Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 3445

1 Monday, 10 April 2006

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.

5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Whiting.

6 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour. It's Ms. Valabhji who will

7 be taking the next witness.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Ms. Valabhji.

9 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour, good morning. May we very

10 briefly go into private session, this morning?

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the Chamber please move into private session.

12 [Private session]

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 3446

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 [Open session]

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

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

13 Ms. Valabhji.

14 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honours. The witness may be

15 brought into Court.

16 [The witness entered court]

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the witness please make the declaration.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak

19 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. The witness may be seated.

21 WITNESS: IVAN GRUJIC

22 [Witness answered through interpreter]

23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

24 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.

25 Examination by Ms. Valabhji:

Page 3447

1 Q. Good morning, Witness.

2 A. Morning.

3 Q. Can you hear me clearly in your own language?

4 A. I can.

5 Q. Witness, please state your name for the Court.

6 A. My name is Ivan Grujic.

7 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honours, Mr. Grujic's expert report and his

8 testimony from the Milosevic case have already been admitted in this case

9 in the decision of 13th January, 2006. As a result, in my examination, I

10 will question the witness mainly on various exhibits.

11 But by way of a brief introduction I would like to point out that

12 Mr. Grujic is a Croatian citizen who was appointed president of the

13 Republic of Croatia Commission for Detainees and Missing Persons in 1993.

14 He held this post until the year 2000 when the commission was abolished

15 and the Republic of Croatia Government Office for Detainees and Missing

16 Persons was founded.

17 In the year 2000 Mr. Grujic was appointed head of the office. In

18 January 2004 the office was replaced by the Administration for Detainees

19 and Missing Persons located within the Ministry of Family, Defenders and

20 Intergeneration Solidarity.

21 Q. Mr. Grujic, could you briefly summarise your education and work

22 experience prior to 1993.

23 A. Yes. I went to primary and secondary school in Osijek, and after

24 that I did my military service in the JNA where I was trained to be a

25 military policeman. And after that I found a job with the Ministry of the

Page 3448

1 Interior of the Republic of Croatia where I worked on jobs requiring

2 secondary schooling, after which I completed a higher school and an

3 intelligence school, which qualified me for jobs requiring higher

4 education, on which I worked until 1992. I did various jobs, beginning

5 with policeman, until inspector first class, on jobs that had to do with

6 anti-terrorism and intelligence. After that, I went to the higher

7 criminological school.

8 Q. What is your present position?

9 A. Currently I am assistant minister at the Ministry of

10 Intergenerational Solidarity, and I'm also president of the government

11 Commission for Missing Persons.

12 Q. What is the scope of the work of this government Commission for

13 Missing Persons?

14 A. The Commission for Missing Persons is a technical advisory body of

15 the government dealing with issues of missing persons. And on the level

16 of assistant ministers it involves all relevant ministries that are able

17 to gather data on missing persons; the public prosecutor's office, the

18 MUP, the Ministry of Defence, the Red Cross, and various security

19 agencies. This advisory body charts a strategy to be followed in the

20 search for missing persons, people who went missing during the homeland

21 war.

22 Q. As head of the Commission for Detainees and Missing Persons, a

23 position to which you were appointed in 1993, and later as head of the

24 Office for Detainees and Missing Persons, what did your work involve?

25 A. I'll try to explain briefly. In 1993 the government of the

Page 3449

1 Republic of Croatia set up a commission for the search for missing

2 persons. And from that day on several modes of organisation changed in

3 that commission following changes in the government. But the tasks boiled

4 down to the search for missing persons, and that involves negotiations

5 with representatives of the countries of the former Yugoslavia who are

6 able to have information about missing persons, as well as exhumations of

7 individual and mass graves in areas that used to be occupied, but also the

8 monitoring of exhumations in Serbia and Montenegro and Bosnia and

9 Herzegovina where we are involved as monitors. And apart from that, one

10 of the tasks of our administration is to conduct identification of exhumed

11 bodies, and of course to keep all possible records about missing persons,

12 about exhumations, records of identified remains from mass graves,

13 official records on prisoners of war who had been released from camps and

14 prisons. And that is also one of the tasks of this administration which

15 used to be a commission earlier.

16 And also when keeping records of missing persons, we obtain data

17 also about displaced persons, people who were afflicted in various ways.

18 Q. Thank you. I'd now like to have displayed certain exhibits.

19 Could the document bearing ERN 0468-7742 please be displayed.

20 Mr. Grujic, are you able to see on the computer, is there ...

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Now, let's turn to page 2 -- well, first let's scroll down a

23 little bit on page 1. I see we're at the top of the page; let's scroll

24 down slowly. And let's turn to page 2 of the B/C/S version of the

25 document, which is pages 2 to 3 in the English version. Incidentally, I

Page 3450

1 have also made hard copies of the English translation of this document.

2 Could I have the assistance of the usher?

3 Mr. Grujic, what is this document?

4 A. That is a statement that I wrote, and that describes -- it gives,

5 first of all, my personal details, and then it describes the chronology of

6 the establishment of this commission, later administration, the reasons

7 why such an institution was created in the Republic of Croatia, going on

8 to describe the purview of this commission and its activities that are

9 listed one by one. It also describes the technical advisory body that is

10 involved in this work, and the methodology of search for missing persons,

11 mentioning as well the decrees that served as a basis for establishing

12 these institutions, beginning with commissions and administrations, and

13 each of these decrees also stipulates the field of expertise of these

14 commissions.

15 Q. Did you provide this document during proofing last month?

16 A. That's correct. That is a document that I produced last month.

17 Q. And is it different from the statement that you had prepared

18 earlier?

19 A. To some extent, some details differ. When I gave my earlier

20 statement, the organisational structure was different. What we had in

21 existence was the Office for Prisoners and Missing Persons, which ceased

22 to be in 2004 when the administration was established for prisoners and

23 missing persons. So this statement was adapted to reflect the changes in

24 the state structure and our organisation of work.

25 Q. Okay. Let's turn to page 11 in the B/C/S version. And in the

Page 3451

1 English version, page 17 of the English version. Mr. Grujic, are there

2 aspects here that are different from the earlier report?

3 A. Yes. It is clear that as time went by some missing persons were

4 found and taken off the list of missing persons, and the number of found

5 and identified persons was deducted from the list of missing persons and

6 added to the number of persons killed. So from that day to date a number

7 of new exhumations were performed, and a number of exhumed victims has

8 increased, and also the number of identified victims has increased. So

9 the only difference is in numbers.

10 Q. So would you --

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: May I just get something clear? Persons that were

12 found were deducted from the number of missing persons and added to the

13 number of killed people. Is that what you say?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct, correct.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: You find a person, and then you add them to the

16 number of killed?

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A missing person can be found in two

18 ways; it can be found alive, and in that case, we take measures to have

19 that person released if he or she is in prison and to reunite them with

20 their family. If the person is found dead, they can be in an individual

21 grave or a mass grave. That is the second option. So when one of the

22 missing persons is found in a mass grave, they are taken off the list of

23 missing persons because they have been found. But since they are dead, we

24 place them on the list of casualties, people killed. That's --

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: You have found the missing person's corpse, not the

Page 3452

1 missing person, in that situation.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct, correct. That's if we find

3 the body of the missing person.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: We must make that clear, make that distinction very

5 clearly, because if you say you found a missing person, and then you are

6 adding to the number of the dead ... A person is alive, but if you found

7 a corpse, it's something different.

8 You may proceed.

9 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.

10 Q. So, Mr. Grujic, would you characterise this document, then, as

11 your updated report?

12 A. Correct. But I have to say here in 31A you will read that the

13 total number of identified remains is -- yes, this is the updated number

14 at this moment.

15 Q. Okay. Thank you.

16 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document be admitted into

17 evidence and assigned an exhibit number, please?

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence, and may it

19 please be given an exhibit number.

20 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 291, Your Honours.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

22 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you. I'd now like the document bearing ERN

23 0469-0799 to be displayed, please. Could we turn to the next page.

24 Q. Mr. Grujic, what is this document?

25 A. This is a decree adopted by the government of the Republic of

Page 3453

1 Croatia on the basis of which the Administration for Missing Persons was

2 established, and it also describes the purview of the administration.

3 Precisely in this Article 64, it says that the Administration for

4 Imprisoned and Missing Persons deals with technical affairs related to the

5 search for imprisoned and missing persons as well as exhumation and

6 identification of remains from mass and individual graves.

7 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honours, could this be admitted into evidence

8 and given an exhibit number, please?

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

10 please be given an exhibit number.

11 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 292, Your Honours.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

13 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you. I would now like the document bearing

14 ERN 0469-0796 to be displayed. And could we turn to the next page. Could

15 we scroll down slowly. And let's turn to the next page.

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: We are now on page 3?

17 MS. VALABHJI: Yes, we are. Let's scroll down as well.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: What are we looking for, Ms. Valabhji?

19 MS. VALABHJI: I was just trying to familiarise the witness with

20 the document. My apologies.

21 Q. Witness, what is this document?

22 A. This is the decree of the government of Croatia on establishing

23 the Commission for Imprisoned and Missing Persons of the Republic of

24 Croatia. I told you that in addition to the administration there was also

25 a commission, precisely this commission, at whose document we are now

Page 3454

1 looking. So this is the decree establishing this commission, or an office

2 for detainees and missing persons as an interdepartmental body which

3 included practically all relevant ministries in the Republic of Croatia

4 dealing with detained and missing persons so the problem could be

5 addressed as efficiently as possible.

6 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honours, could this be admitted into evidence?

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

8 please be given an exhibit number.

9 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 293, Your Honours.

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, very much.

11 MS. VALABHJI: Could the document bearing ERN 0469-3240 now be

12 shown. And let's turn to the next page.

13 Q. Mr. Grujic, what is this document?

14 A. This document is a questionnaire which is filled for every missing

15 person. And this questionnaire is mentioned in the first document that

16 came with my statement. You have the explanation of how this document was

17 drafted. This is a document where all information on a missing person is

18 entered. It has several sections. It lists personal, basic particulars

19 of each missing person, also its status, the manner in which the person

20 went missing, the place, persons who might be responsible for the fact

21 that this person disappeared, also health information on the missing

22 person needed in identification, as well as information about the person

23 who is seeking the missing person.

24 This questionnaire was created in such a way that specialists in

25 criminal science, psychologists, and different other experts were included

Page 3455

1 in creating it, so everybody who could provide a meaningful input into

2 this process. This questionnaire was created in 1994 and it contains

3 various elements recommended by the UN agencies, by ICRC, and so on,

4 listing all the information needed, generally, to find a missing person.

5 MS. VALABHJI: Incidentally, I have hard copies of the English

6 translation - I should have distributed that earlier - of this

7 questionnaire.

8 JUDGE HOEPFEL: On e-court there is only the B/C/S version so far.

9 MS. VALABHJI: I think that's right, and I hope the hard copies

10 will assist in remedying that problem.

11 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.

12 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document and its

13 accompanying translation be admitted into evidence?

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the document and its accompanying translation

15 be admitted into evidence and may it please be given an exhibit number.

16 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 294, Your Honours.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

18 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.

19 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I would like a little bit more time to peruse

20 the questionnaire. Not too long, just a little bit more time. Thank you.

21 Thank you very much. I have completed now.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may proceed.

23 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you. Could the document bearing ERN

24 0469-6078 please be exhibited [sic]. And let's turn to the next page,

25 which is also the second page of the English version. It seems a little

Page 3456

1 hard to read. I wonder if it can be made slightly bigger. Okay.

2 Q. Mr. Grujic, what is this document about?

3 A. This is an organigramme of the structure of bodies participating

4 in the process of exhumation and identification. It also describes the

5 process. It lists the participants and describes their jobs in that

6 process. Based on this scheme, you can see that the Ministry of Family --

7 the Ministry of Family and Intergenerational Solidarity Affairs prepares

8 information on the missing persons in the places where mass graves are

9 found, organises and coordinates exhumation, conducts preliminary

10 identification, and then identification keeps records on exhumation and

11 identification and collects full documentation on the process. On the

12 right part of this organigramme we can see that international

13 organisations participate in a transparent manner in this entire process

14 and their experts are given opportunity to monitor the process. In

15 everything that has been done from 1996 until today, we exhumed 140 mass

16 graves and over 2.000 individual graves, and practically in all of these

17 instances international observers took part.

18 Then you can see the portion pertaining to the administration, and

19 you can see which bodies participate in exhumation and their tasks. You

20 will see that the Ministry of the Interior is listed here as a body which

21 takes -- ensures that there is security; that it secures the place, it

22 de-mines the area, and conducts certain technical steps on site, as well

23 as keeps a record of exhumation.

24 The following body which participates is Ministry of Defence,

25 which is involved for purely logistical reasons. There is a department

Page 3457

1 within the Ministry of Defence which deals almost exclusively with

2 exhumations. They conduct engineering work on sites where mass graves and

3 individual graves are located. They also transport remains and process

4 them further.

5 Then we have the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs. They

6 ensure that doctors, specialists in forensic medicine are present, or

7 pathologists, and they submit information to the Administration for

8 Detained and Missing Persons, and coordinate that part of record-keeping.

9 Then we have the Ministry of Justice, which ensures that an

10 investigative judge is present who conducts the investigation, and then

11 all relevant documents are submitted to the Administration for Detained

12 and Missing Persons.

13 In addition to these bodies, Croatian Red Cross is also involved

14 as a humanitarian agency, which collects information needed for

15 identification, it also contacts family members and invites them to be

16 present. So they are actually a body who contacts the family to ensure

17 that the family is present when exhumation and identification are

18 conducted.

19 Q. Thank you.

20 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document be admitted into

21 evidence?

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

23 please be given an exhibit number.

24 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 295, Your Honours.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

Page 3458

1 MS. VALABHJI:

2 Q. Mr. Grujic, in your updated report you discuss various statistics

3 concerning missing, exhumed, displaces and detained persons. I would like

4 to discuss some of these statistics in greater detail, particularly in

5 connection with various charts and tables.

6 MS. VALABHJI: And to that end, could the document bearing ERN

7 0469-3103 please be displayed.

8 I see that it's the English version which is on the screen, and

9 the English and B/C/S are, of course, part of the same document.

10 Actually, I have a hard copy of the B/C/S version. Perhaps to facilitate

11 matters, this could be shown to the witness.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you have a hard copy for your opposite number?

13 MS. VALABHJI: Unfortunately, I don't. The document that's

14 currently displayed on the screen has the English followed by the B/C/S,

15 so it's of course not going to be possible to show both versions

16 simultaneously because they are in one and the same document, and I see --

17 Mr. Whiting has informed me that the witness already has a copy, in which

18 case --

19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is that correct, Mr. Grujic?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct. I have my own copy.

21 Both in Croatian and in English.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. So you would like to perhaps hand over

23 the copy to your opposite number.

24 MS. VALABHJI: Indeed. Thank you.

25 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I just wish to

Page 3459

1 inform you that the Defence has a copy of this document, so everything is

2 fine, thank you.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Milovancevic.

4 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you. Could we turn to page 2 of the

5 document.

6 Q. Mr. Grujic, please take a look at page 2.

7 A. Yes. This is a chart showing exhumed persons. There are 3.568 so

8 far, out of which 2.982 have been identified, or perhaps 84 per cent.

9 Q. Who prepared this chart?

10 A. This document, and actually all charts, have been prepared in my

11 office, and I took part in their creation.

12 Q. And when was it prepared?

13 A. These are the most current data. This document was created last

14 month.

15 Q. Now, in what country did these exhumations take place?

16 A. The exhumations depicted here took place in the territory of the

17 Republic of Croatia in the areas which used to be temporarily occupied

18 previously.

19 Q. And during what period of time did these exhumations take place?

20 A. The said exhumations, the process of exhuming bodies was commenced

21 in 1996 after the occupied territories had been liberated and after it was

22 enabled -- after we were enabled access to this territory of Croatia, the

23 newly reintegrated territory of Croatia.

24 Q. Let's turn to page 5 of the document. Of course it's page 5 in

25 both versions. Now, on this page the status -- pardon me -- yes, this

Page 3460

1 chart lists several categories of persons, such as civilians and soldiers.

2 How were these figures tabulated?

3 A. It is obvious that all members of armed forces of the Republic of

4 Croatia were recorded by the Ministry of Veterans' Affairs and

5 Intergenerational Solidarity. All of those whose names were recorded,

6 based on the questionnaires that we mentioned earlier, were the sources

7 based on which this data was compiled. The chart on the right side

8 describes only those whose status was known. In the cases where the

9 status was not known, we were unable to give analysis of that.

10 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document be admitted into

11 evidence?

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

13 please be given an exhibit number.

14 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 296, Your Honours.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

16 You may proceed, Ms. Valabhji.

17 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you. May the document bearing ERN 0469-3089

18 please be shown. Perhaps if the usher -- I have the B/C/S, because I see

19 the witness is looking for the document.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Everything is fine.

21 Q. Okay. Could we turn to page 2 of the document. Now, on this page

22 the total number of killed persons is listed as 12.078. Witness, on what

23 basis was this figure reached?

24 A. The list of persons who were killed was created on the basis of

25 the decision of the government of Croatia by my office. The sources for

Page 3461

1 compiling this single list were the list of persons who were killed, by

2 the Ministry of Health and Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Croatia.

3 These lists were unified and the number of exhumed persons was added to

4 the list. At this point in time we can say with certainty that in the

5 Republic of Croatia, at least - I'm repeating, at least - 12.078 persons

6 were killed.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry, there's something I would like to understand

8 that may very well be a problem of interpretation. There is a sentence

9 here that says: "The sources for compiling this single list were the list

10 of persons who were killed, by the Ministry of Health and Ministry of

11 Defence of the Republic of Croatia." Is that what is intended to be said?

12 MS. VALABHJI:

13 Q. Witness, could you -- did you understand His Honour's question

14 pertaining to the response you just gave?

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: My understanding of that statement is that these

16 people were killed by the Ministry of Health and the Defence.

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, this must be an interpretation

18 problem. As I have said, on the basis of lists compiled by these

19 institutions in the course of their work -- I'm now describing events

20 which took place 10 years ago. We took these lists, we unified them in my

21 office where we keep official records on these persons, so the lists

22 coming from these ministries were simply a source for creating this final

23 list. We have details on each name entered on the list. The institutions

24 which, at the time, were active in this field, namely the Ministry of

25 Health, which received from the ground information on persons who were

Page 3462

1 killed, they recorded this information, we took this information over from

2 them, and created a single database on persons who were killed. I just

3 wanted to explain how we came into possession of these details.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

5 MS. VALABHJI:

6 Q. Now, let's turn to page 4 of this document. Mr. Grujic, what does

7 this chart show in terms of the number of killed civilians? What is the

8 figure that is shown?

9 A. Based on this chart, we can see that 4.508 persons were civilians,

10 782 persons, and their status is not known. We don't have reliable

11 information about their status. But out of the total number, 6.788 were

12 members of armed forces.

13 Q. Now, as to the figure relating to civilians, how was this

14 statistic derived or tabulated?

15 A. Just like information on all casualties, when information is

16 recorded, the status of a person is also recorded. However, the situation

17 is even clearer in this case: We have firm, reliable information. Even

18 though 782 persons could be said that they were not members of the armed

19 forces of the Republic of Croatia, but we don't have firm information

20 confirming that they were civilians.

21 How is this possible? Members of the armed forces of the Republic

22 of Croatia were recorded, their names were recorded. Their families today

23 continue to receive certain benefits based on their status. In order to

24 receive benefits, they need to submit a number of documents confirming

25 that members of their family were members of armed forces. So we have a

Page 3463

1 very firm, reliable figure in this case. It is clear that they are

2 interested in receiving financial benefits.

3 So let me repeat: In addition to being recorded by the Ministry

4 of Defence of the Republic of Croatia, in the case of these 6.788 persons,

5 their family members receive, nowadays, financial benefits on the basis of

6 the fact that their family members were members of armed forces of the

7 Republic of Croatia and took part in combat. So we have a double source

8 in this case to confirm their status, namely that of the members of armed

9 forces.

10 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this set of documents be

11 admitted into evidence?

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: This set of documents is admitted into evidence.

13 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: May it please be given an exhibit number, and I

15 apologise for not using the microphone earlier.

16 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 297, Your Honours.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

18 JUDGE HOEPFEL: May I ask a question? By the set of documents,

19 you mean this 14-page document?

20 MS. VALABHJI: My apologies.

21 JUDGE HOEPFEL: No, this is one question, I have a second one.

22 MS. VALABHJI: Yes, I meant the document that starts with ERN

23 0469-3089.

24 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Yes, and what I wanted to ask, how does this

25 document relate to the former one about -- the chart about exhumed and

Page 3464

1 identified persons? We had the number of 3.568 exhumed and identified

2 persons, and then the last chart about 12.078 killed persons. How does

3 this relate to each other? Is the exhumed -- are the exhumed persons part

4 of the killed persons, and how did you do that? Just to clarify that.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Precisely. 11.296 -- or rather, we

6 have to say 12.078 is the total number firmly recorded as the number of

7 deaths. That number, 12.078, includes victims exhumed from mass and

8 individual graves, around 2.500 [as interpreted].

9 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: So what is the 2.500? It says "around 2.500."

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know what is unclear. Where

12 is that number?

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: On the evidence, on the transcript, the witness

14 said: "... as the number of -- That number, 12.078, includes victims

15 exhumed from mass and individual graves, around 2.500." My question is,

16 what does, "around 2.500" mean?

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It must be an error. It's not

18 2.500, it's -- the total number of exhumed, I will tell you the exact

19 number, it's 3.568. Not 2.000, but 3.500.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: My question is simply what does, "around 2.500" at

21 the end of your answer at page 20, lines 2 to 4, to 5 mean? That's all.

22 Is it something that came by mistake that shouldn't be there, or what --

23 does it have any significance?

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's obviously an error relating to

25 the number of exhumed victims. What I said is that the total number of

Page 3465

1 dead is 12.078, including the number of exhumed from mass and individual

2 graves, which is not 2.500, but 3.568.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

4 MS. VALABHJI: Okay. Could we show the document bearing ERN --

5 has the previous document been assigned an exhibit number? I'm referring

6 to 0469-3089.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's what you collectively called a set.

8 MS. VALABHJI: And caused some confusion in the process. Okay.

9 Thank you. Could we now show 0469-3071, please.

10 Q. Mr. Grujic, have you located the document?

11 A. [No interpretation].

12 Q. Let's turn to page 2. Mr. Grujic, what -- what are these charts

13 about?

14 A. This particular chart relates to missing persons and it's evident

15 from it that at this time in the Republic of Croatia, we have 1.140

16 persons still missing. And this chart depicts the structure according to

17 gender. We see that 970 men and 223 women are still recorded as missing.

18 Q. And let's turn to page 7. What does this page illustrate?

19 A. This page shows the number of missing persons by districts, by

20 administrative units in the Republic of Croatia. It shows clearly that

21 the greatest number of missing persons is in the Vukovar-Srijem county,

22 504; in Sisak-Moslavina county, 264 persons; Osijek-Baranja county, 88;

23 and so on. It shows the number of missing persons according to the region

24 where they went missing -- from which they went missing.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Maybe this may just be an opportune time to ask my

Page 3466

1 question which I was going to ask about all the other documents that have

2 been handed in. I was going to ask, in fact, whether we have the data per

3 region like that of the dead people, the 12.078, and all those other

4 people.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What kind of data? Maybe --

6 JUDGE MOLOTO: The data per region. You said, for instance, there

7 were 12.078 people dead. In that document are we going to find a

8 distribution of the 12.078 according to regions and districts, like you

9 have done in this particular case? That was a question I was going to ask

10 about the dead people and all the other statistics that you have given us

11 so far, whether the statistics have been broken down in terms of districts

12 like that.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They are not broken down by

14 counties, but I have the ethnic structure that I can give you, the age

15 structure and the gender breakdown of these numbers.

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is that information in the analysis, in the data

17 that you have filed?

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think so. We have these numbers

19 in these tables organised precisely in the way I just described. As Madam

20 Prosecutor said, they are to be found in a set of documents.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Coming back to this document

22 that's on the screen, the 1.140 missing people, do we have names attached

23 to all the 1.140? In other words, do we know who these people are who are

24 missing? Otherwise, how do we get to that number of missing people?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely. We spoke earlier of a

Page 3467

1 document that we named Questionnaire for Missing Persons. Each missing

2 person has attached to them a questionnaire giving all their personal

3 details, the circumstances, time and place of disappearance. Every

4 missing person has a file, a name and surname, and behind each one of them

5 there is a person looking for them.

6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. That satisfies me.

7 MS. VALABHJI:

8 Q. I just had one more question about this document. Turning to the

9 next page, which is page 8 -- Turning to the next page, which is page 8,

10 Mr. Grujic, can you tell us, during what period of time did these persons

11 go missing?

12 A. Again, we're talking about the current situation, that is the

13 total of 1.140 missing persons, each of whom, as I said, has a file, a

14 dossier. On the basis of data from these dossier, we compiled these

15 statistics which shows that out of this total number in 1991, 943 went

16 missing, 113 went missing in 1992, 15 in 1993, 3 went missing in 1994, and

17 22 went missing in 1995. For 44 of them the year of disappearance is not

18 known.

19 I wanted to add one more thing. This is the current number of

20 missing persons. But in 1991 the number of missing persons was 18.000.

21 And their cases were resolved in various ways. As I said, missing persons

22 can be found alive and reunited with their families, or released from

23 prisons, or they can be found dead through exhumations. But currently we

24 have this number, 1.140, as shown here.

25 MS. VALABHJI: I see we've reached -- well, we are a little past

Page 3468

1 the hour, Your Honour. Perhaps this would be a convenient time. Or we

2 could also -- I was just going to ask that this document be tendered into

3 evidence.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

5 please be given an exhibit number.

6 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 298, Your Honours.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. And indeed it does look like

8 it is a convenient time to take the break. We will come back at quarter

9 to 11.00. Court adjourned.

10 --- Recess taken at 10.18 a.m.

11 --- On resuming at 10.46 a.m.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Ms. Valabhji.

13 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you. Thank you, Your Honour.

14 Continuing with the documents, could the document bearing ERN

15 0469-3055 please be shown.

16 Q. Mr. Grujic, have you located the document?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Let's turn to page 2 of the document. What does this document

19 pertain to?

20 A. This document deals with people expelled from somewhere in the

21 territory of the Republic of Croatia, and we see that there is a total of

22 220.338 expelled persons, out of which 105.036 are men, and 115.302 are

23 women. Or, in terms of percentage, 52 per cent are women, and 47.7 per

24 cent are men.

25 Q. And how was this figure of 220.338 reached?

Page 3469

1 A. In the Republic of Croatia there is an office for expelled

2 persons, or displaced persons that has registered each such person, and

3 each of them has a dossier. So behind each of these numbers we have a

4 name, surname, and personal details, and they are compatible, these

5 numbers and data, with the data of the UNHCR.

6 Q. And let's turn to the next page. What does this page illustrate,

7 in a sentence?

8 A. This shows the ethnic structure of displaced persons, those

9 220.338 persons.

10 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document be admitted into

11 evidence?

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

13 please be given an exhibit number.

14 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 299, Your Honours.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

16 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you. Now let's take a look at the document

17 bearing ERN 0469-3033.

18 Q. What is this document about?

19 A. In this set of documents we have an analysis of imprisoned

20 persons. 7.666 were recorded as held in camps and prisons of previously

21 occupied areas in the Republic of Croatia, in Serbia, or in Bosnia and

22 Herzegovina.

23 Q. And how was this figure derived?

24 A. As I said in the introduction of my statement, the Administration

25 for Imprisoned and Missing Persons keeps records on prisoners of war, and

Page 3470

1 behind each number again there is a name and surname, the circumstances of

2 detention or arrest, and release. Most of these people were also recorded

3 by the International Red Cross as prisoners of war.

4 Q. And what time period does this figure pertain to?

5 A. The greatest number of detainees were released by 1992, and the

6 last prisoner was released in 1996.

7 Q. And, finally, let's turn to page 5 of the document. What does

8 this page show?

9 A. On this page we see the ethnic structure of imprisoned persons.

10 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document be admitted into

11 evidence?

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

13 please be given an exhibit number.

14 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 300, Your Honours.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Could I just ask two questions relating to this

16 document. Is there a breakdown in terms of soldiers and civilians, of

17 these numbers?

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. In that document we see an

19 indication of the status of the detainee. Where it says that 2.094

20 persons were recorded in the category of members of the armed forces of

21 the Republic of Croatia, whereas 1.865 were registered as civilians, and

22 with regard to 3.614, the status is not determined. But we can go back

23 again to what I said earlier, that family members of the members of the

24 armed forces receive benefits, and therefore we can deduce that those

25 3.614 are not members of the armed forces.

Page 3471

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. You indicated a little earlier,

2 Mr. Grujic, that the last detained person came out around 1995. Did I

3 correctly hear you?

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 1996.

5 JUDGE MOLOTO: 1996. Since 1996, after the last detainee had been

6 released, has it not been possible to determine the nationality of the

7 24.5 per cent whose nationality is still undetermined?

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have to say that in the Republic

9 of Croatia we have a law on confidentiality of information, so that data

10 on ethnicity is not accessible without the express consent of each person

11 concerned. So anybody who wished to declare their ethnicity has done so

12 on previous occasions when information was gathered.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

14 You may proceed, Ms. Valabhji.

15 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

16 MS. VALABHJI: Could the next document, bearing ERN number

17 0469-3252 please be displayed. Could it be enlarged a little bit? Please

18 scroll down.

19 Q. Mr. Grujic, can you tell us what this document is about?

20 A. This document depicts the situation in the Bacin area; the number

21 of residents and their structure in 1991, the number of displaced

22 in that place. It says that in 1991 there were 414 residents, out of

23 which 393 Croats, 9 unknown, and 6 Serbs, and 6 others. Out of that total

24 number, 286 were registered as displaced or expelled. And, furthermore,

25 13 are still on record as missing. This statistical document says that 58

Page 3472

1 persons were exhumed in Bacin from one mass grave and two individual

2 graves. Out of these 58, 44 bodies have been positively identified, and

3 each them is categorised according to their ethnicity, gender and age.

4 Q. Were you present at that exhumation?

5 A. Yes. I took part in that process, beginning with the search for

6 the location, through the organisation and implementation of this

7 exhumation, up to the identification of bodies found.

8 Q. Let's look at the next page of this document. What is -- what

9 does this page show, what's it about?

10 A. On this page we see information about Hrvatska Dubica, which is

11 adjacent to Bacin, and we see that in 1991 the population of Hrvatska

12 Dubica was 2.062. 694 were expelled, 12 are still recorded as missing, 7

13 persons -- 7 bodies were exhumed, out of which 6 were positively

14 identified, and they were exhumed from individual graves. And again we

15 see breakdowns by ethnicity, age and gender.

16 Q. Could we turn to the next page. Could you tell us what this page

17 illustrates.

18 A. Once again we see that the structure is the same. It is described

19 here that in a place called Cerovljani in 1991, there were 512 residents,

20 and we see their ethnic make-up. 203 persons were recorded as deported or

21 expelled. We see their age breakdowns, we also see that two persons are

22 still listed as missing, two persons from Cerovljani. Further on we see

23 that three bodies were exhumed in Cerovljani, out of which all three were

24 positively identified, and then we see their gender, ethnic and age

25 breakdown. And then we see that their bodies were exhumed from individual

Page 3473

1 graves.

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are we on the same page? We've got Skabrnja on the

3 monitor.

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have Cerovljani.

5 MS. VALABHJI: I think, Your Honours, when -- probably the pages

6 have been somehow changed around.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Let's put it down to our inability to deal with

8 technology.

9 MS. VALABHJI: Let's look at the next page.

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Indeed it was technology.

11 MS. VALABHJI: I won't be going through all the pages of this

12 document. At this time I would simply ask that it be given an exhibit

13 number.

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the document please be given an exhibit number.

15 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 301, Your Honours.

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: You don't want it admitted into evidence?

17 MS. VALABHJI: I would very much like it to be admitted, Your

18 Honour.

19 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence.

20 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: You're welcome.

22 MS. VALABHJI:

23 Q. Mr. Grujic, prior to coming here to testify, were you asked to

24 review certain lists of victims contained in the indictment in this case

25 and to check them against the records kept by your office on killed,

Page 3474

1 exhumed and missing persons?

2 A. Yes. I analysed the list of victims from the indictment and I

3 compared it with the list and official records kept by my office. And in

4 relation to each of these places, or rather, in relation to each of them,

5 we made an analysis covering each name. That is to say, covering each

6 name and each place.

7 MS. VALABHJI: Could the document bearing ERN 0469-3261 please be

8 displayed.

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: While that document is being displayed, Mr. Grujic,

10 can I just ask, did you have a similar analysis relating to detained

11 people? The question had been to you whether you had anything to -- any

12 analysis relating to killed, exhumed and missing persons. I know there

13 are no longer detained persons, but did you have a similar thing with

14 respect to those who were detained?

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, not in this manner as I did

16 here. I did an analysis here because there are names given in the

17 indictment. But certainly the analysis of detained persons could also be

18 done. We know which prisons existed, camps, and who was detained where.

19 We have that information. But we did not do that type of analysis at this

20 time.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Grujic.

22 MS. VALABHJI: Could we see the document bearing ERN 0469-3261.

23 And I have some hard copies of this document. Could I have the assistance

24 of the usher? This is actually the translation of the document, and I

25 don't think it's in e-court, so that necessitates the distribution of hard

Page 3475

1 copies.

2 Q. Mr. Grujic, do you recognise this document?

3 A. Yes. This is the document that I mentioned, the document

4 representing the analysis of the victims mentioned in the indictment.

5 Q. Let's turn to page 2 of the document. Can you explain to us how

6 this list was annotated? What does it show, and how was it annotated?

7 A. Yes. On the left side you have family name and then first name

8 and then the date of birth. This pertains to victims listed in the

9 indictment. Following that, on the right-hand side, after the date of

10 birth, we have the column indicating the gender of victims, and then the

11 next category is -- the next column reflects what happened to the victim.

12 And it can be interpreted using the key that is enclosed with this

13 document. In relation to the first name, Katarina Alavancic, we see that

14 she was born on the 10th of November, 1910, she's of female gender, and

15 the category indicates that she has been identified.

16 Then we have the next column, entitled, "Circumstances." She was

17 found in a mass grave, in a place called Skela, exhumed on the 13th -- on

18 the 25th of March, 1997. She was identified -- or she was recorded

19 previously as an unidentified victim under the number given here, and then

20 she was identified on the 18th of March, 1999.

21 And then we have similar explanations given for all other victims.

22 In instances where we have abbreviation "ND," that means that we

23 have no information pertaining to the person listed in the indictment. If

24 the abbreviation "NES" is seen, that means that that person is still

25 listed as missing. Abbreviation "CPO" stands for the fact that a request

Page 3476

1 was submitted to locate mortal remains. So such a procedure can be

2 initiated in cases where a person is listed as missing.

3 Q. This list that we're currently looking at, which location does it

4 pertain to? Let's scroll up, please.

5 A. This pertains to Bacin.

6 Q. Now, let's turn to page 4 of this document. It's ERN 3264. There

7 are three lines in bold. Could you explain those three lines?

8 A. In these cases these persons were found alive. They were

9 previously listed as missing, and they were found alive, so the seeking

10 procedure was terminated in their cases.

11 Q. Let's turn to the next page. What location does this pertain to,

12 this list?

13 A. The analysis was made in the same way as in the case of Bacin.

14 This pertains to Lipovaca Dreznicka, that's the name of the place, and we

15 have seven persons in this location.

16 Q. Let's turn to the next page. Again, where does this pertain to?

17 A. This analysis pertains to Vukovici. We have 10 persons on the

18 list, out of which two have been identified, four were established to be

19 dead, one is missing, and we have no information concerning three persons.

20 Q. Going to the next page, what area or place does this list refer

21 to?

22 A. This list represents an analysis conducted in the same way, and it

23 pertains to Saborsko. In Saborsko we have 28 persons on this list, out of

24 which 27 were identified, and one person is recorded as killed.

25 Q. Let's turn to the next page. What location?

Page 3477

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Before we go to the next page, can we just take a

2 moment on Saborsko. The one person is recorded as killed, the rest -- or

3 we've got to go back to the -- are the rest alive?

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. All 28 persons were killed.

5 Out of those 28, however, one person, before the exhumation, was recorded

6 as killed in the list including 12.000 people, whereas in case of these 27

7 persons, their bodies were found in two mass graves in Saborsko, and also

8 in some individual graves.

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

10 MS. VALABHJI:

11 Q. And turning to the next page, which location does this list

12 pertain to?

13 A. This list pertains to Skabrnja. The list has names of 38

14 persons. All of them are also recorded in the list of persons killed

15 containing 12.000 and something names.

16 Q. The next page, please?

17 A. The next page deals with Nadin. There are seven persons on the

18 list. All seven are also listed as identified, meaning they were exhumed

19 and identified.

20 Q. Okay. Let's just go through one more page. The next page,

21 please. What does this page show?

22 A. This page takes us back to Skabrnja, however in this case it deals

23 with a different event. This list has 26 persons, all 26 were identified,

24 and all of them, all 26, were buried -- or rather, I apologise, 25 were

25 buried in the mass grave in Skabrnja, which was exhumed between the 5th

Page 3478

1 and 6th of June, 1996. All persons on this list were identified.

2 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

3 into evidence?

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: This document is admitted into evidence. And may

5 it please be -- the document is admitted into evidence, and may it please

6 be given an exhibit number.

7 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 302, Your Honours.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

9 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Can I ask something about the last page we were

10 just looking at? Referring to the second event, as it says, and it says

11 18 November, 1991 to February 1992, whereas the first page concerning

12 Skabrnja refers to 18 and 19 November, 1991. So is this a distinct list

13 but still also concerning 18th of November 1991, in part, or what can we

14 say about that?

15 MS. VALABHJI:

16 Q. Witness, His Honour has asked a question regarding the last list

17 and its temporal frame in comparison with the other list we saw on

18 Skabrnja, which says 18th to 19th November, 1991. Is there an overlap?

19 Could you explain?

20 A. Well, I will try to explain. The first list, the first one we

21 mentioned involving Skabrnja, clearly has to do with the victims who were

22 killed on the 18th and 19th of November. These victims -- or their

23 bodies, following some local negotiations, were turned over to their

24 families. At the time, we knew nothing about the circumstances of their

25 death and exhumation, we simply had a situation where we had mortal

Page 3479

1 remains delivered in 1991. Let me verify the year to make sure that I

2 didn't make a mistake. In 1992 these remains were handed over, and it was

3 then that we recorded these persons as killed. Autopsies were conducted,

4 and there are records of them.

5 In case of the second event, we found a mass grave in Skabrnja.

6 We exhumed it on the 5th and 6th of June, 1996. And there we have all

7 records concerning the entire process of exhumation and identification.

8 So, yes, there is some temporal overlap, because some of these people,

9 based on eye-witness testimony, were killed in 1991, between November of

10 1991 and February of 1992. I don't have more specific information about

11 the exact time of death. I just have information about the place and time

12 of exhumation. And in relation to that, we have all relevant data, yes.

13 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.

14 MS. VALABHJI: Could the document bearing ERN 0469-3121 please be

15 shown. Could we enlarge it somewhat?

16 Q. Mr. Grujic, what is this document? Who prepared it?

17 A. This document was prepared by the Crisis Staff of the Ministry of

18 Health, information and investigation department. These documents were

19 forwarded to my office, because my office kept records on casualties.

20 This document pertains to the civilians who were killed in the course of

21 the artillery attack on Zagreb on the 2nd and 3rd of May, 1992.

22 Q. Turning to page 2 of the document - it's page 2 in both the

23 English and B/C/S versions - what is written under the headings "Weapons,"

24 and "Targets"?

25 A. Under the heading "Weapons," we see that there were 12 missiles,

Page 3480

1 six -- and six each in attack. They were of a type called Orkan, and they

2 had cluster filling. This type of a weapon is intended to produce as

3 large a number of personnel casualties as possible without significant

4 property damage. These weapons are banned by international conventions.

5 And then under "Targets," we see that the targets were all in the

6 centre of the town and its vicinity, and then we see what particular

7 houses were hit.

8 Q. Thank you.

9 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document be admitted into

10 evidence?

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

12 please be given an exhibit number.

13 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 303, Your Honours.

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

15 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

16 Could 65 ter number 399 please be displayed. And let's turn to

17 the next page, the top half of the page. In the English version, that

18 would be page 3 at the top.

19 Q. Mr. Grujic, what is this document?

20 A. This document speaks of the exhumation which was carried out in

21 Rakovica municipality in places called Drezni -- Lipovacka Dreznica --

22 Dreznicka, Lipovac, Klanac, Korita Rakovicka, Ostarski Stanovi. This is

23 in the territory of Rakovica municipality where exhumations were carried

24 out. This is a record of the exhumation. We can see, based on this

25 record, that the exhumation took place on the 12th of June, 1996, pursuant

Page 3481

1 to the proposal of the Commission on Detained and Missing Persons of the

2 Republic of Croatia. In a total of four locations exhumation was

3 conducted, and we have a record of it.

4 Q. Incidentally, where is Rakovica municipality?

5 A. It is located in the Karlovac district. And I'll give you more

6 precise data now. The exhumations that were performed were performed in

7 the places I already enumerated, Lipovacka Dreznica, a site which is not

8 far from Slunj town.

9 Q. And did you participate in these exhumations?

10 A. I wasn't there all the time, but I visited and supervised the

11 process, and I think you can see that from the record. According to our

12 prevailing rules, I supervised the drafting of the records and I toured

13 regularly during exhumations, but I wasn't there throughout the

14 exhumation.

15 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

16 into evidence?

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

18 please be given an exhibit number.

19 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 304, Your Honours.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

21 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.

22 Let's take a look now at 65 ter number 402. Let's scroll down

23 slowly. And let's look at page 2.

24 Q. Mr. Grujic, are you familiar with the contents of this document?

25 A. Yes. Just as the previous document, this is a record of an

Page 3482

1 exhumation, this time applying to Skabrnja. It was a mass grave that was

2 exhumed on the 5th and 6th of June, 1996. We can also see from the record

3 I was present and that the whole process was initiated by the Commission

4 for Imprisoned and Missing Persons, and that this record was drafted by an

5 investigating judge.

6 Q. Thank you.

7 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

8 into evidence?

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

10 please be given an exhibit number.

11 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 305, Your Honours.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

13 MS. VALABHJI: Could 65 ter number 373 please be shown. Let's

14 turn to page 3 of the document, which is page 3 in both the English and

15 B/C/S versions. And I would also like to take a look at page 5 of the

16 B/C/S version, which is page 4 in the English.

17 Q. Mr. Grujic, what is this document?

18 A. This is the first page of a dossier of a missing person that we

19 discussed earlier. And we can see that details have been recorded for a

20 missing person, Ana Tepic, nee Isaic, daughter of Nikola and Ana, and

21 mother's maiden name Stanisavac. She was born on the 8th of March, 1925,

22 in Hrvatska Dubica. She is an ethnic Serb and an Orthodox Christian by

23 religion. Her residence was Buzadjica 68, and the county was

24 Sisak-Moslavina county.

25 Q. Is the document part of the records kept by your office?

Page 3483

1 A. Yes. This is a dossier of a missing person that has been kept by

2 my office all the time. And this particular person was taken off the list

3 of missing persons and added to the list of deaths, because her remains

4 were found in a mass grave.

5 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

6 into evidence?

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

8 please be given an exhibit number.

9 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 306, Your Honours.

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

11 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.

12 Could we now look at 65 ter 374. Let's turn to page 5 of the

13 document, which is page 5 in both versions. Could we scroll down, please?

14 Q. Mr. Grujic, what is this document?

15 A. It's the same kind of document as the one we just discussed. It's

16 the first page of the dossier of a missing person. This particular

17 person, Antun Mucavac, was born in Hrvatska Dubica in the Sisak-Moslavina

18 county, an ethnic Croat of Roman Catholic faith, and he resided in

19 Hrvatska Dubica in Djure Trninica Street, number 29.

20 Q. Turning to page 6 of the B/C/S version, which is also page 6 in

21 the English version, could you read aloud the information under item 5 of

22 the section entitled, "Information on abduction, disappearance and

23 capture." I think we have to scroll down. Yeah. It's the information

24 under item 5 of the section entitled "Information on abduction,

25 disappearance and capture." Could you please read it aloud.

Page 3484

1 A. The dossier of a missing person contains a chapter that reflects

2 the circumstances of disappearance or arrest of that person. The person

3 who is looking for this missing person gave the following information:

4 That they went missing in October, 1991, around a month after the fall of

5 Hrvatska Dubica after it was occupied, and in parentheses, the fall of

6 Dubica is dated to the 14th of September, 1991. The person was taken from

7 their own home, and the address is indicated, municipality Hrvatska

8 Kostajnica, the Sisak-Moslavina county. Circumstances are described as

9 follows: After the fall of Dubica, the remaining Croats were rounded up

10 and taken to the then fire brigade hall, never to be seen again. The last

11 question is: Were there other persons who were forcibly taken away,

12 together with the missing person? The answer is yes.

13 Q. Thank you.

14 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document be given an --

15 admitted into evidence, please?

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

17 please be given an exhibit number.

18 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 307, Your Honours.

19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

20 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you. Could we now look at 65 ter number

21 376. And let's look at page 5 of this document. It's page 5 in both

22 versions.

23 Q. And again, Mr. Grujic, in brief, what is this document about?

24 A. It's the first page of a dossier, a request to search for a

25 missing person. And we see that it was filled in 1994, the missing person

Page 3485

1 is Marija Djukic.

2 Q. And in what year was the missing person born?

3 A. The date of birth is indicated as the 17th of April, 1923.

4 Q. And where was she living at the time of her disappearance?

5 A. Place of birth is Hrvatska Dubica, last residence was Marsala Tita

6 Street, number 4, in Hrvatska Dubica.

7 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

8 into evidence?

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: That document is admitted into evidence. May it

10 please be given an exhibit number.

11 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 308, Your Honours.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

13 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you. Let's look at 65 ter 377. Can we look

14 at page 5 of the B/C/S version, which is page 6 -- pardon me, page 7 in

15 the English. Please scroll down. Thank you.

16 Q. Mr. Grujic, can you briefly tell us what this document pertains

17 to?

18 A. As the previous ones, this is the first page of a dossier. The

19 page is a request for search of a missing person born in 1908. He lived

20 in Cerovljani at the time of disappearance.

21 Q. And his name, could we have his name, please? Please scroll up.

22 A. Andrija Likic.

23 Q. Thank you.

24 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

25 into evidence?

Page 3486

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

2 please be given an exhibit number.

3 THE REGISTRAR: That will be 309, Your Honours.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

5 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you. Turning to 65 ter number 379, please.

6 Can we take a look at page 5 of the B/C/S version, which is page 6 in the

7 English. Please scroll down. Thank you.

8 Q. Now, who does this document pertain to; what year was the

9 individual born?

10 A. This is also another first page of a dossier, the request for

11 search of a missing person, Mara Coric, who lived in Predore 194, in

12 Dubica, municipality Kostajnica, Sisak-Moslavina county. And if you can

13 scroll down -- rather, up, so I can she where she was born. 27th October,

14 1939.

15 Q. Thank you.

16 MS. VALABHJI: Could this document be admitted into evidence?

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

18 please be given an exhibit number.

19 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 310, Your Honours.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

21 MS. VALABHJI: And could we have a look at 65 ter number 383,

22 please. Let's look at page 5 of the B/C/S version, which is page 7 --

23 page 7 in the English. Could it be enlarged, please? And please scroll

24 down. That's fine. Just further up a little, please.

25 Q. Mr. Grujic, again, could you briefly tell us what this document

Page 3487

1 pertains to.

2 A. It's again the front page of a questionnaire, the request for

3 search for a missing person Marija Antolovic, born on the 1st of January,

4 1922, who resided in Cerovljani, Donji Cerovljani, 110, the municipality

5 of Hrvatska Dubica.

6 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, may this admitted into evidence?

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence; may it

8 please be given an exhibit number.

9 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 311, Your Honours.

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

11 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you. Let's take a look at 65 ter 358,

12 please. And could we go to page 6 of the English and B/C/S versions.

13 Please scroll down to the middle of the page. That's great.

14 Q. Mr. Grujic, this document, in a sentence?

15 A. Another first page of the request for search for a missing person.

16 The person in question is Soka Vularevic, born on the 15th of May, 1915.

17 Her place of birth was Bosanska Dubica.

18 Q. Thank you, Witness.

19 MS. VALABHJI: Could this document please be admitted into

20 evidence?

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

22 please be given an exhibit number.

23 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 312, Your Honours.

24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

25 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you. And could we now look at 65 ter number

Page 3488

1 382. And let's go to page 5 of the B/C/S version, which is page 6 in the

2 English. Please scroll down to the middle of the page. That's great.

3 Q. Mr. Grujic, what is this document about?

4 A. Another first page of a questionnaire for search for a missing

5 person, Kata Loncar, born on the 1st of January, 1906, who resided in

6 Cerovljani, municipality of Hrvatska Kostajnica.

7 Q. Thank you.

8 MS. VALABHJI: Could this document be admitted into evidence,

9 please?

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

11 please be given an exhibit number.

12 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 313, Your Honours.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. [Microphone not activated].

14 MS. VALABHJI: Actually, Your Honour, I have only a few more.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: You have no way of -- my apologies. Do I have to

16 repeat myself?

17 MS. VALABHJI: No, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: No, for the record here. It looks like my question

19 to you had been: Are we going through all of them one by one like that?

20 MS. VALABHJI: Actually, yes, Your Honour.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

22 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could we -- well, we are approaching

23 the hour, but we still have five minutes, so I will continue. Could we go

24 into private session, please, Your Honour.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the Chamber please go into private session?

Page 3489

1 [Private session]

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 3490

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 3490-3493 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Page 3494

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 [Open session]

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

6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Maybe just before you

7 proceed, Ms. Valabhji, if we could have that Exhibit 303 on the monitor

8 again, please. I just have one question on it. Thank you. Maybe if we

9 can go to the last page that we looked at.

10 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone please, Your Honour.

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: If you can look at the last page that we looked at

12 -- I don't know whether it was page 8. Let's see. No. That's at page

13 2. At the bottom of that page I see there's a section 2 there, "Victims,"

14 and there is no number. Is there any significance of the lack of a

15 number? At the bottom of page 2.

16 MS. VALABHJI: I think the document continues. Probably the rest

17 of that is appearing on the following page.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: It does look like that's there. Thank you so much,

19 it's just that we didn't go to page 3.

20 MS. VALABHJI: That's right, Your Honour.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

22 MS. VALABHJI: As the final aspect of the direct examination, I

23 would now like to play a few clips from a video. The first clip is

24 slightly on the long side. I think it's approximately 12 minutes or so.

25 I wonder if the actual clip, is it only -- can it only be shown in that

Page 3495

1 size?

2 [Prosecution counsel confer]

3 [Videotape played]

4 MS. VALABHJI: I neglected to mention what the video is about,

5 Your Honours. This is a video concerning certain exhumations. And after

6 we play the first clip, I'll be asking the witness some questions about

7 it.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Ms. Valabhji. You may proceed.

9 [Videotape played]

10 MS. VALABHJI:

11 Q. Mr. Grujic, do you recognise this video clip?

12 A. Yes. This is a documentary which covered the location of Bacin.

13 The film depicts the process of exhumation and identification of the

14 bodies of victims.

15 Q. Is it accurate? Is the clip accurate?

16 A. Yes. Everything we saw is accurate.

17 Q. And did you have an opportunity to review the entire video itself

18 during proofing last month?

19 A. Yes.

20 MS. VALABHJI: I'd like to now show the remaining clips. Now,

21 they are considerably shorter.

22 [Videotape played]

23 MS. VALABHJI: And the final clip, which is much, much shorter.

24 [Videotape played]

25 MS. VALABHJI:

Page 3496

1 Q. Mr. Grujic, what was the name of the place shown in the final --

2 in the third and final clip?

3 A. It was -- the distance from the designated place is 10 kilometres

4 [as interpreted] relative to the mass grave, from the site where a mass

5 grave was found. And it's just by the edge of the road.

6 Q. Thank you.

7 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this video be admitted into

8 evidence? I have copies of the English translation.

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: The clip is admitted into evidence. May it be

10 given an exhibit number. But did you get the answer to the question, what

11 is the name of the place? Mr. Grujic talked about the distance from the

12 designated place being 10 kilometres. I'm not quite sure what the

13 designated place is.

14 MS. VALABHJI: I think he may have mentioned it at the outset when

15 we watched the first clip.

16 Q. But, Mr. Grujic, could you tell us the name of this region? First

17 of all, where the mass grave is, was found.

18 A. This footage, especially the last frame, was made at the entrance

19 to Bacin village, and the place that was marked by police tape, where

20 there was a concentration of cartridges, was just 10 metres away from the

21 mass grave, along the edge of the road. So the place is Bacin, the site

22 of the mass grave, and 10 metres from the mass grave there were cartridges

23 found.

24 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you. That's now very clear. I think the

25 previous translation said 10 kilometres.

Page 3497

1 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 318, Your Honours.

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

3 MS. VALABHJI: We also have several copies of the video on CD.

4 With the assistance of the usher, could this be distributed. The CD that

5 is being distributed and the accompanying English translation -- actually,

6 this consists of the whole video in which the three clips that we have

7 shown are placed. And so the clips are part of a 43-minute video.

8 With the assistance of the usher, could the English translation

9 please be distributed. Thank you.

10 Just a final point, Your Honours. The transcripts of the evidence

11 of this witness have already been admitted in this case in the decision of

12 the 13th of January, 2006, however, they have yet to be assigned an

13 exhibit number. The ERN of the transcript dated 3rd March is 0504-5454.

14 And the ERN of the transcript of the 4th of March is 0504-5500. I would

15 be grateful if these could be assigned an exhibit number.

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the exhibits please be given an exhibit number

17 and be admitted into evidence.

18 THE REGISTRAR: Document 0504-5454 will be Exhibit Number 319,

19 Your Honours; and document 0504-5500 will be Exhibit Number 320, Your

20 Honours.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

22 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you very much. I have nothing further.

23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Did we admit the CDs into evidence?

24 MS. VALABHJI: I think it was Exhibit Number 318.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. And you did say the CD contains the three

Page 3498

1 clips that were shown.

2 MS. VALABHJI: The CD consists of the entire video, including the

3 three clips. The three clips were merely selections of the 43-minute

4 video.

5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. And the rest of the video is -- must also be

6 admitted into evidence.

7 MS. VALABHJI: Yes, Your Honour. The entire video is what we are

8 seeking to admit into evidence.

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. I think that's how it got

10 admitted.

11 MS. VALABHJI: Together with the transcript. The hard copy, which

12 is the English translation.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the English translation of the CD also be

14 admitted into evidence and be given an exhibit number, if it hasn't been

15 done.

16 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour, that will be included in Exhibit

17 Number 318.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

19 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you done, Ms. Valabhji?

21 MS. VALABHJI: Yes, Your Honour. That completes my examination.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

23 Mr. Milovancevic.

24 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

25 Cross-examination by Mr. Milovancevic:

Page 3499

1 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Grujic, I am Defence counsel for the accused

2 Milan Martic. Now begins the stage that is called cross-examination. I

3 believe you're familiar with it. I would appreciate it if you could try,

4 together with me, to make a pause between question and answers for the

5 sake of the interpreters.

6 In your background details you stated that you found a job with

7 the Ministry of the Interior of Croatia in 1972. You also stated that in

8 1980 you went to a course where you got a diploma for traffic police.

9 A. Correct.

10 Q. In your data I also read that after that you were sent to one

11 year's special training within the police academy, where you acquired

12 experience and qualifications for highly-skilled work within state

13 security, and became a junior inspector; is that correct?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Between 1984 and 1992 you worked in the state security section of

16 the Ministry of the Interior on jobs related to terrorism, correct?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. You stated that in that period you completed anti-terrorist

19 activity training and became a post-graduate to the faculty of criminal

20 sciences and were promoted to the rank of inspector, earning the title of

21 a criminologist.

22 A. Not quite. I completed this training for anti-terrorism and

23 before that year I became a post-graduate, and the faculty of criminal

24 science, criminological science, that was before 1990.

25 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us when you graduated from the

Page 3500

1 criminology course and when you were promoted to inspector first class.

2 A. As for the rank, I think I got it in 1980 -- sorry, 1998. I got

3 my promotion in 1998 to inspector first class.

4 Q. Looking at your professional background, I see that in 1990 you

5 were appointed to the post of independent inspector, and head of the war

6 section office of the service for the protection of constitutional order

7 in Osijek. When exactly was it in 1990?

8 A. I cannot tell you exactly, but it was in the first half of that

9 year. Between March and May, if I remember correctly.

10 Q. Did I understand well; it was 1990?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Is it true that in 1990 there was a war section of the service for

13 the protection of constitutional order in Osijek?

14 A. Things were a bit more complicated than that. According to the

15 organisation that existed then, there existed certain areas covered by

16 certain war outposts as a contingency plan, in case they have to be

17 activated. So in that year I was indeed appointed head of such a war

18 outpost that hadn't been activated yet.

19 Q. Can you tell us until when you continued to be head of that war

20 outpost of the service of the protection of constitutional order of

21 Osijek?

22 A. Until the 1st of April 1992.

23 Q. Is it correct when it says that you moved to the Information

24 Security Service when you left your previous job on the 1st of April?

25 A. Correct.

Page 3501

1 Q. Can you tell us, to which ministry did this Information Security

2 Service belong?

3 A. I'm certain it is specified there. From the Ministry of the

4 Interior on the 1st of April, 1992, by decision of the then minister, I

5 was transferred to a job in the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of

6 Croatia, under which they had this service that was named Information and

7 Security Service.

8 Q. Is it correct that from the Ministry of the Interior you

9 transferred to the Ministry of Defence, to the Information Security

10 Service, by virtue of an agreement between the minister of defence and the

11 minister of interior?

12 A. Right. I can explain very briefly what it is about. Since we

13 were understaffed in this area, an agreement was reached between the

14 ministries to the effect that a certain number of staff from the Ministry

15 of the Interior would be transferred to the Ministry of Defence.

16 Q. Thank you. When you speak about your transfer to the Information

17 Security Service within the Ministry of Defence, you say that you worked

18 as an inspector for Eastern Slavonia and that upon moving from the police

19 to the army, you became a major.

20 A. Yes, we have certain rules of procedure concerning such transfers

21 and the change in rank and, according to those rules, I became major in

22 the army.

23 Q. In your background, professional background, it is stated that the

24 government of Croatia, by virtue of a decision from 1993, appointed you

25 president of the Republic of Croatia's Commission for Detainees and

Page 3502

1 Missing Persons.

2 A. That's correct.

3 Q. Before this appointment in 1993, did you perform a similar job in

4 a similar agency in 1991 to 1993?

5 A. No. But in 1993, if that is what you're driving at, I was also

6 appointed to a commission for war crimes of the Republic of Croatia. But

7 that followed my appointment to the Commission for Detainees and Missing

8 Persons.

9 Q. You say that this government office for detainees was founded in

10 2000, and you were appointed head of that office; is that correct?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. You also explained that after this office for detained and missing

13 persons was ended in January, 1994, you were appointed assistant minister,

14 and later, by decision of the Republic of Croatia's government in August,

15 2005, you were appointed commissioner for war crimes, right?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. When you mentioned a moment ago that you were a member of the

18 commission for war crimes, I suppose you meant this decision of the

19 government from 1994, appointing you.

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. In your professional background I also read that by a decision of

22 the president of the Republic of Croatia, in 1996 you were promoted to the

23 rank of colonel; is that correct?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. As president of the government Commission for Detained and Missing

Page 3503

1 Persons, which you were from 1993, I suppose you succeeded the work of two

2 previous commissions; one commission for handling persons captured in war,

3 and the commission for persons who went missing in the war in Croatia.

4 A. That's correct. Two commissions merged and one commission

5 resulted, the government's Commission for Detained and Missing Persons,

6 attached to the government.

7 Q. Therefore, could it be said that starting in 1990, when you were

8 appointed inspector in the Ministry of the Interior of Croatia, and then

9 in 1992 when you moved to the Ministry of Defence, to the Security and

10 Information Service there, that since then until today you held positions

11 described by you as a commissioner, working in various ministries of the

12 government of Croatia?

13 A. Your question is not quite clear to me. I submitted, as part of

14 the documentation with my statement, the dates of each of my appointments,

15 and from 1993 all of the appointments that were given by the government of

16 Croatia confirmed that I was a commissioner, a civil servant. I worked in

17 various jobs in the Ministry of the Interior until 1992, holding various

18 functions. In 1992 I was promoted to the rank of major. I stayed there

19 and then moved to the Ministry of Defence, and then from there I moved to

20 the Commission for Detained and Missing Persons, and this is the area of

21 my work since then.

22 Q. You, as a government official during that period of time, were you

23 aware that here, at this Tribunal, there was an indictment against the

24 accused Ivan Cermak, Mladen Markac, and Mr. Gotovina, charging the

25 leadership of the Republic of Croatia for participation in a joint

Page 3504

1 criminal enterprise which commenced with Operation Storm in August of

2 1995, and whose common goal was to remove permanently the Serb population

3 from Krajina by committing crimes listed in the indictment. Are you aware

4 of this information?

5 A. I don't have any official information to this effect. If there

6 are any kind of inquiries concerning my work, then, yes, I will be able to

7 respond officially. As for the text of the indictment and legal

8 qualifications provided therein, I can tell you nothing about it. I

9 learned about it from the media. The indictment itself was never served

10 on me, because nothing in my work is related to this indictment.

11 As for the leadership of the government of Croatia being charged,

12 most likely the indictment specifies the specific members of the

13 Government of Croatia. That is to say, it has nothing to do with me.

14 MS. VALABHJI: Could the usher please assist us and give a copy of

15 the indictment, the indictment I mentioned, both to the Trial Chamber and

16 to the expert witness and the OTP. There are B/C/S copies and English

17 copies as well.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, your opposite number is on her

19 feet.

20 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, I would just wonder about the

21 relevance of this line of inquiry.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: May I just make a comment, and I think I made this

23 comment some time back, Mr. Milovancevic: If your opposite number stands

24 up, it's preferable that you sit down. That's my knowledge of court

25 etiquette here. I'm not sure about here, but that's my culture. You

Page 3505

1 don't both stand up at the same time.

2 You have an objection, Mr. Milovancevic. Your opposite number

3 says, What is the relevance of this line of questioning? You're talking

4 about the charge against Croatian leaders, not the person charged. Any

5 response?

6 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Right now I

7 am verifying the credibility and impartiality of the expert witness. I

8 will do it by way of pointing out his role as related to other proceedings

9 before this Tribunal. You will see that there is a traditional type of

10 conflict of interest in this case, which can challenge the role of this

11 expert witness as an impartial expert who is supposed to provide us

12 certain type of information. By your leave, I will show you explicitly

13 why I believe it important for him to see the indictment.

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Excepting that I don't think this witness has

15 denied having testified in other proceedings before this Tribunal. But,

16 having said what you have said, that's fine.

17 Ms. Valabhji.

18 MS. VALABHJI: I would only just add that the witness has already

19 said that he doesn't know anything about this. It's in the transcript.

20 But that's all.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: What about your objection? Are you persisting with

22 the objection or not?

23 MS. VALABHJI: Yes, Your Honour. I -- I keep the objection that I

24 raised. I just wanted to add that point to it.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: And you don't have any reply to what

Page 3506

1 Mr. Milovancevic said by way of answer except just that comment?

2 MS. VALABHJI: That's right, Your Honour.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. Well, in the absence of any reply, much

4 as I am still at large, you know, I still don't see the relevance, you're

5 talking about looking for credibility or -- or verifying credibility,

6 Mr. Milovancevic, I hope it will emerge as you go along. You may proceed.

7 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

8 Paragraph 10 of the amended indictment before you, Your Honours,

9 and before the witness, lists that the goal of the Operation Storm, which,

10 as the Prosecution claims, was conducted by joint forces and participants

11 in the joint criminal enterprise, was to forcibly expel all Serb

12 population from the territory of Krajina. There is a detailed description

13 there. If you wish, I can read it out to you, but I don't want to use up

14 the valuable time. What is important for me is that in paragraph 12 it

15 says that many persons took part in this joint criminal enterprise,

16 together with the accused Cermak and Markac, and that these persons

17 include Mr. Franjo Tudjman, president of the Republic of Croatia;

18 Mr. Gojko Susak, minister of defence of the Republic of Croatia; Mr. Janko

19 Bobetko, head of -- chief of the Main Staff of the Croatian army;

20 Mr. Cervenko, Chief of Staff of the Croatian army during Operation Storm;

21 Ante Gotovina, former officer of the Croatian army; as well as various

22 officers, officials and members of Croatian government, and political

23 establishment at all levels, including municipal governments and local

24 organisations. In addition to them, also various leaders and members of

25 the Croatian Democratic Union, various officials and members of the armed

Page 3507

1 forces of the Republic of Croatia, including Croatian government, Croatian

2 leadership, special police, civilian police, as well as other security and

3 intelligence services of the Republic of Croatia, as well as other

4 identified and unidentified persons.

5 Q. Given that there is this indictment issued by this Office of the

6 Prosecutor against the said accused, which also includes people from the

7 top establishment of the Republic of Croatia, I would like to ask the

8 expert witness whether, in the relevant period of time, he was a member of

9 security or intelligence services and whether he served in positions

10 mentioned by him. Yes or no.

11 A. No. I have to clarify my position. At the time when the

12 government appoints an official, the official in question is a civil

13 servant. I will reserve the right, which is generally recognised in all

14 countries, to -- to be called by their rank. This is why my rank is

15 mentioned, that of colonel. However, I have to say that after 1993 I did

16 not work in those positions. Rather, I performed the tasks described in

17 the decree of the government of Croatia on establishing the Commission on

18 Detained and Missing Persons. My tasks are listed in the decree. Later

19 on, these responsibilities were transferred to other institutions.

20 Q. Thank you. That is to say you come here to testify as the OTP

21 expert witness, the same Office of the Prosecution that charged the top

22 leadership of Croatia, including its government, for persecution of Serbs

23 from Krajina. You confirmed that you were an official of that government

24 appointed by that government, and you go on to claim that you can be

25 impartial and honest in your testimony, when testifying about the

Page 3508

1 persecution of Serbian citizens of Croatia. Do you believe that this

2 is --

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, I don't see where you're going

4 with this cross-examination. The charges that you are talking about are

5 charges of people who worked in their -- people, senior people in the

6 government of Croatia. It has nothing to do with this person's -- this

7 witness's responsibilities as a witness in this matter. I still want to

8 understand where do you say there is a conflict or where you say there is

9 -- there is no credibility.

10 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. It is

11 entirely clearly to me what position was held by Mr. Grujic in the

12 government of Croatia. But he's not an eye-witness. He is an expert

13 witness. Today he told us that all of the information he submitted to the

14 Tribunal were provided to him by the Ministry of Defence, Ministry of the

15 Interior, Ministry of Justice, and other ministries of the government of

16 the Croatia. All of these ministries as integral part of the government

17 of Croatia and the ruling government administration of Croatia, were

18 indicted by this Office of the Prosecutor in the indictment that I gave

19 you. This is not the first time that an expert witness, whose credibility

20 is questionable, comes here to testify, portraying himself as an

21 impartial, knowledgeable expert, who is supposed to assist the Trial

22 Chamber in determining the information concerning which we ourselves are

23 not qualified enough. I will attempt in the remaining portion of my

24 cross-examination to show that these two issues are linked. It was

25 important for me to have the witness confirm to us what positions were

Page 3509

1 held by him, and apart from that, I have no further questions for the

2 expert witness. I believe that this is a good time for adjournment of

3 today's proceedings.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just before we -- we adjourn, there is an objection

5 on the table, and the Chamber must rule of it. I've got to understand

6 your line of cross-examination. After this long explanation, I still

7 don't understand what you're trying to say.

8 The witness is testifying on events that took place long before

9 Operation Storm. And he's -- I don't know whether he has ever testified

10 on Operation Storm, and even if he did, that's a completely different

11 incident. He's talking here about things that have nothing to do with

12 Operation Storm for which these people that you mentioned in this

13 indictment are charged. I would like to see where the conflict exists

14 between him being a civil servant of the Croatian government and coming to

15 testify here about allegations of attacks on Croats long before Operation

16 Storm.

17 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, by your leave, I

18 will point to you to the allegations in this indictment. The Prosecution

19 brought this expert witness here, who submitted a written report

20 indicating that 3.400 Serbs had been expelled from Croatia. In the

21 indictment, the Prosecution mentions a figure of several -- of tens of

22 thousands of people. How can these figures be reconciled? How can it be

23 reconciled that in one indictment the Prosecution alleges that tens of

24 thousands of Serbs were expelled whereas in another indictment they

25 mention a figure of 3.000 something? I can verify the figure for you.

Page 3510

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: I still don't understand how that has anything to

2 do with the price of butter.

3 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] This expert, Your Honours, in

4 our view, defends the interests of the government which appointed him. He

5 is here to conceal the action of his government, the government that was

6 charged by the OTP indictment. Nothing what he said here corroborates the

7 facts from the indictment against Cermak and Markac.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, this witness is not testifying in

9 the case against Mladen Markac or Ivan Cermak. He is testifying in the

10 trial of Mr. Martic. How you say he is protecting his government when his

11 government is not on trial, I cannot understand. This is what I don't

12 understand.

13 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm just trying to

14 see whether the doubts that the Defence has about the credibility of this

15 witness are legitimate or not. And I'm trying to verify that by showing

16 that the official of the government accused for -- accused of persecuting

17 Serbs is qualified to testify now here about these other crimes. In our

18 view, those two things cannot be reconciled; in Prosecution's view, it

19 seems they can.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, if you have doubts about the

21 credibility of the witness and you want to check whether your doubts are

22 legitimate, you've got to lay a basis for it. You can't go on a fishing

23 expedition. You are saying that you are going to show by asking questions

24 from this indictment. You have read to us two paragraphs in this

25 indictment. The Bench still doesn't see the relevance of this indictment

Page 3511

1 to these proceedings, even after you have read what I would assume you

2 regard as relevant to your questions from this document.

3 I cannot -- or the Bench cannot allow a continued

4 cross-examination until we see which -- where you are going. You have not

5 laid the basis. You are having doubts about the credibility of the

6 witness, and you want to check if your doubts are legitimate, I think you

7 could check that when you do your preparation, and when you have done your

8 preparation and you have a foundation for your doubts, come here and argue

9 the witness's lack of credibility. What you are doing, you're doing

10 exactly what I suggested you are doing; you are going on a fishing

11 expedition to find out if your doubts are legitimate.

12 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Milovancevic, just before you go on, I would

13 just like to say something to you. I must confess that you have left me a

14 bit confused because you had pitched your submission or your responses to

15 the question from the Court slightly different from how I thought it was

16 going. I thought your submissions would be twofold; that firstly you take

17 issue as to the impartiality of the witness, and there is a conflict of

18 interest because of the interest on the part of the DPP in his initial

19 instruction and briefing; and secondly, you were taking issue as to the

20 integrity of his compilations contained in the exhibits at the end of the

21 day, because the source was a tainted source in that it came from certain

22 officials of Croatia who had an interest to serve and he himself had an

23 interest to serve. Is that not what is the substance of your objections?

24 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] That is correct, Your Honour.

25 It's just that I have been put in an uncomfortable position. Namely, I

Page 3512

1 have to state my position about the objection of the opposite side, none

2 of the arguments being specific. But all this will be clarified if I am

3 allowed to continue this line of questioning.

4 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: But, strictly speaking, you do not need the

5 indictment in order to do that.

6 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, at this moment

7 there is no other way in which I can expose the complete disproportion of

8 what is stated by the OTP in one indictment and the same kind of data they

9 are producing in this case. These numbers are completely disparate, but

10 if you allow me to continue my cross-examination, I will be able to

11 demonstrate that.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: My problem, Mr. Milovancevic, is that these are two

13 separate incidents. Neither the OTP nor anybody has tried to suggest that

14 these are identical and therefore numbers must be equal on either side.

15 Obviously whatever may have happened to -- in the attacks of 1991, the

16 people who may have died or been maimed or been detained or been deported

17 are not going to be exact same number as the number of people who would

18 have been involved under similar circumstances in 1995 during Operation

19 Storm. There is no suggestion here of comparisons. You are bringing the

20 comparisons. And the Bench is trying to find what the relevance of the

21 comparison is.

22 Certainly, if the Croats attacked the Serbs in 1995, they stand or

23 fall by their deeds then, which go with the numbers that were involved in

24 that case, which numbers will not be the same as the numbers of 1991. And

25 to quote numbers from this indictment and want to compare them to the

Page 3513

1 numbers that this witness gave when this witness has given no comparative

2 numbers whatsoever -- he's talking about one issue, 1991 case, and he's

3 comparing it to no other. So the Bench doesn't understand where you're

4 going.

5 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in paragraphs 50,

6 51, 52 and 53 of the indictment before you the Office of the Prosecutor

7 deals with certain events. I'm not comparing two indictments. I am just

8 talking about the way facts are presented. In this indictment, and in any

9 other indictment, the same facts relate to the same events, the same

10 participants, the same area, the same population, the same statistics.

11 And in any case, in this or another one or a third one, these statistics,

12 this data should correspond. If there is a large disproportion, that

13 gives birth to doubt. But at this moment I'm just asking the witness if

14 he indeed occupied the positions he said he occupied in the said period.

15 He confirmed that.

16 Now, by comparing his expert report, in light of this indictment

17 only, we will be able to establish whether he is or isn't an independent,

18 impartial expert. All this are answers that are yet to come.

19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can you tell the Chamber what is contained in

20 paragraphs 50, 51, 52 and 53 of this indictment, which is presented

21 differently? And differently from what?

22 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, from this

23 indictment I just excerpted certain details that should display the

24 logical, factual, chronological connection with all that this expert is

25 testifying to. In the course of later cross-examination I will

Page 3514

1 demonstrate the essence of it. I am just trying to say that through this

2 expert, that the OTP is trying to tell us that in the period from 1991 to

3 1995, in Croatia, there were 3.400 expelled Serbs - that is the essence of

4 all the material that was produced to us by this witness - and in another

5 indictment the same Office of the Prosecutor, speaking about the same area

6 and about the same period, the Prosecution is telling us that the number

7 of the expelled Serbs was in the tens of thousands. So I'm asking the

8 question: How is that possible? It's not easy, but it's not the first

9 time either that I'm asking this question. I raised it in several Status

10 Conferences as well, and meetings. Now we have reached it again at this

11 stage.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: You are saying that this witness has testified that

13 in the period 1991 to 1995 in Croatia 3.400 Serbs were expelled? I

14 thought this witness is testifying about the statistics of the people that

15 were either expelled or killed or detained in the war of 1991 insofar as

16 he has been able to ascertain. Did this witness testify in this case,

17 Mr. Milovancevic, in this case where -- the case of Ivan Cermak and Mladen

18 Markac?

19 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] No, that case has not began

20 yet. The trial hasn't begun. So it's my mistake; it's not 3.400, but

21 it's 3.104 in the period from 1991 to 1995. That is the claim of this

22 witness, and that is the claim presented by the OTP as their finding. But

23 in a different indictment, they say that in the same period, in the same

24 area, tens of thousands of Serbs were expelled. That's the fact that I'm

25 trying to point out to you. In 1991-1995 period, they are giving two

Page 3515

1 different figures for two different cases.

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, I guess you do understand that

3 people make allegations in the indictments and then they call evidence to

4 prove their allegations. Now, the allegations in this indictment will be

5 allegations made by the OTP. This witness here knows nothing about those

6 allegations. He is here to testify about allegations relating to the case

7 that this Chamber is hearing and the case that he has investigated. He

8 tells you he doesn't -- he knows nothing about this other case. He --

9 where the Prosecutor may have got the figures that he -- that the

10 Prosecutor quotes in this indictment, this witness has nothing do with.

11 And I would imagine that even the numbers that this witness testified to

12 this morning are not necessarily -- do not necessarily tell you, with any

13 numbers, if any, that the Prosecutor might have given in the Martic case,

14 because this witness just goes by the -- by his own investigations.

15 Now, I'm sorry, I still don't understand where you're going. And

16 I think the Chamber needs to rule on this objection at this stage. The

17 objection is upheld.

18 It's way beyond time to take the break. The Court will take an

19 adjournment until tomorrow. I am told tomorrow we are starting at -- we

20 are in Courtroom I, not Courtroom II. Court adjourned.

21 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.04 p.m.,

22 to be reconvened on Tuesay, the 11th day of April,

23 2006, at 9.00 a.m.

24

25