rule 5 is not limited in its
13 scope and, in my submission, covers questioning under
14 Rule 85(B).
15 Those, it seems to me, are the parameters of
16 this issue, and it's in that context that objections
17 must be made according to our Rules whenever a party
18 feels that there is a basis for an objection,
19 regardless of who is asking the question.
20 Those are my submissions.
21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you,
22 Mr. O'Sullivan.
23 Mr. Tosic. Mr. Stojanovic, rather.
24 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your
25 Honours, we have no objections to make with respect to
1 the proposed exhibits.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you,
3 Mr. Stojanovic.
4 Mr. Jovan Simic.
5 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours,
6 we have no objections either.
7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I
8 understand, therefore, that there are no objections
9 with respect to the tendering of D25/1, so that the
10 exhibits have all been tendered.
11 I think that we ought to give a little
12 thought on the question that was raised as well. I
13 stand by the position that I indicated to you, but we
14 shall have some reflection on the subject.
15 We have 20 more minutes for hearing or
16 starting to hear another witness.
17 MR. KEEGAN: Thank you, Your Honour.
18 The Prosecution would call Witness B to the
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Perhaps I
21 could take advantage of the opportunity to hear how
22 many witnesses you still have this week.
23 MR. KEEGAN: Yes, Your Honour. We have two,
24 including Witness B, here, but it's our estimation that
25 it's very unlikely, using the normal work schedule,
1 that we will conclude both witnesses. In fact, it
2 would be my estimation at this time that we would only
3 conclude Witness B.
4 That was the issue that we would like to
5 raise afterwards with respect to whether the Judges
6 would desire to go extra time both days to try and
7 conclude both witnesses. But in my estimation, it
8 would probably mean an additional two hours each day in
9 order to conclude both.
10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Two hours
11 each day; that is to say, today and tomorrow, two extra
12 hours per day?
13 MR. KEEGAN: That would be my estimation,
14 Your Honour, based on just the way we have proceeded
15 with the witnesses thus far this week, and I see no
16 reason to indicate the timing would be any different
17 for the next two. They're both fairly significant
18 witnesses. If the Defence has another opinion on it,
19 I'd be happy to hear it.
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] What is the
21 viewpoint of the Defence with respect to doing our
22 utmost to set the witnesses free? And we're going to
23 interrupt ...
24 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours,
25 I still feel that there might be an unrealistic
1 assessment. We have witnesses here before us; we have
2 had days behind us and know what it looks like. And as
3 the witness is an important one, he has a lengthy
4 statement, lengthy testimony, and I think that we'll
5 have to bring him back. We discussed this, to have the
6 two witnesses back, and today and tomorrow to get
7 through with Witness B. That is, perhaps, more
8 realistic but it's up to you to decide. I don't know
9 whether this speeding up of matters will necessarily
10 lead to the proper results.
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Is that
12 opinion shared by the other Defence counsel, or are
13 there differing opinions?
14 MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Yes, it is.
15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well.
16 Thank you.
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 MR. KEEGAN: Your Honour, if I might. There
19 is one additional factor. I know you're concerned
20 about the issue of how long witnesses are here. This
21 witness, in fact, only arrived last night -- the second
22 witness, not Witness B, but the one who would follow
23 her. So he, in fact, has not been here that long,
24 Witness AL. There is also a concern, however, whether
25 or not he would be willing to come back a second time,
1 but that's something that we'll have to address
2 depending on your decision.
3 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes,
4 Mr. Keegan. The problem is, as you can well
5 understand, a whole series of questions with respect to
6 all the people working here, not maybe in the courtroom
7 but who are the support of all of us here, and we too
8 have constraints. I myself, for example, have
9 something at 3.15, a meeting that I cannot put off, and
10 another one tomorrow of the same nature. So that is a
11 pity. My colleagues, the Judges, would like to
12 continue, but of course there are these constraints and
13 we must foresee all this in advance to be able to
14 function properly.
15 So we're going to go as far as possible, do
16 as much as possible, but quite certainly we cannot hear
17 just one -- we may be able to hear just one witness.
18 MR. KEEGAN: Yes, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] As regards
20 protective measures, Mr. Keegan, for this witness, what
21 are they, Witness B?
22 MR. KEEGAN: Pseudonym, Your Honour,
23 obviously, and facial distortion. And of course we
24 would want the initial session in private session as we
25 go through just the basic biographical data, and then
1 after that the normal session.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well.
3 We're now going to --
4 Mr. O'Sullivan, yes.
5 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Just to make sure that Your
6 Honours are correctly informed. At the break
7 Mr. Keegan spoke with us, and of course there is always
8 perhaps a language barrier between Mr. Keegan and some
9 of my colleagues who don't speak English, my
10 understanding was that the sensible solution for the
11 second witness may, in fact, be to tell that witness
12 that it's not likely that he would begin his
13 examination-in-chief before the end of tomorrow, and if
14 he did he would be two weeks before he came back to
15 complete his examination-in-chief. So that was our
16 understanding, under Mr. Keegan's suggestion, and I
17 think I'm speaking correctly that it may be the
18 sensible solution, for the benefit of the second
19 witness, to do our best to complete the witness who is
20 about to enter. I just wanted to state that for the
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, and
23 that's what we said, I think. Was there a difference
24 on your side as to what we said? We said that it was
25 better only to hear this witness and to inform the
1 other witness that we cannot hear his testimony at this
2 point. So we're going to introduce one witness and
3 we're going to do our best to hear that witness today
4 and tomorrow, because we only have ten more minutes
6 [The witness entered court]
7 [Private session]
13 pages 2301-2309 redacted – private session
18 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at
19 2.37 p.m., to be reconvened on Friday,
20 the 19th day of May, 2000, at 9.30 a.m.