1 Wednesday, 13 September 2006
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 ---Upon commencing at 9.00 a.m.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good morning, Witness.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: I would remind you that you are still bound by the
9 declaration you made at the beginning of your testimony, to tell the
10 truth, the whole truth and nothing else but the truth.
11 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Mr. Milovancevic.
13 WITNESS: LAZAR MACURA [Resumed]
14 [Witness answered through interpreter]
15 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Just a
17 Thank you, Your Honour. I'm sorry.
18 Examination by Mr. Milovancevic: [Continued]
19 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Witness.
20 A. Good morning.
21 Q. Just like yesterday, could you please take care that we do not
22 overlap when speaking.
23 A. All right.
24 Q. The last topic we dealt with yesterday was the Vance Plan. You
25 spoke about the meeting that you attended, the meeting between late
1 Mr. Babic with Mr. Vance. Can you tell us whether you are aware of the
2 reason why Mr. Babic asked for Mr. Vance that UN troops be deployed
3 according to the ink blocks, ink blot system in towns outside the
4 territory of the urban communities.
5 A. That's what Mr. Babic explained to Mr. Vance. The point was that
6 Serbs in Croatia's cities and towns were already subjected to mass
7 dismissals, that some executions of Serbs had already begun, and that they
8 were in jeopardy. Mr. Babic guaranteed to Mr. Vance complete safety for
9 Croats in the territory of Krajina.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 A. However, I must add, I'm sorry, that Mr. Babic suggested, after
12 that, that UN troops be deployed on the line of separation, on the
13 demarcation line. Mr. Vance would not even talk about it.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Witness, I asked you yesterday, when a lawyer
15 says "thank you," you stop. Will you please do that.
16 THE WITNESS: Okay, thank you, thank you, I'm sorry.
17 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Mr. Milovancevic, please may I just ask the
19 Witness, what do you mean by "execution of Serbs"?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, by that time we already had
21 reports that Serbs were being killed in Croatia's towns and cities, that
22 is something that people knew and stories about that circulated among the
23 people. We had no official data, but we knew that that was going on. And
24 later on those reports proved true and even films were made about it.
25 Croats did it later in Karlovac, in Zagreb.
1 JUDGE HOEPFEL: You used the word "executions" for this. Why did
2 you use this word?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I mean, if you take somebody, for
4 instance, to Maska Poljana, that is Manja field, or maybe that is not the
5 name, I can't remember now. You take them from their home and the person
6 never comes back, you reckon that they were executed.
7 JUDGE HOEPFEL: What are you referring to? Just in one sentence,
8 please. I said just in one sentence, please.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If somebody is taken away from
10 their home and never comes back then you reckon --
11 JUDGE HOEPFEL: I was --
12 THE WITNESS: I don't know what you mean.
13 JUDGE HOEPFEL: You are a witness and you should tell us about
14 facts and to what facts did you refer.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What was reported by all the
16 newspapers, for instance, is one case in Zagreb where the whole family
17 named Zec was killed off. It was in all the newspapers. In Krajina such
18 things did not happen.
19 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.
20 Please, Mr. Milovancevic, you can go on.
21 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
22 Q. When Mr. Babic told Mr. Vance the reasons why he was asking for UN
23 troops to be deployed across Croatia's towns and cities to protect the
24 Serbs, did he familiarise Mr. Vance with some of the reports and
25 information? Did he explain why he was asking for that?
1 A. Babic did explain certainly why he was asking that. I can't
2 remember the details, but he certainly had his reasons for making that
4 Q. All right. Do you remember that you said you had been to Geneva
5 with Mr. Babic in early 1991 at talks where the party armed forces of the
6 HDZ were discussed?
7 A. Yes. We went to Geneva to make our case before the
8 United Nations, meaning to ask protection from the United Nations.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we see on the screen
11 Exhibit 36 or a document from the Prosecution 65 ter list 1226.
12 MR. BLACK: I believe it is Exhibit 236, if that is helpful.
13 65 ter number 1226 is Exhibit 236.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Mr. Black.
15 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I appreciate that. Thank you.
16 Q. Could we zoom in on the left top corner. Can you see, Witness,
17 this document?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. What does it seem to be about?
20 A. Well, I can only read the text.
21 Q. That's what I meant. Could you please read to us the heading and
22 the title.
23 A. Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Serbian Autonomous
24 District of Krajina. The government of SAO Krajina.
25 Q. What is the date?
1 A. Knin, 5th September 1991.
2 Q. Do you see to whom the document was sent?
3 A. The peace conference of -- on Yugoslavia in The Hague.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we see page 7 in B/C/S.
6 That is marked 4834 in the right top corner.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is this document being sent to the peace conference
8 of Yugoslavia in The Hague as the witness says? Or is it being sent to
9 the SFRY Presidency offices?
10 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I did not ask the
11 witness to whom it was sent. I just asked him who seems to be the
12 addressee from the heading of the document. I just wanted him to read
13 what is written on the document itself, and the question you raised is one
14 we were about to deal with right now.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, the question I raised is already on the
16 transcript at page 4, line 25. Do you see? To whom the document was
17 sent? It may have been an interpretation problem, but I think, then, if
18 we can just check.
19 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it was not a
20 misinterpretation. I asked the question in such a way that it gives rise,
21 indeed, to the question you asked. But, in fact, I wanted the witness
22 just to tell us to whom the letter was addressed. And if you allow me, I
23 will ask the witness.
24 Can we see from the cover page --
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: But is it --
1 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] To whom -- for whom it was
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is it addressed to the peace conference? Or is the
4 subject the peace conference?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, yes, it is.
6 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] That is written on the
8 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Sorry. You were asked a question with "or." So
9 the answer "yes" is not very clear, is it?
10 To whom was this letter supposed to be sent? It's according to
11 what is written on the letter?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is quite clear from the text that
13 it was addressed to the peace conference in The Hague.
14 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Where do you see that?
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, it's ...
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is written in the heading.
17 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Heading and addressee, this is two different
18 things, isn't it?
19 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: There seems to be some confusion between the
20 title of the letter or what I would refer to as the caption, the subject
21 matter of the letter and the person to whom the letter is addressed. I
22 think all of the Judges have a different person as the addressee of the
23 letter than what the witness has said, and that's a material point.
24 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, with your leave, I
25 will try, through questions to the witness, without any explanations of my
1 own, to get at that. Since we are seeing on the monitor the page that we
2 have here, I would like to continue and I believe we will reach an answer
3 to your questions.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may proceed. Did you say we must go to page 7
5 of the B/C/S? What page in the English?
6 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't know the
7 number of that page, but it's the last page of this document bearing a
8 stamp. So the very end of that document, and on that page we see who
9 signed it, together with the stamp.
10 Q. Witness, on the seventh page of the document in B/C/S, we see
11 something in the bottom right corner, if we can zoom in on it, please.
12 A. I can see it even without zooming in. It says: "Head of the
13 government of SAO Krajina, Dr. Milan Babic." And from the contents of the
14 letter, it is obvious that it is addressed to the peace conference in
15 The Hague. That is what the contents tell us.
16 Q. Can we turn to page 8 in B/C/S where we can see to whom the letter
17 was delivered.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just a moment. Do you see there is no peace
19 conference in The Hague amongst the people to whom it is sent?
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] We will get an answer even to
21 that question now, Your Honour. We will ask the witness what he knows
22 about it.
23 Q. What is written on this Page 8, to whom was the letter delivered?
24 A. One, to the United Nations. Two, to the Ministerial Council of
25 the European Community. Three, to the parliament of the European
1 Community. Four, to the High Commission of the OSCE. The conference in
2 European Cooperation and Security. Five, to the Presidency of the SFRY.
3 Six, to the Federal Executive Council. Seven, to the National Assembly of
4 the Republic of Serbia. Eight, to the President of the Republic of
5 Serbia. Seven, to the government of the Republic of Serbia.
6 Q. Thank you. Can we now go back to page 1. The last four digits of
7 the ERN number are 4828.
8 You said a while ago, while reading the left top, left-hand top
9 corner, saying who composed this letter, you said that. And when I asked
10 you whom it was addressed to you said something. Could you take another
11 look at this title and say whether it can be concluded to whom it is
13 A. It says in the title: "The peace conference on Yugoslavia in
14 The Hague," meaning that it is to be the recipient of that letter.
15 Q. Can we look at the first paragraph of this letter, just below the
17 A. The government of the Serbian Autonomous District of the Krajina,
18 at a session held on --
19 THE INTERPRETER: Neither can the interpreter ...
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Can we just look at the first paragraph. Scroll down please to
22 the beginning. Thank you.
23 A. The government of the Serbian Autonomous District of the Krajina,
24 at a session held on the 5th of September, 1991, discussed the declaration
25 on Yugoslavia adopted at the extraordinary ministerial meeting of the
1 European political community in Brussels on the 27th of August, 1991.
2 A cease-fire agreement and a memorandum on an observer mission,
3 and in that connection adopted the following stances.
4 Q. Thank you. Did you know about the existence of this letter before
5 I showed it to you today?
6 A. Everything that Mr. Babic sent to international organisations I
7 had to translate into English. Of course I cannot remember all the
8 details of all of that correspondence.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: What's your answer to the question? The question
11 was: "Did you know about the existence of this letter before I showed it
12 to you today."
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, I did.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
15 THE WITNESS: Okay. I haven't got used to this procedure. Okay,
16 sorry. Sorry.
17 JUDGE HOEPFEL: And you mean you know the contents already when
18 looking at the first page?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, there have been so many. No,
20 that is not what I mean. I translated all the documents into the English
21 language, and I certainly cannot recall them all.
22 JUDGE HOEPFEL: No. I was asking you, you before said, I think,
23 from the contents you can tell immediately to whom this letter was
24 addressed. And only later we found out that at the end it was said that
25 to eight addressees it was addressed. And the heading The Hague Peace
1 Conference in Yugoslavia has apparently not directly to do with the
2 question to whom the letter was addressed. So don't you agree? Just yes
3 or no.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
5 JUDGE HOEPFEL: So you may conclude that your idea was a little
6 premature when saying it's quite clear? Please, so don't make any
7 premature conclusions. Just say step by step what you are being asked.
8 Thank you very much.
9 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I'm sorry. I thought the evidence has revealed
10 that there was one addressee, but in fact a number of deliverees [Realtime
11 transcript read in error "deliveries"]. It was addressed to a particular
12 person and then delivered and copied to a number of others.
13 Yes. Please go ahead, Mr. Milovancevic. If Judge Hoepfel has
15 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Yes. Thank you.
16 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Mr. Witness, at the very beginning when I presented this document
18 to you, I asked you what was written in the top left-hand corner. Do you
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. You read out that the letter was sent, being sent by the
22 government of the SAO Krajina. Then I asked you to whom it was addressed.
23 Do you remember?
24 A. Yes. And I read out the title believing that it was to reach that
1 Q. When you read out -- read that title, were you interpreting what
2 was written in the content or did you just read the title?
3 A. No. I just read the title.
4 Q. Now, when we have shown to you both the first and last pages and
5 the addresses to which the letter was sent, what is your position about
6 this letter in view of the existing title? To whom was it written
8 A. It is -- you can see the addresses to which it is addressed, but
9 it was certainly to be at the peace conference in The Hague for the people
10 there to be informed of its content. That is also obvious from the
11 content which asks the peace conference to provide the protection that we
12 refer to. It is not the other addressees that are asked for that.
13 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Just before you go on. I would just like to
14 make a correction of the record at page 10, line 7. The third word from
15 the end should be "deliverees," e-e-s on the end. Subjective, the person
16 to whom it was delivered. Not "deliveries" the noun, the object.
17 Thank you, Mr. Milovancevic.
18 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
19 Q. Do you know, Witness, whether in September 1991 a peace conference
20 was being held in The Hague, a peace conference on Yugoslavia was being
21 held in The Hague?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Do you know who had convened that conference, which countries, and
24 what was the subject of it?
25 A. I could not exactly enumerate the bodies. I believe at any rate
1 it was the European Community. It was her department, and I believe it
2 was called the European Community at that particular point in time.
3 Q. Thank you. Let us now take a look at the second page of this
4 letter in B/C/S, the -- marked as 4829 in the B/C/S.
5 And I wish to finish with this document. Can you read for us the
6 second paragraph from the top, Mr. Macura.
7 A. I do not see it on my monitor.
8 Q. Can we scroll down so that the second paragraph from the top would
9 appear on the screen. You should scroll down, actually.
10 A. It should be scrolled up.
11 Q. I don't know what you see, Mr. Macura.
12 A. I see the number 3.
13 Q. Can we have page number 2, the second paragraph from the top.
14 A. The second paragraph from the top? I can read it now.
15 Q. Yes, please, do.
16 A. "The Croatian neo-fascist authorities, in certain elements
17 identical to the former communist totalitarianism sought by bringing
18 Yugoslavia down, to force us to reconcile ourselves to terror and not to
19 apply what Croatia views as its natural right, the right to
20 self-determination, up to secession. Under such circumstances, with
21 being" -- can you scroll it down a bit please, a bit more, please?
22 THE INTERPRETER: The witness is asking for the text to be
23 scrolled down.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "...in such circumstances where
25 there are challenging of a referenda of our equal right, we had no option
1 but to respond by arms, with arms to arms. The new Croatia -- the new
2 Croatia attacked a right in our decisions with weapons in the intention of
3 forcing by aggression the Serbian people to live in independent
4 neo-fascist Croatian state, a state so reminiscent of" -- can you scroll
5 the text down, please -- "and not only to us Serbs of that genocidal
6 time," the years 1941 to 1945 are indicated there in brackets, "when it
7 was also called and comported itself in," in inverted commas,
8 "independent, or independently, from any common sense and humanity."
9 Q. Thank you. It says in the introductory part, I mean the title of
10 that, this was the position adopted at the session of the government of
11 the SAO Krajina as regards the situation and the peace conference in
12 Yugoslavia. Was Mr. Babic -- did Mr. Babic share these standpoints of the
13 government which he actually signed?
14 A. Yes, he did. He certainly did.
15 Q. Thank you. We can now remove this document from the monitor. I
16 thank you.
17 What happened -- what became of the talks with Mr. Vance? Seeing
18 that he wouldn't accommodate the request of Mr. Babic.
19 A. He, Mr. Vance, actually seeing that the situation with Mr. Babic
20 was like that, opted for exerting pressure on the president of Serbia,
21 Mr. Milosevic. After that, the government of the Krajina was dismantled.
22 Q. When you say that after that Mr. Vance went to exert pressure on
23 Mr. Milosevic, do you know or can you tell us what does that mean, to
24 exert pressure how and with what objective in mind?
25 A. With the objective of having the Vance Plan accepted
2 Q. Do you know whether, in connection with the acceptance of that
3 plan, there was a Presidency session held in Belgrade?
4 A. Yes. There was a session of the Presidency held, and I attended
5 it, as did -- there were a number of us from the Krajina attending it.
6 Members of the government and the municipality presidents from the Krajina
7 attended the session. Also, representatives of Serbs from Bosnia were
8 there with Dr. Radovan Karadzic at the helm.
9 Q. Where was this meeting held and who organised it?
10 A. Frankly speaking, I don't know who organised the meeting, but we
11 were driven, taken by car into a space, a big conference room. I don't
12 remember the exact circumstances. I know that, for instance, Petar
13 Stikovac fainted and Dr. Karadzic attended to him.
14 Q. Thank you. In connection with this answer of yours, please tell
15 us whether any of the members of the Presidency attended the meeting?
16 A. I believe it was indeed organised by the Presidency of Yugoslavia,
17 because President Jovic was there, as were Generals Adzic and Kukanjac,
18 and they were all exerting pressure on us, telling us that we had to
19 accept the Vance Plan.
20 Q. What was their explanation, what reasons did they give you for
22 A. I can tell you that it was a quite unpleasant meeting because they
23 were shouting, especially General Adzic was shouting at us, calling us
24 from the Krajina all sorts of names.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I ask a question. Do you say you don't know
1 where. You can't tell us which town this meeting was held?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That was in Belgrade. I just do not
3 remember the exact conference venue, because I don't know Belgrade that
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. At least that gives some kind of answer
6 to the question: "Where was the meeting held and do you know who
7 organised it."
8 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
9 Q. What were the arguments that were adduced to substantiate the
10 Presidency's and the Generals' request to you to accept the plan? What
11 was their argumentation?
12 A. Their arguments were that we would be completely protected by the
13 Vance Plan, whereas we claimed the opposite, and regrettably that was
14 proven true.
15 Q. You said, Mr. Macura, their argumentation was that "we would be
16 completely protected by the Vance Plan." Who is "we"?
17 A. The Serbs in the Krajina. General Adzic and Mr. Jovic guaranteed
18 that the JNA would be the guarantor of our protection, and we said that
19 they would not even be in the Krajina.
20 Q. Were you -- did they tell you why the president of the Presidency
21 of Yugoslavia, Mr. Jovic, and General Adzic, did they tell you why they
22 thought it would be good for the -- for the United Nations troops to come?
23 What did they tell you about that?
24 A. I have already told you that they asserted that the JNA was
25 present and would remain in the Krajina, but nothing came of it, and they
1 said: We remain in Bosnia and we are in Grahovo, and Grahovo is just ten
2 minutes from Knin by car, and we told them: You won't be even in Bosnia
3 because you will have to leave Bosnia as well. And then General Adzic was
4 angry, and so was Mr. Jovic, and they claimed that they would never be
5 leaving Bosnia.
6 Q. When you mentioned Bosnia, what was Bosnia at that time?
7 A. Bosnia was one of the republics of the Socialist Federal Republic
8 of Yugoslavia.
9 Q. Why do you say that Mr. Jovic and General Adzic told you that they
10 would be in Bosnia? Who is "they" and why in Bosnia?
11 A. He meant Yugoslav People's Army, because this was war. So,
12 therefore, and why they thought that they would be in Bosnia, I don't know
13 that. That is a question you should be asking them.
14 Q. Was any reference at all at the time made to the possibility of
15 Bosnia's secession and Bosnia's independence?
16 A. Nobody referred to that at that time at all.
17 Q. But did it occur afterwards?
18 A. Yes, it did. It certainly did.
19 Q. When, Mr. Macura?
20 A. Very soon thereafter. I don't know the date. I do apologise.
21 Perhaps I should have recorded dates, but I didn't. I know that Bosnia
22 recognised why the war was still on as, after all was Croatia, was
23 recognised while the combat operations was still going on.
24 Q. Did the -- Mr. Jovic and General Adzic, in addition to this
25 immediate task of, as you call it, the protection of the Serbs in the
1 Krajina, did they also tell you why they thought that peace operation
2 important for Yugoslavia and why it should be accepted generally? What
3 were their political arguments, not only talking about the factual
5 A. I have to repeat what General Adzic said. He said that -- he
6 actually didn't use very polished language, if I can say that.
7 Q. Well, you can say it in a decent way.
8 A. He said: "You bandits from the Krajina cannot take an entire
9 state for a ride, you know." "You riff-raff from Knin." That is what he
10 said to us.
11 Q. So that is the attitude of General Adzic to the Serbs from the
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. What was he, what is he by ethnicity?
15 A. He's a Serb.
16 Q. You said that one of the participants in the meeting from Krajina
17 fainted. Why?
18 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction, who was it?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was Mr. Pero Stikovac, who was a
20 professor. And why he fainted, I think simply because it was a very, very
21 difficult situation. He could not endure it. He started quarrelling with
22 Mr. -- General Adzic, and he grabbed him, physically assaulted him, in
24 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Thank you. General Adzic held a post at that time. What was he?
1 A. He was the commander of the Yugoslav army, of the JNA. Or the
2 commander of the General Staff. I am not sure what the designation is,
3 but he was the person, the chief in command of the Yugoslav army at any
5 Q. Was the Vance Plan accepted after all that, and how?
6 A. Yes. The Vance Plan was adopted when, in Glina, a town in
7 Krajina, a meeting or a session was held of the Assembly of SAO Krajina
8 which was illegal. They simply assembled people according to their own
9 selection. Very few of them were members of the Assembly. Branko Kostic
10 attended this meeting as well. At the time he was the president of the
11 Presidency, of the rump Yugoslavia as it was called.
12 So at this Assembly, the government of Milan Babic was, in fact,
14 Q. Was the Vance Plan adopted?
15 A. Yes. Later on it was implemented.
16 Q. Was there any explanation put forward on why the Vance Plan should
17 be adopted? I'm referring to the attitude of the politicians in Krajina;
18 there were probably some differences of opinion.
19 A. I was among those who opposed the adoption of the Vance Plan. I
20 translated the entire plan for Babic, from English. We were going around
21 Krajina canvassing and holding rallies, where we tried to explain why this
22 plan should not be adopted.
23 Q. Thank you. Mr. Macura, could you tell us very briefly what was
24 the essence of your opposition to this plan. The war, the secession,
25 annexation, what was the exact reason?
1 A. We believed that this was tantamount to an occupation of the
2 Krajina region. And we thought that the United Nations served only as a
3 means to defend, for Croatia to be able to accomplish all its objectives.
4 Q. Was this, in fact, so?
5 A. Yes, unfortunately.
6 Q. Why are you saying this?
7 A. I think it is very clear from this point in time, because right
8 now they're only elderly people living in Krajina.
9 Q. Do you think that the goal of Jovic and Adzic was for the Serbs to
10 flee this region?
11 A. I heard what Stipe Mesic said in connection to Bora Jovic when he
12 was asked about the situation of Serbs in the Krajina region.
13 Q. What did he say?
14 A. Bora Jovic said that as far as they were concerned, they could do
15 whatever they wanted with the Serbs. You can do whatever you want with
16 them, we don't care.
17 Q. Was this the support that you received from Belgrade in Krajina?
18 A. Unfortunately, yes. But I can't add anything, not to -- in order
19 not to irritate the Bench.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm sorry. You don't have to take the Bench's
21 feelings into account. Tell us the truth as you know it. Whether the
22 Bench is irritated or not, it is not for you to tell. And I don't know
23 how you would know the Bench would be irritated. Just say what you want
24 to say without concerning yourself with how the Bench will react.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you wish to go ahead and tell us then what you
2 held back?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Jovic said -- can even impale
5 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Was Mr. Jovic convicted before this -- indicted before this
8 A. I don't know.
9 Q. But he was the president of the Presidency of Yugoslavia?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Thank you. Until when did you hold the post of the minister of
13 A. Until the Glina Assembly that was held illegally. The entire
14 government was dismissed then, and then Mr. Zecevic formed a new
16 Q. Thank you. Are you familiar with Z-4 plan? Do you know what it
17 refers to?
18 A. The Z-4 plan was the plan of Croatia for the autonomy of Serbs
19 within Croatia, and in fact this autonomy referred to the district of
20 Glina and the district of Knin.
21 Q. Thank you. I apologise for interrupting you. I will let you
22 finish this sentence, but I wanted to ask you why you said that the Z-4
23 was a Croatian plan, the plan of the Croatian state and not of the
24 international community.
25 A. This was the plan devised by Croatia and was supposed to be
1 implemented by the international community.
2 Q. Thank you. Do you know what was the reaction of Mr. Martic as the
3 president of Krajina or when this plan was put forward to him?
4 A. This was on the Knin fortress. Mr. Martic asked for guarantees
5 for the UNPROFOR mandate to be extended. Since Croatia had already
6 announced that it would not be in favour of this extension of the UNPROFOR
7 mandate, and since he did not receive guarantees that the mandate would be
8 extended, Mr. Martic did not want to discuss the plan, nor to accept it.
9 Q. Thank you. Are you familiar with Mr. Galbraith's name?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Who was he?
12 A. He was the ambassador of the United States in Zagreb.
13 Q. Did he have anything to do with the Z-4 plan? Mr. Galbraith, I
15 A. He certainly did, since he was the representative of the -- of the
16 world superpower, which certainly affects everything that happens in the
18 Q. What does Operation Flash mean to you?
19 A. This was the cleansing of Western Slavonia on the part of the
20 Croatian police and army forces. They were trying to cleanse it from
21 Serbs. I think this was in May.
22 Q. Was Western Slavonia at the time under somebody's protection?
23 A. Western Slavonia was part of Krajina and was protected by the
24 UN troops, by UNPROFOR troops.
25 Q. After, as you referred to it, the cleansing of Western Slavonia by
1 Croatian forces, did the representatives of Krajina take part into any
2 subsequent meetings with the Croatian authorities, with respect to Krajina
4 A. There were no further discussions. This was already dealt with in
5 a military way.
6 Q. If I refer to Geneva and I take you back to the beginning of
7 August 1995, does it bring back anything?
8 A. Yes. We held negotiations. I was one of the participants of the
9 negotiations on behalf of Krajina. We negotiated with the Croatian
10 authorities, and this was under the chairmanship of Mr. Stoltenberg.
11 In the morning, we met in a plenary session, both the Croatian
12 side and ourselves, and later on Mr. Stoltenberg had a -- separate
13 discussions with each of the delegations.
14 In the course of these discussions that he held with us, we
15 accepted all of his demands, all of Mr. Stoltenberg's demands.
16 Q. Can I interrupt you for a moment. When you said that you accepted
17 all of his demands, are you referring to his own personal demands?
18 A. We thought that these were demands that were formulated by the
19 United Nations, and were put forward to us by Mr. Stoltenberg.
20 Q. What exactly did you accept?
21 A. We agreed to guarantee the normal functioning throughout the
22 territory of Croatia, would be restored all the tracks, the
23 infrastructure, the roads, and the oil pipes.
24 We also agreed that this should be completed on the ground in
25 cooperation with the Croatian authorities within 15 days. The Croatian
1 side demanded that we sign a capitulation.
2 Q. Excuse me. When was this requested by the Croatian authorities,
3 before or after you accepted these demands?
4 A. Before we accepted the demands, at the morning session.
5 Q. Did you accept to capitulate?
6 A. We said that we did not have the mandate to sign a capitulation.
7 Q. But you said that you accepted all the demands put forward by
8 Mr. Stoltenberg.
9 A. That is correct.
10 Q. What happened on the 3rd of August, 1995, what happened
12 A. In the evening, I was invited by the representative of the Russian
13 mission in Geneva, I was invited to a meeting and he told me that the
14 United States and Germany gave a green light to Croatia to attack Krajina,
15 and that they would be assisting them in this effort. And this is what
16 happened at dawn of the next day, Krajina was attacked.
17 Q. What was the name of this operation, of this attack on Krajina?
18 A. This operation was referred to as "Storm" and is now celebrated as
19 the day of independence in Croatia.
20 Q. Thank you. Can we have the Defence Exhibit 1D0130 shown on the
21 screen, please.
22 Zoom in on the photograph, please. Perfect.
23 Can you recognise anyone on the photograph?
24 A. Left, you can see Mr. Galbraith, the ambassador of the United
25 States to Croatia, he was riding on a tank. And I heard his statement
1 when he said that the Serbs occupied Croatia, whereas he himself was
2 trying to expel Serbs from the territory that was inhabited by Serbs for
3 hundreds of years.
4 Q. Mr. Macura, where was this taken, this photograph? What does it
5 say beneath, underneath the photograph?
6 A. It says "on a Croatian tank." American Ambassador Galbraith.
7 This was also on the TV, I saw it on TV. He was rushing people to go
9 Q. Rushing people? Which people?
10 A. The Serbian refugees who were expelled from their land.
11 Q. Mr. Macura, Mr. Galbraith testified here and claimed that he was
12 never atop a Croatian tank.
13 A. He was not telling the truth. I saw this on TV.
14 MR. BLACK: Objection, Your Honour. I believe that misstates the
15 evidence. He didn't say he was never atop a Croatian tank. He said he
16 wasn't on a Croatian tank in Operation Storm, and that is a critical
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic.
19 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence has,
20 to Mr. Galbraith as a protected witness and the former ambassador of the
21 United States to Croatia, put the question whether he was photographed
22 atop a Croatian tank. He answered that he didn't.
23 When the question was put to him again, he gave an explanation
24 that he was atop an American Chevrolet.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Microphone not activated].
1 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I can't do it now,
2 because I did not have this transcript, but my colleague from the
3 Prosecution can confirm that he was not atop a Croatian tank and this is
4 sufficient for me. If needed, I can look for the transcript.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Your learned friend from the Prosecution is
6 objecting, and if you insist on what you are saying, you've got to refer
7 us to a transcript, otherwise you will have to hang on before you can
8 follow on this issue.
9 Judge Hoepfel seems to have it somewhere. Let's find out from
10 him. He might be able to help you.
11 Yes, Judge.
12 JUDGE HOEPFEL: If you want to know, Mr. Milovancevic, it's
13 transcript 3851, line 15. "Are you familiar with the fact," Mr. Galbraith
14 was asked, "that the world media, that the world media published your
15 photo on a tank of the Croatian army, a photo that was taken during
16 Operation Storm?"
17 Answer: "No photograph was taken of me during Operation Storm on
18 a Croatian tank. I was not on a Croatian tank during Operation Storm."
19 And so on.
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Judge Hoepfel. That
21 is precisely what I meant, and that was the gist of my question to the
22 witness. Therefore, Mr. Galbraith lied before this court, and he even
23 deceived the Trial Chamber by saying he was atop a passenger vehicle.
24 MR. BLACK: Objection, Your Honour. Objection. It is not at all
25 the question that he had put before. It is quite different. And I object
1 to this argument now on it.
2 He can put to him what Mr. Galbraith said, if that is even proper
3 under the guidelines that the Chamber has set forth, to ask for a comment
4 of another witness, but what he can't do is misstate what Ambassador
5 Galbraith said when he came to testify.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, what you put to this witness is
7 different from what he said -- what Judge Hoepfel read. Now I will ask
8 you to say exactly what it is that you allege was put to Ambassador
9 Galbraith and what his answer was. Can you just say what was put to him
10 and what his answer was?
11 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, with
12 pleasure. I asked the ambassador whether he was aware that the world
13 media had published his photograph atop a Croatian tank during
14 Operation Storm. I asked him that question maybe even twice, and
15 Mr. Galbraith said he had not been on the Croatian tank but atop a vehicle
16 belonging to the American embassy. Now we see his photograph atop a tank,
17 and that's --
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: This is not what his answer is here. His answer is
19 he was never on top of a Croatian tank during Operation Storm.
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, but I asked him:
21 Were you atop a Croatian tank during Operation Storm? And he said no.
22 Now we see a photograph showing that, yes, he was. I don't understand the
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Wait a minute. Wait a minute, Mr. Milovancevic.
25 You don't misrepresent the questions.
1 What you are telling this witness is not -- unless what
2 Judge Hoepfel was reading here is not what you were referring to when you
3 were talking about the transcript, if you can show us some other part of
4 the transcript, I will allow you to carry on. Otherwise I am afraid you
5 are misrepresenting the evidence.
6 MR. BLACK: Your Honour, could I just add one point that I think
7 is important. Unless I missed something, this does not say that this
8 photograph was taken during Operation Storm. There is no indication of
9 that on the caption that was read. It said Ambassador Galbraith up on a
10 tank. Not that it was taken during Operation Storm.
11 And I would note that this is also leading, because the witness --
12 this exact question was asked of the witness. It says: Mr. Macura, where
13 was this taken, this photograph? And he says it was on a Croatian tank.
14 He doesn't say anything about Operation Storm. But now if the next
15 question was, was this taken during Operation Storm, well, the witness has
16 been given an answer by Defence counsel through argumentative questions.
17 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I just wondered, Mr. Black, if there is anything
18 within the text itself that would shed light and would --
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm afraid - sorry, Judge - that the witness is
20 being asked about the picture, not about the text.
21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Fair enough.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry. Mr. Milovancevic, I'm afraid you are
23 misrepresenting the evidence and you are either going to stay away from
24 that question, or you phrase it properly. The choice is yours.
25 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I will reformulate my question.
1 What matters to us is the essence, not the form. That is sometimes meant
2 to hide the essence.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, Mr. Milovancevic, I rule that
4 remark out of order, because we are all here looking for substance and not
5 form. And the substance of the question, of the answer by Ambassador
6 Galbraith on the transcript was he was never on a Croatian tank during
7 Operation Storm. He doesn't say he was never on a tank, on a Croatian
8 tank. He may have been on a Croatian tank some other time. But not
9 during Operation Storm.
10 If you cannot make that distinction, then don't make insinuations
11 that you cannot substantiate.
12 You may proceed.
13 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Witness, this man, second to the right from Mr. Galbraith has a
15 cap. Do you see any emblem on the cap?
16 A. It is difficult to see the insignia, but it should be one of the
17 Croatian officers. Who else could it be? Although the photograph is not
18 the clearest, but this emblem on the cap is the chequer-board symbol.
19 Q. That is what I meant.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, you are telling the witness that
21 it is a chequer-board? He said he can't see. Now you're telling him what
22 it is. You can see, you tell us why you say the chequer-board. You can
23 take the witness stand and tell us why you say it is a chequer-board,
24 because we don't see any chequer-board here.
25 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the witness
1 answered literally that he saw the chequer-board. I will ask him again.
2 Q. Did you say that?
3 A. Yes, I did.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I think it is time for our
6 break, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Before we go, I'm not able to identify the tank.
8 I think I am less technically minded than my brothers.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: I don't see it.
10 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I need assistance there. Probably when we come
11 back, if not now.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: The Chamber will take -- I beg your pardon. The
13 Court will take a short break. We will come back at quarter to 11.00, and
14 we'll keep this photograph on the screen.
15 Court adjourned.
16 --- Recess taken at 10.14 a.m.
17 --- On resuming at 10.44 a.m.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Before the break, Judge Nosworthy was confessing
19 her technical limitations and asking to be assisted to see the tank. I
20 must confess, I happen to be in the same company.
21 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, in e-court we
22 have the same photograph of which we have a hard copy, and since the photo
23 that we have on paper is clearer, I would like to distribute those copies,
24 and then I would like to ask the witness some questions on this topic.
25 MR. BLACK: Thank you. Your Honour, pardon the interruption.
1 There was some discussion between counsel over the break, and we were
2 certainly under the impression that Defence counsel was going to correct
3 some things that were incorrect that were said before the break, and I
4 just wonder if Defence counsel is going to do that now. That's what I
5 thought was going to happen, but I am just enquiring.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Maybe I interrupted because we opened this later
7 session now with me talking first.
8 Mr. Milovancevic, is there anything that you agreed with your
9 opposite number during the break which you would like to place on the
10 record before we go on?
11 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, Honourable Judge
12 Hoepfel rightly indicated page 3851 where we have on record the question I
13 asked of Witness Galbraith; namely, was he aware that the world media
14 published his photo on the tank during Operation Storm, and his answer was
15 that he had never been on a tank during Operation Storm. He was standing
16 atop a tractor, or something. So his answer was he was never atop a
17 Croatian tank during Operation Storm. And I think that was the question,
18 the part of the record that is relevant both for the Prosecutor and the
19 Trial Chamber.
20 So the -- my point is, I accept that this photograph is not from
21 Operation Storm, because Ambassador Galbraith said he had never been atop
22 a Croatian tank during Operation Storm. He later gave some additional
23 explanations related to vehicles belonging to the American embassy and his
24 personal vehicles, but in order to avoid reviewing the entire transcript,
25 we have the photograph in front of us now and, with your leave, I would
1 like to ask the question of the witness, what does he see on the photo.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Even before I ask Mr. Black to say what he wants to
3 say, my question to you would be: If you accept, as you now seem to be
4 saying, that Mr. Galbraith was never on a Croatian tank during
5 Operation Storm, if you accept that, is this picture still relevant to the
6 proceedings? Do we still need to talk about it?
7 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] We do, very much so, because
8 precisely on this photo Ambassador Galbraith is atop a tank, indeed. And
9 he explained, during his testimony here, that he had been in contact with
10 Mr. Tudjman sometime several times a day, and it is very important for the
11 sake of establishing facts, to establish what exactly Mr. Galbraith did.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm not quite sure I understand you. Now you are
13 bringing Mr. Tudjman into the equation. Obviously we can talk about what
14 Mr. Galbraith said and did with Mr. Tudjman, but unless you're saying that
15 he's with Mr. Tudjman on the tank, and that's one of the things that you
16 want to say he did with him, but I don't know whether we need this
17 photograph to talk about what they did.
18 The point of the matter is, if the question to him had been that
19 he was on top of a tank during Operation Storm and he said, no, he was
20 never on top of a tank during Operation Storm and that answer is accepted
21 by the Defence, then my question of relevance becomes very important,
22 because he's not denying that he was ever on top of a tank. But he only
23 says he was never on top of a tank during Operation Storm. I don't know
24 whether he was asked whether he was ever on top of a tank at all and he
25 denied it.
1 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Mr. Galbraith -
2 and we can open this page 3851, line 5 and onwards - he did say he had
3 never been atop a Croatian tank in Operation Storm. He was only on top of
4 a tractor during Operation Flash, only a tractor, which shows that he
5 denies he was ever on a tank. And in further discussion, when he was
6 asked where he was at that moment, Mr. Galbraith explained that he was
7 only on an armoured American vehicle; in fact, a bullet-proof vehicle of
8 the American embassy. But what is important to me is not exactly that
9 answer. It's the relevance of this topic, I have to tell you that. Why
10 this photograph is relevant to me. Irrespective of when it was taken, it
11 is important that the American ambassador is on top of a tank.
12 What could an American ambassador be possibly doing atop a tank?
13 He was a witness here and he testified and commented upon his earlier
14 written reports.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: But don't you think what you are doing is actually
16 what you should be doing at the time of argument? I really think what you
17 are now saying is appropriate at the time of argument.
18 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this photograph is
19 related to the text on the same page and it is relevant directly to the
20 testimony of Witness Macura. After we establish who is on this
21 photograph, I would like to put to this witness the text of this article
22 related to Ambassador Galbraith and the negotiations in Geneva, a certain
23 passage on this page consisting of only two brief sentences.
24 All of this is directly relevant and related to the testimony of
25 this witness. I know --
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's your right. You are entitled to do that,
2 Mr. Milovancevic. I'm sorry, I interrupted the translator.
3 You can do that. All I'm asking you is what you are saying on
4 whether or not Mr. Galbraith lied when he said he was never on a Croatian
5 tank during Operation Storm, isn't that what you should be preserving for
6 argument? The other things, you haven't gone to text yet, so I don't know
7 what you are going to say about text and I am not commenting on the text.
8 I am commenting on that statement only.
9 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I agree with that, Your
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: You agree with that? Thank you very much.
12 I don't know whether that dispenses with your -- what you were
13 going to say when you stood up or you still have something to say?
14 MR. BLACK: I do still have something to say, Your Honour, if I
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Please.
17 MR. BLACK: It's just that in our view, Defence counsel has
18 accepted the truth of what Ambassador Galbraith said, that he was not on a
19 Croatian tank during Operation Storm, so I think when counsel said at
20 page 25, line 19 that Ambassador Galbraith lied under oath, he should
21 withdraw that comment. I'm not even sure that's the kind of thing that he
22 should be making in argument. But separate from that distinction, I think
23 that if he accepts the truth of what Mr. Galbraith said, then he should
24 publicly withdraw his comment that he lied. It's on page 25 at line 19.
25 And I quote: "Therefore, Mr. Galbraith lied before this court and he even
1 deceived the Trial Chamber."
2 Now, I don't think those kind of comments are appropriate, and I
3 especially have -- I would note, Your Honour, that Defence counsel was
4 warned or informed by the Prosecution two days ago that according to our
5 information this is a photograph from 1993. This is not something that
6 came up fresh in the course of the examination. Defence counsel chose to
7 examine on this, made what we say are absolutely unsupportable comments
8 about Mr. Galbraith's veracity under oath, and we think that he should
9 publicly withdraw those comments.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, I would imagine that that's
11 logical. You can't in one breath accept the truthfulness of Witness
12 Galbraith and at the same time call him a liar. In fact, even that
13 comment can only be made at the time of argument.
14 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: One moment, please. Mr. Black, before
15 Mr. Milovancevic responds, just one small point.
16 In his submissions to the Trial Chamber, I did not understand him
17 to be saying that he accepted the truth of the statement. More he
18 accepted the fact that the statement was made, after having been shown or
19 read the record.
20 So that was what I understood. Was he really accepting the truth
21 of the statement which was made by Ambassador Galbraith from his
22 submissions? I am following your other points, but on that one I don't
23 see the basis for that submission of yours.
24 MR. BLACK: Thank you, Your Honour. There is a possibility that I
25 have misunderstood the position. But as I was saying just before, we had
1 alerted Defence counsel that this is -- actually, in fact, I am
2 corrected. We didn't tell them it was 1993. We said it was a photo from
3 before Storm, according to our information. We told them that two days
4 ago. Then we discussed it over the break, and I understood him to be
5 saying, okay, he accepted that this was not a photo taken during Storm.
6 I'm looking for the cite, Your Honours. It's at page 30, line 16
7 he says: "I accept that this photograph is not from Operation Storm,
8 because Ambassador Galbraith said he had never been atop a Croatian tank
9 during Operation Storm."
10 So based on that, that's what I was relying on for the fact that
11 he accepted it was, as he said, not a photograph from Operation Storm.
12 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you very much, Mr. Black.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic.
14 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] It is quite -- I agree to
15 withdraw my comment on the answer of Witness Galbraith and I will keep it
16 for argument.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
18 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] If you would allow me, I would
19 like to continue questioning the witness, now.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's actually not the only reference. There was
21 another reference a little later, which I would like you also to apply
22 your mind to, if I can find it.
23 Now, this is at line, the paragraph starting at line -- at page,
24 sorry, page 31, line 24, to page 32, line 5. You said there, that's
25 Mr. Milovancevic speaking: "Your Honour, Mr. Galbraith - and we can open
1 this page 3851, line 5 and onwards - he did say he had never been atop a
2 Croatian tank in Operation Storm. He was only on top of a tractor during
3 Operation Flash, only a tractor, which shows that he denies he was never
4 on a tank. And in further discussion when he was asked where he was at
5 that moment, Mr. Galbraith explained that he was only on an armoured
6 American vehicle."
7 Maybe that's not -- doesn't absolutely require a retraction, but,
8 okay, no, that's fine.
9 MR. BLACK: Your Honour, perhaps the other citation that Your
10 Honour may have had in mind is page 26, lines 17 to 20. And that's where
11 Defence counsel said: "I asked -- I asked him were you atop a Croatian
12 tank during Operation Storm, and he said no, now we see a photograph
13 showing that, yes, he was."
14 So I think that contradicts the position which has now been
15 accepted and perhaps that's what Your Honour had in mind.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Black.
17 Mr. Milovancevic, would you like to apply your mind to that also.
18 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, I have that on my mind,
19 but that does not need to be corrected, Your Honours, because the
20 ambassador gave this statement, which I quote under this line 31, there is
21 an explanation associated generally with this reference to the tank and
22 the possibility for the ambassador to be atop it. The ambassador has
23 given his explanation, of course, but I retracted this sentence which
24 refers to the Storm operation because it is not a photograph from the
25 Storm operation, and I have corrected, retracted my statement in that
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, line 19 at page 26, line 19 to 20
3 becomes unnecessary, if you accept that. Where you say "now we see a
4 photograph showing that, yes, he was. I don't understand the problem." I
5 think that statement becomes completely -- it contradicts what you had
6 just said before.
7 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] That's all right, Your Honours.
8 I accept.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
10 JUDGE HOEPFEL: So, Mr. Milovancevic, your statement now also
11 includes page 25, line 19, and line 20, Mr. Galbraith having deceived the
12 Trial Chamber?
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Isn't that what Mr. Black referred to?
14 MR. BLACK: Yes. Yes, that was the first instance and then the
15 second --
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: He has is already withdrawn.
17 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Milovancevic. You may
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Mr. Macura, look at this photograph on the paper in front of you.
22 Look at it well. Can you see it?
23 A. Yes, I can see, although it is quite small.
24 Q. What is in front of Mr. Galbraith, and you were a reserve officer
25 yourself. There is something jutting in front of him.
1 A. That is a machine-gun on the top of the tank.
2 Q. Next to Mr. Galbraith, there is a man in uniform with glasses. Do
3 you see him?
4 A. To the right of him is a man without a cap.
5 Q. That is right. But let us -- do let us pause between question and
7 In front of this man who is not wearing a cap --
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I ask, for my elucidation, who is Mr. Galbraith
9 of all the people that are on that photograph? I hear you talking of to
10 his right there being a person.
11 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you, Your
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Who is Mr. Galbraith?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Galbraith is the first person on
15 the left of the photograph. To his right-hand side, looking from where we
16 stand of course, to his left is this man wearing glasses without a cap. I
17 don't know who that man is. But Mr. Galbraith is the first person on the
18 left side of the photograph.
19 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. I have another question --
21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: One moment, please, Mr. Milovancevic.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Milovancevic, there is a question which I
24 must pose to you, and it arises out of the point of objection which was
25 taken by Mr. Black, that you had accepted, in principle, the truth of the
1 statement made by Ambassador Galbraith, that he was not on a tank during
2 Operation Storm. Is that correct? Because if that is so, and you accept
3 the answer which he gave in cross-examination, then you wouldn't have a
4 right to controvert that evidence and that statement of his through your
5 witness in putting an inconsistent position to your witness.
6 Do you understand what I'm saying? If you accept the truth of the
7 statement made by Ambassador Galbraith, then why are you leading evidence
8 from this witness to controvert it? It is not regular. It's not
9 permissible under the rules of examination and evidence. This is why I
10 took the point earlier on that you had really, in your submissions, only
11 admitted that the statement was made. You weren't accepting the fact of
12 its truth, but you have confirmed to this Court that you are accepting the
13 fact of the truth of the statement.
14 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I am dealing with
15 this photograph not to controvert Mr. Galbraith's statement that he was
16 not atop a Croatian tank during the Storm operation. I am trying to do
17 something else right now. The witness has given us an answer to the
18 effect that during the Geneva negotiations he was informed that America
19 and Germany had approved an attack against the Krajina, which started on
20 the next day. That is the Storm operation.
21 This photograph is associated with the text which is on this page.
22 I am only trying to point to what -- in referring to this photograph and
23 seeking to establish that Mr. Galbraith is on a tank on this photograph, I
24 am trying to come to a conclusion, to elicit a conclusion whether
25 Mr. Galbraith is objective or partial, whether he has aligned himself with
1 one of the sides, whether his treatment of both sides, the Croatian and
2 the Serbian is the same. That is my only purpose.
3 I am no longer at all dealing with that topic, whether what
4 Mr. Galbraith said is correct or not. I believe that that has been
6 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: In fact, thank you. It seems as if I was
7 pre-emptive, having heard you refer to Mr. Galbraith then. I accept your
8 position now. Thank you very much.
9 Please proceed.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can we deal with my problem, Mr. Milovancevic? My
11 problem had been, can we identify the personalities on the photograph.
12 You see, the witness has referred to a person to the right and to the left
13 of Mr. Galbraith. I need to know who is Mr. Galbraith. I notice that
14 there is what looks like a face of a human being below the blazer of the
15 person on the extreme left, and next to his blazer there is yet another
16 person in what is -- looks like a camouflage uniform. And those are small
17 inserts. But on the main picture I see four people.
18 And then below the person that looks like a lady, in something
19 that looks like a ring, I seem to see something that looks like a face of
20 a human being.
21 Now so in addition to the four who are in the main picture, I see,
22 one, two, three other faces. So let's know who we are talking about so
23 that the Chamber is clear.
24 Who is Mr. Galbraith, first? Can we identify him.
25 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I shall try, Your Honours.
1 Thank you.
2 Q. Mr. Witness, please explain to us who is Mr. Galbraith on this
3 photograph? Would you point to a detail on him.
4 A. Here, these people in the foreground, and Mr. Galbraith is the
5 first one on the left-hand side with a tie.
6 Q. Do you know anybody else?
7 A. No, I don't know any of the other people shown in the photograph.
8 Q. That will do. Thank you. This head on the right-hand side of the
9 photograph, what you can see, there is a circle in the head. Do you see
11 A. This woman, you mean?
12 Q. Yes, yes. Does that mean anything to you?
13 A. I don't know. That might be a human head. I have no idea.
14 Q. Could it be a member of the crew of the tank? This man has
15 something --
16 A. Yes, yes, you are correct, he has a cap. It's probably the tank
17 driver, because he's wearing this cap on his head. It is the tank driver;
18 now I can see more clearly, yes.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Who is the tank driver? The person that looks like
20 a woman is a tank driver?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is not a woman. This is a man
22 with a cap, it looks like a hairdo. He has to wear such a protective cap
23 while driving a tank, that's why.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Which person is that on the photograph are you
25 referring to?
1 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if you will allow
2 me, perhaps it would be easiest if we put the photograph on the ELMO and
3 the witness could show us with a pencil exactly what he is talking about,
4 without us having to conclude what is left and what is right.
5 Will the usher please assist us?
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Milovancevic.
7 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Would you please show to us Mr. Galbraith and tell us what head
9 you were talking about.
10 A. You mean point at it with my finger?
11 Q. You will be given an implement.
12 A. This here is Mr. Galbraith. This here is Mr. Galbraith. So this
13 person here.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: The one next to him in glasses, is that glasses?
15 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone please, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: I beg your pardon. The next one, next to him, in
17 dark glasses to Mr. Galbraith's left? Who is that one?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They are sitting, there up. He is
19 not the driver. This is the driver, here. [Indicates]. But of course it
20 is a very poor image, but that is the driver wearing this protective cap.
21 It is not a lady's hairdo.
22 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Can you explain to us who these people behind are? No, no, below.
24 Here on the left.
25 A. Here, what I am showing right now, this is a soldier wearing a
1 camouflage uniform, but of course this is not a clear enough image for us
2 to be able to make out the details. We can see that it is a soldier in
3 camouflage uniform.
4 Q. Why are these people down there? Can you explain that?
5 A. Well, probably as security, as escorts, escorting these people
6 riding on the tank.
7 Q. I meant why are they on a lower level in relation to
8 Mr. Galbraith.
9 A. But they are not on the tank. They are behind it.
10 Q. Thank you. When you said a while ago that you could see this
11 machine-gun, where is it? Could you show it to us?
12 A. Well, you can see the barrel here very nicely. Quite clearly.
13 This is of course something that is used if there should be -- if the need
14 should arise in case of some operations.
15 Q. Thank you.
16 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I believe that this photograph
17 can be admitted, if the Trial Chamber does not have any additional
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: The photograph is admitted into evidence. May it
20 please be given an exhibit number.
21 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number 942.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
23 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Mr. Macura, in connection with this photograph is also the text
25 which is rounded. What date do you see in the bottom left-hand corner.
1 Can we see the left-hand bottom corner of this page, please.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, can we have an English
3 translation, please.
4 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I will just refer
5 to the date, that is a --
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm not able to read the date in --
7 THE WITNESS: August 11th.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: -- in B/C/S.
9 Are you looking at the date at the bottom --
10 THE WITNESS: August 11th, 1995.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Witness, when I am talking to counsel --
12 THE WITNESS: After the Operation Storm.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just keep quiet, please.
14 THE WITNESS: Sorry, sorry. Excuse me, Mr. Moloto.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just keep quiet, please. You're not in a class
16 here, okay, you're in a court.
17 Yes, Mr. Milovancevic. The date only.
18 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Yes.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Thank you very much.
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I should also like
21 to give you the reason for that. We showed you -- showed a page from the
22 Daily Press which bears the date of the copy in question, and the date
23 which is in the left corner is in the Cyrillic script and we shall
24 translate it.
25 Q. But I shall like to ask the witness what the date is.
1 A. It is the 11th of August, 1990.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Mr. Milovancevic.
3 A. 1991 -- 1995.
4 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction, 1995. I'm very sorry.
5 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
6 MR. BLACK: I apologise for the interruption. Just one thing
7 before we move on. Perhaps we're about to go to this, but I'm a little
8 confused about what is in evidence now.
9 It was asked that the photograph be admitted into evidence. And
10 then -- and that's fine that there is a reference to the date also on the
11 same page. And if that's all that's gone into evidence, I'm fine. If the
12 text is going to go into evidence, I might have an objection, because I
13 really have no idea what it says, since we don't have a translation. So
14 at this point I would object to the text going in, but the photograph and
15 the date is just fine with me.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, as I understood Mr. Milovancevic, I asked him
17 for the translation. He says it's -- from the photograph he is going to
18 the date and date only, so I accept -- I would imagine, therefore, that
19 what is admitted into evidence is the photograph and the date, and not the
20 article. I see him nodding.
21 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Correct, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Milovancevic.
23 JUDGE HOEPFEL: The date being the date of the publication of the
24 photo in the Serb newspaper, isn't it? Can we take that?
25 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] That is correct, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just for clarification then. In relation to the
2 exhibit that is being admitted, the Chamber clarifies that only the
3 photograph and the date of the newspaper are admitted into evidence and
4 not the writings in B/C/S that are -- surround the photograph.
5 Thank you very much. I hope the record makes it clear.
6 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Mr. Milovancevic. You may proceed.
8 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Until when did you stay in Krajina?
10 A. Until the Geneva accords, then I went to Martinbrod and I couldn't
11 return to Knin because there was a big column of refugees heading for
13 Q. You said that on the 3rd in the evening you received from the
14 Russian representative the information that the operation, Croatian
15 operation was going to commence.
16 A. This operation began on the 4th of August at dawn. Since I had
17 the information from the representative of the Russian mission -- excuse
18 me. I cannot follow because of the interpretation.
19 [In English] Sorry, I don't have the transcript on the screen.
20 All right. Thank you.
21 [Interpretation] Mr. Prijic, who was a member of the delegation,
22 and myself addressed Mr. Peters, who was then a general, a Belgium general
23 in the UNPROFOR forces, and who was with us in Geneva.
24 We asked him to be able to return to Krajina as soon as possible.
25 He just laughed. He said that they had their own schedule and there was
1 no problem. They were aware of Operation Storm which had been prepared
2 previously. Pavicevic, our ambassador to Geneva, also had this
3 information, he told us that he would take us to Samaruga. This means
4 that we were to request the help of the Red Cross.
5 Q. Who was Mr. Pavicevic?
6 A. Mr. Pavicevic was the ambassador of Yugoslavia in Geneva, and he
7 greeted us when we arrived to Geneva. We thought that we had come to
8 negotiate and to settle certain issues, but as soon as the ambassador told
9 us that he was taking us to Samaruga we realised that we would need
10 assistance from the Red Cross, which we did not expect.
11 Q. Did you need assistance of the Red Cross?
12 A. Yes. Because Operation Storm started on the next day and people
13 were fleeing the Krajina region.
14 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this brings me to
15 the conclusion of this questioning.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Milovancevic.
17 Mr. Black.
18 Cross-examination by Mr. Black:
19 MR. BLACK: Thank you, Your Honour.
20 Q. Mr. Macura, my name is Mr. Black. I'm one of the Prosecutors in
21 the case, and now it is my turn to ask you questions for a little while.
22 A. All right.
23 Q. I don't want to ask you questions about history or about World
24 War II. I don't want you to take that as an indication that I agree with
25 you on your views on those matters, but I am going to try to focus on
1 events in the 1990s, which are more directly relevant to these
2 proceedings. And first I want to ask you a little bit about some
3 activities as SAO Krajina minister of information in 1991.
4 And the first thing I want to do is to clarify some dates. You
5 testified that the first SAO Krajina government was established in
6 December of 1990. Do you remember telling us that?
7 A. That is possible, sir. However, I didn't think I had to write
8 down everything that was going on. I don't think the dates are relevant.
9 The events are relevant.
10 Q. Okay. Well, for these purposes, I'll decide what's relevant, and
11 if you can just try to answer my questions the best that you can.
12 So do you think that -- you said yesterday that the first
13 SAO Krajina government was established in December 1990. Is that still
14 what you think today or would you like to change your testimony on that
15 date, or do you just simply not remember the date?
16 A. I recall, sir, that I took an oath on St. Michael's Day, 19th of
18 Q. You would agree with me, wouldn't you, that you were the minister
19 of information in the first SAO Krajina government. There wasn't another
20 government before you became minister, right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. I would like to show you another document on the screen.
23 MR. BLACK: If we could please see ERN 02195913. And the English
24 is actually the next page, 02195914. If we could see those on the
25 e-court, please.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Black, I have a little bit of a problem. I'm
2 not quite sure whether you are satisfied with the answer that you got.
3 You said that you will decide what was relevant. And then you went on to
4 say: "So do you think that -- you said yesterday that the first
5 SAO Krajina government was established in December 1990. Is that still
6 what you think today or would you like to change your testimony on that
7 date, or do you just simply don't remember?"
8 "I recall, sir, that it was St. Michael's Day, the 19th of
10 I don't know whether it is the 19th of December, 1890, 1790 or
12 MR. BLACK: I understood him to mean 1990, but I will follow up
13 with the witness. Thank you, Your Honour.
14 Q. Mr. Macura, perhaps you understood His Honour Judge Moloto's
15 question. When you referred to the 19th of December, what year were you
16 referring to?
17 A. It was the 19th of December. I apologise, I don't recall. It
18 could have been 1991. I remember when the Croatian constitution was
19 adopted. The day before this adoption we had adopted some legal roles.
20 I can only remember the substance, but I don't recall the dates.
21 Q. Okay. Well, I'm not trying to confuse you here. Yesterday you
22 said December 1990. You have also referred to the Croatian constitution,
23 which was adopted in December 1990.
24 Is that when you had -- that's when you thought you recalled this
25 first SAO Krajina government being established, right? And if you can
1 just answer that, and then we will look at the document and we will see if
2 we can clarify the dates.
3 A. I can't reply to this question. As far as the date is concerned,
4 I apologise, but I never wrote the dates down, nor did I make an effort to
5 remember them.
6 Q. Okay. Well, let me ask you -- Your Honour, I think with my next
7 few questions I can elucidate this.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's fine. And if you could elucidate on whether
9 the Croatian constitution was also the day before this 1991 or 1990,
10 whatever the date is.
11 MR. BLACK:
12 Q. Sir, you said that you have some trouble with dates and I accept
14 The Croatian constitution, the so-called Christmas constitution,
15 that was adopted in December of 1990; correct?
16 A. I think this was the Christmas constitution and it was probably
17 adopted in 1990 because this was when they won the elections.
18 MR. BLACK: Your Honour, does that satisfy you for the moment?
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
20 MR. BLACK: Thank you.
21 Q. Now, Mr. Macura, there is a document on your screen. This
22 document is the decision electing you minister of information for the SAO
23 Krajina; correct?
24 A. Yes, that is correct.
25 Q. And looking at the date of this document, you will agree with me,
1 would you not, that that happened in May of 1991, not in December of 1990.
2 A. That is correct.
3 MR. BLACK: Your Honour, could this be made an exhibit, please?
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm still on the update. Is that, this document
5 021? I beg your pardon. Document 02195914?
6 MR. BLACK: Correct, Your Honour. The B/C/S is 02195913, and the
7 English is 5914.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it
9 please be given an exhibit number.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number 943.
11 MR. BLACK: Thank you very much.
12 Q. Mr. Macura, just again to establish a little bit the dates. The
13 parties in this case have agreed that the RSK was established in December
14 of 1991. Does that sound right to you? Do you accept that?
15 A. That is correct. I apologise, but SAO Krajina, RSK, I think I got
16 the dates confused.
17 Q. Well, let me ask you about some of your own statements. Hopefully
18 it will be easier to remember that.
19 You believed, in 1991, and you publicly stated as minister of
20 information, that all Serbs should live in a single Serb state. Didn't
22 A. Yes, I did.
23 Q. If we could look at a document on the e-court, please. It's
25 I apologise, Mr. Macura. This is a news article that I only have
1 in English. I don't have it in B/C/S, but I know that you read English
2 very well, so hopefully it won't cause a problem. If we could just blow
3 that up a bit, please.
4 Mr. Macura, as you see here, this is a news article from the
5 Financial Times dated the 3rd of August, 1991. You will see there in the
6 first paragraph there is a reference to you, Lazar Macura. And then the
7 second paragraph says -- it quotes you. It says: "All Serbs should live
8 in a compact Serbia, said Mr. Macura, minister of information in the
9 self-proclaimed Serb inhabited Autonomous Region of Krajina, south
10 Croatia, which borders with Bosnia-Herzegovina."
11 You did in fact say that in August 1991, right?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. If you move down a couple of more paragraphs. There is one right
14 next to a black dot that starts "Mr. Macura believes." It then says:
15 "Mr. Macura believes a territorial corridor stretching from Krajina
16 across Bosnia-Herzegovina to Serbia is the obvious solution to uniting the
17 two Serb communities."
18 Now, there you're referring to the so-called Posavina corridor;
20 A. Yes. But if I may, sir, all the Serbs lived in one compact state
21 until then and they should have remained in one state. They were not the
22 ones asking for secession.
23 Q. Okay. If you could just focus on my question, please. I asked
24 you if you were referring here to the so-called Posavina corridor. That's
25 what you were referring to, right?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And you considered that to be the obvious solution to uniting
3 Krajina with not only the Serb inhabited parts of Bosnia but also with
4 Serbia, right?
5 A. Yes. Because I think the Serbs have this right of determination,
7 Q. If you look at the last paragraph of this, before it gives the
8 copyright information, et cetera, it says "he." And this is referring to
9 you, Mr. Macura. It says: "He is adamant that no Serbian community in
10 Yugoslavia should be categorised as a Serb minority. Yet when Franjo
11 Tudjman, President of Croatia, this week offered cultural and political
12 autonomy to the Serbs in Croatia, following repeated bombardment by Serb
13 nationalists of Croat villages, the Serbs in Krajina were in no mood to
14 accept the offer."
15 And that paragraph is accurate, isn't it?
16 A. This is the conclusion of the journalist who wrote the article,
17 not mine.
18 Q. But it is correct, isn't it, that President Tudjman of Croatia
19 offered cultural and political autonomy to the Croatian Serbs in early
20 August 1991, but that offer was rejected by the leadership in Knin. True?
21 A. I don't remember this. I don't remember Tudjman offering
22 anything. They never wanted to negotiate with us. They only sent their
23 police troops. They never wanted to negotiate with the politicians.
24 Q. Please, if you could just try to answer my question. If it is
25 necessary to add more information, I will ask you for more information.
1 MR. BLACK: Your Honour, could this document also be admitted into
2 evidence, please.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: This document is admitted into evidence. May it
4 please be given an exhibit number?
5 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number 944.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
7 MR. BLACK: Thank you.
8 Q. Mr. Macura, it was also your position as minister of information,
9 that the Serbs in Krajina did not want to be part of an independent
10 Croatia and that they in fact had the right to secede if Croatia seceded
11 from Yugoslavia. Correct?
12 A. That is correct. I still hold that view.
13 MR. BLACK: If we could see another document on the screen,
14 please. Actually, it is part of a larger document as it's been uploaded.
15 The doc ID should be 03251158, and I'm actually interested in page 120 of
16 that document, which has the ERN 03251277.
17 And with the assistance of the usher, this is a document that's
18 only in B/C/S. I was able to ask a colleague to do a draft translation.
19 It is not an official translation, Your Honours, but it may help you
20 follow along, so if I could distribute copies to Defence counsel and to
21 the Bench, please.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Draft translation of the black document we see in
23 front of us?
24 MR. BLACK: Of one very, very small portion of it, Your Honour,
25 and it is on page 120.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
2 MR. BLACK: If we could please on the B/C/S focus on the top
3 right-hand corner of the document, please. Thank you.
4 Q. Mr. Macura you will see there there's a heading that refers to the
5 8th of August, 1991, Belgrade, Tanjug.
6 And what this says -- it makes reference to an interview you gave
7 to Austrian radio where you pointed out that there is a restoration of
8 fascism in Croatia, and that Serbs do not want to be part of an
9 independent state of Croatia and that they have the right to secede from
10 that Yugoslav republic if she secedes from Yugoslavia.
11 That was your position in August of 1991, wasn't it?
12 A. Correct.
13 MR. BLACK: Your Honour, could this be admitted into evidence as
14 well. And I will ask for an official translation of that excerpt, only.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Black. The document is
16 admitted into evidence. May it please be given an exhibit number.
17 JUDGE HOEPFEL: In fact, it refers to the Tanjug report of the 7th
18 August, doesn't it?
19 MR. BLACK: It does, Your Honour, then --
20 JUDGE HOEPFEL: At the same time to a source of the 8th, which may
21 be an evening edition or whatever.
22 MR. BLACK: That's right, Your Honour. I agree it's a little
23 confusing, but that is the passage I'm focused on.
24 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: It's the one at the very top?
25 MR. BLACK: Correct.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, may I explain?
2 MR. BLACK: Please.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can explain this, about the dates.
4 Glas is a publication that was a monthly, so the date should not confuse
5 you. It was not a newspaper. It was a monthly.
6 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the document please be admitted into evidence.
8 I'm sorry we have sort of side-stepped you. I know that you wanted to
9 tell us and that everybody jumped in.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you very much, Your Honour. Your Honour
11 this will become Exhibit number 945.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
13 MR. BLACK:
14 Q. Mr. Macura, even in January of 1992, when the Vance Plan had been
15 adopted, your position then was that the Krajina would never be part of
16 Croatia again and that war would probably continue despite the Vance Plan.
18 A. Correct. And that's how it happened. But Krajina is nowadays a
19 part of Croatia, although the war did continue there.
20 Q. Let me show you another news article, and this one bears the ERN
21 06037133. If we could -- again this is in English, Mr. Macura. If we
22 could focus in just on the top third of the page, perhaps, that's fine.
23 You will see that this is an Associated Press article dated 17th
24 of January, 1992, from Knin. And you'll see there the second and third
25 paragraphs. It's quoting you, it says: "Europe does not understand.
1 We'll never be part of Croatia again, said Lazar Macura, Information
2 Minister of the Krajina region of western Croatia."
3 And then it quotes you some more. It says: "The war has not
4 ended. This is only a brief timeout, said Macura."
5 And that's a correct representation of your views as minister of
6 information at that time, right, in January of 1992?
7 A. It was not only my position, it was the position of those who
8 elected me and the SDS of Krajina as a party, of Dr. Milan Babic as the
9 president, and all the members of the government.
10 Q. Sorry to interrupt, but just focus on my question. Just answer my
11 question, that will be fine.
12 MR. BLACK: Your Honours, could this be admitted into evidence,
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: I just want to ask the question.
15 Mr. Macura, the article goes on to say: "A cease-fire between
16 Serb-led forces and Croatian units has been in effect with sporadic
17 violations for 15 days. Federal army and Croatian officials are
18 optimistic it can hold. Not Macura. 'When the war starts again, it will
19 only stop when one side exterminates the other,' he said."
20 Was that your position also at the time?
21 A. That's correct. And that's what happened, and the Serbs were the
22 side that lost.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. The document is admitted into
24 evidence and may it please be given an exhibit number.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this become Exhibit number 946.
1 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Mr. Macura, may I ask you: These kind of
2 statements were made by you because you were the minister of information,
3 do I see this correctly?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I had to act in accordance
5 with the official policy of the government. I was not a freelancer making
6 statements of his own accord.
7 JUDGE HOEPFEL: That was the gist of my question. Thank you very
9 Please, Mr. Black, you may go on. Yes.
10 MR. BLACK: Thank you very much, Your Honours.
11 Q. Mr. Macura, you mentioned there wasn't -- this wasn't just your
12 position, it was also the position of some others, and you mentioned Milan
13 Babic. Was it also Milan Martic's position at the time?
14 A. I was not in direct contact with Mr. Martic, because we were not
15 doing the same job, but it's possible that he shared that position.
16 Q. I'm a little confused. You're saying you don't know it was, or it
17 was not, or you don't know?
18 A. Don't know.
19 Q. Thank you. If we could look at another document also from the
20 17th of January, 1992. It's ERN 06037134.
21 As it is coming up, Mr. Macura, you told a reporter from the
22 New York Times that the Serbs in Krajina would rather continue the war
23 than to recognise Croatia's borders at that time as legal borders.
24 Correct? Do you remember taking that position in January of 1992?
25 A. I think that, sir, because international borders may not be
1 changed according to the final Helsinki Act. They have to remain
2 sovereign states. Otherwise, if you start with secessions, that can have
3 no end. Those were internal borders, they cannot be international
4 borders, sir.
5 Q. Let me focus you on -- if we could scroll down to the bottom of
6 this article which again is in English. There you will see your name in
7 bold. That paragraph says: "'Croatia has not had control here for over
8 18 months,' says Lazar Macura, Information Minister of the self-declared
9 Krajina republic, speaking by telephone tonight from Knin, the centre of
10 the Serb rebellion in Croatia."
11 It continues to quote you: "We will go forward with the war
12 before we will recognise the present borders as Croatia's legal borders."
13 And that was your position in January of 1992; correct?
14 A. It was before the Vance Plan was adopted, and insurgency broke out
15 in Croatia vis-a-vis Yugoslavia before the insurgency in Knin, which means
16 that the insurgency of Croatia against Yugoslavia preceded the insurgency
17 in Knin.
18 Q. Let me focus you again on my question. What I just quoted to you
19 from this news article, that was your position on the 17th of January,
20 1992; correct?
21 A. It was my position in January 1992.
22 MR. BLACK: Your Honours, could this be admitted into evidence,
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: This document is admitted into evidence. May it
25 please be given an exhibit number.
1 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number 947.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
3 MR. BLACK:
4 Q. Mr. Macura, you mentioned earlier in your testimony that the Serbs
5 in Croatia had initially demanded cultural autonomy. Do you remember
6 saying that?
7 A. Yes, correct. But that was at the very outset.
8 Q. You remember that on the 25th of July, 1990, there was a Serb
9 Assembly in Srb where there was actually a declaration adopted on this
10 precise issue of autonomy; correct?
11 A. Yes. But I was not at that rally. I know it was held, though.
12 Q. Well, let me ask you a bit about the content of the declaration to
13 see if you know that. The declaration is in evidence in this case.
14 Under that declaration it said that the scope of Serb autonomy
15 would have to depend on whether Croatia stayed in Yugoslavia, and
16 specifically if Croatia remained in a federal Yugoslavia, then the Serbs
17 demanded essentially cultural autonomy. But if Croatia separated itself
18 from Yugoslavia, then the Serbs had the right, according to the
19 declaration, to "political and territorial autonomy."
20 That's correct, isn't it? That was the position in July of 1990?
21 A. Yes, correct.
22 Q. So basically from the very beginning from July of 1990, the Serbs
23 in Krajina were already contemplating the option of territorial autonomy
24 from Croatia, which is another way of saying independence; correct?
25 A. It's not correct that it was tantamount to independence. That was
1 the kind of autonomy that was offered to us in Grac in 1993. We would
2 have had the same status as the Tirol, but the Croats refused to continue
3 those negotiations.
4 Q. When you say about the same status as Tirol, are you there
5 referring to cultural autonomy or political autonomy or territorial
6 autonomy? Which one of those is represented by Tirol in your view?
7 A. I think Tirol has also political autonomy, not only cultural
8 autonomy within it.
9 Q. Right. But it doesn't have territorial autonomy. That is
10 something more, isn't it?
11 A. But it has political autonomy, which is significant.
12 Q. All right. Separate from that I'm focused on territorial
13 autonomy. Tirol does not have territorial autonomy. That is something
14 more, right? More than political autonomy.
15 A. Yes, probably.
16 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Are you speaking of Tirol as part of Italy?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Tirol is either in Italy or in
18 Austria. All I know is that we got the offer to have the same status as
19 Tirol at one point. Some other options were mentioned, like islands of --
20 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not hear which islands.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] However, these negotiations did not
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: The interpreter didn't hear which islands you are
24 referring to. Can you please repeat that?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Oland islands; it is somewhere
1 in Finland or Sweden. It doesn't matter. That was also on the table at
2 one point. That's what matters. However, none of it was finalised.
3 That's the tragedy. That's what I'm trying to say.
4 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Let me just ask you one more question as to the
5 issue of the status of Tirol. Who did offer that, and where? And when?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was at a three-day meeting in
7 Grac in 1993. There was Dr. Pupovac from Zagreb, Milos Vojnovic from
8 Krajina, myself, and there was a Croatian delegation. And there were
9 UN representatives as mediators. I don't know who organised the meeting.
10 However, all that was discontinued later.
11 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you. From whom the offer came, did you say
12 that also? Do I have to understand you that --
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The representative of the United
14 Nations proposed it. I don't remember the name of the man.
15 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.
16 Please, Mr. Black.
17 MR. BLACK: Thank you, Your Honour.
18 Q. If we could just look briefly at Exhibit 236 on our screens,
20 Mr. Macura, this is a document that you were asked questions about
21 by Defence counsel. It's from September of 1991.
22 Do you remember that document, the one that says The Hague peace
23 conference on Yugoslavia, on the top of it, do you remember discussing
25 A. There were a million documents. I can't remember all of them.
1 Q. Okay. Well, let me ask you if we can focus in perhaps on that
2 first paragraph. If we could scroll down just a little bit, please.
3 Thank you.
4 Mr. Macura, just read that first paragraph to yourself and tell me
5 if that refreshes your recollection, you remember talking about this
6 document with Defence counsel earlier in your testimony.
7 A. You mean the first paragraph?
8 Q. Yes.
9 A. Yes. We discussed that this morning.
10 Q. Okay. If we could turn to the second-to-last page, just above the
11 signature, please. I believe it is page 7. If we could focus in on the
12 bottom, the last, the last two or three or four lines at the bottom of the
13 page. That's fine.
14 Now, Mr. Macura, the last sentence of this document signed by
15 Milan Babic says: "To the Serb nation, being free means being sovereign.
16 While being sovereign means existing in the form of one's own democratic
18 That was Mr. Babic's position in September 1991, and it was your
19 own position, wasn't it?
20 A. Yes.
21 MR. BLACK: I think it is probably time for the break, Your
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. We will take a break and come
24 back at half past 12.00.
25 Court adjourned.
1 --- Recess taken at 12.00 p.m.
2 --- On resuming at 12.29 p.m.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Black.
4 MR. BLACK: Thank you, Your Honour.
5 And just before I go back to my questions. First, to clear up one
6 thing about Exhibit 945. This was the one that I said was page 120 of a
7 much larger document. It wasn't -- I went back and looked and it wasn't
8 clear. We only asked for the particular page that we were interested in
9 to be admitted into evidence, not the whole however many hundred pages it
10 is. And so I will, if this works with the registrar, I will ask that we
11 just take the large document out of e-court and just put the one page in
12 e-court, so that it is clear what it is that we're relying on, if that is
13 a solution that is acceptable to Your Honours.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: If that is acceptable also and it's possible to
15 registry? Thank you very much. So it is ordered.
16 MR. BLACK: Thank you, Your Honour.
17 And just one other thing about scheduling today. At the end
18 yesterday the Trial Chamber had indicated that you wanted to go back to
19 this issue of revised estimates. Should I leave some time for that at the
20 end of the day today or how would you like me to deal with that?
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: We would appreciate if you could do that.
22 MR. BLACK: Should I leave about 15 minutes, Your Honour, or more
23 or less? I'm at your disposal, of course.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, these discussions usually take longer than
25 they're supposed to. Leave as much as you possibly can without
1 compromising your cross-examination.
2 MR. BLACK: Your Honour, I think it is unlikely I will finish my
3 cross-examination today, so it's just a question of when I stop, to
4 continue tomorrow.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, we can deal with this issue after this
6 witness is finished.
7 MR. BLACK: Okay. However you prefer, Your Honour. Okay.
8 Q. Mr. Macura, sorry for the interruption while we talked about some
9 other matters.
10 I want to see if I understand your position on the changes to the
11 Croatian constitution in December of 1990. I don't want to spend too much
12 time on this but I just want to see if we can understand one another.
13 Do you remember testifying a little bit about this yesterday,
14 about why it was important that the Serbs' status in Croatia was changed
15 from a constituent nation to a minority. Do you remember talking about
17 A. Yes. Mr. Prosecutor, I shall try to be brief and to explain the
18 essence of the issue to you.
19 Q. Well, actually you explained it yesterday, and I just want to ask
20 a couple of questions about what you said.
21 THE WITNESS: Okay.
22 MR. BLACK:
23 Q. First of all, well, so that there is no confusion. Yesterday at
24 transcript 28 to 29, you were asked about this specific issue, and let me
25 read out to you what you said so you have in mind what you said yesterday.
1 You say: "We thought that we would never be divested of the status of a
2 constituent people." "That we could never be divested," excuse me, "of
3 the status of a constituent people. But this was violence against law,
4 because Croatia could not unilaterally divest us of that status." We
5 would have -- "We were supposed to be asked."
6 "And secondly, it is true that -- the second factor is that
7 Croatians announced that they would secede from Yugoslavia, and we thought
8 that we had the -- that the pre-emptive right of remaining in the country
9 of our birth, and that that right pre-empted the right of secession from
10 that country. We had no claims to Croatian towns in which many Serbs
11 lived, but we did have a compact territory which could have been
12 completely separated from Croatia in the way that Croatia was separated
13 from Yugoslavia. There, the population were 80 per cent Serbs. In the
14 area of Knin, Croats accounted for only 7 per cent, whereas now there are
15 no Serbs there at all."
16 That's what you said yesterday, Mr. Macura.
17 A. Yes. That's it.
18 Q. Is it your view that Croatia could not change the constitutional
19 status of Serbs, nor secede from Yugoslavia without first obtaining the
20 agreement of the Serbs in Croatia?
21 A. That is only normal for me, because we participated in the
22 creation of Croatia, both in the First and in the Second World War, and
23 Serbs had the most casualties in both world wars.
24 Q. Well, let's not -- let's not talk about World War II right now
1 I'm not sure you answered my question. Is it your view that
2 Croatia couldn't change the constitutional status of Serbs, nor could it
3 secede from Yugoslavia without first obtaining the agreement of the Serbs
4 in Croatia?
5 A. That is my position, Mr. Prosecutor.
6 Q. So, in other words, the Serbs had a kind of veto power over
7 Croatian secession and this kind of important constitutional change, or
8 important in your view anyhow.
9 A. In all previous Croatian constitutions, the Serbs were an equal
10 people in Croatia, and that is why I think the Serbs should have also been
11 asked, rather than have the constitution amended unilaterally.
12 Q. Well, my question is a little bit different. It's not about what
13 you think should have happened, but did you think that Croatia could not
14 change that status and could not --
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. -- without the agreement first?
17 A. Yes, yes, that is what I thought. That is what I thought.
18 Q. So it's not only a question of what they should have done but what
19 they could do, what their possibilities were; is that right?
20 JUDGE HOEPFEL: You mean legal possibilities, or moral
21 possibilities or historical obligations? Maybe you can ask that.
22 MR. BLACK:
23 Q. Mr. Macura, you heard Judge Hoepfel's question, and maybe it was
24 to me. But are you speaking of legal possibilities, moral possibilities
25 or historical possibilities? Or obligations?
1 A. Legal, moral and historical, whatever you like.
2 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.
3 Please go on.
4 MR. BLACK: Thank you, Your Honour.
5 Q. You spoke yesterday in the part that I read out about a compact
6 territory which could have been completely separated from Croatia. And
7 there you were referring basically to the Krajina. Correct?
8 A. Correct.
9 Q. And you mentioned about the numbers of -- you had some figures
10 about how many Serbs and Croats you thought composed the population in
12 In your view, what would have happened to the Croats living in
13 Krajina if Krajina separated itself from Croatia?
14 A. We were ready to give the Croats all rights as to Serbs, to treat
15 them on an equal footing as the Serbian people. So nothing would have
16 happened to them.
17 Q. Well, isn't that exactly what Croatia guaranteed for the Serbs,
18 that they would have all rights guaranteed to them?
19 A. Yes. But it abolished our basic right, the right of a constituent
20 people. And from that emanated many other issues.
21 Q. Are you saying that -- well, what do you mean when you say "we
22 were ready to give the Croats all rights as to Serbs."
23 What rights are you talking about?
24 A. We were prepared to treat them as an equal people, a people living
25 side by side with the Serbian people. They were in the minority, but
1 President Babic kept repeating that nothing could happen to the Croats
2 inside of the Krajina.
3 Q. Are you talking about -- when you say "treat them as an equal
4 people," do you mean that they would have been a constituent nation of the
5 Krajina? Or that they would have been a minority whose rights were
7 A. Well, that issue would be treated by the constitution later, when
8 it was adopted.
9 But Mr. Prosecutor, if you will allow me to explain. In the Knin
10 Krajina, we did nothing to the Croats, inflicted no evil on them during
11 the war. I'm referring to this latest war, not to the Second World War.
12 Q. I will ask you some questions about that later, but that's not my
13 focus right now.
14 Could we please see Exhibit 137 on the screen.
15 Mr. Macura, you told us yesterday that you were -- you held public
16 office as a member of the SDS; correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. What you see on the screen in front of you is the founding
19 document of the SDS from the 17th of February, 1990, in Knin. Were you
20 present at that founding Assembly of the SDS?
21 A. No, I wasn't present, Mr. Prosecutor. I only joined later.
22 Q. If I could ask you to look at the last page. It's the last page
23 in English and the last page in B/C/S original.
24 Mr. Macura, you can see on the screen now in front of you, this is
25 the SDS resolution on Kosovo, which was adopted at this February 1990
1 Assembly. And if you focus on the second-to-last paragraph down there,
2 near the bottom of the page, if we could scroll down, please. And it says
3 in that paragraph, this is the SDS resolution speaking: "We advocate that
4 the Albanians should keep those rights which minorities in most democratic
5 countries of the world have. We are in favour of them holding all the
6 rights they have. There is no minority in the world which has its academy
7 of sciences, its universities, its independent national school curriculum,
8 it's independent media, including radio, television and publishing houses.
9 They have everything but a state. We are vigorously against two Albanian
10 states in the Balkans of which one would be created in the territory of
11 the Socialist Republic of Serbia."
12 And my question, sir, is that the SDS had a double standard,
13 didn't it? It thought that Albanians in Kosovo should have --
14 A. That is not true.
15 Q. Let me finish my question and then you will have a chance to
16 respond. The SDS --
17 A. I'm sorry.
18 Q. It's okay. The SDS thought that Albanians in Kosovo should be
19 content with minority rights, but that Serbs in Croatia should have some
20 further rights, some special status. Right?
21 A. Mr. Prosecutor, can I explain to you something which I know from
22 my personal experience, and I shall be very brief.
23 Krajina is ethnically and historically a Serbian land and Kosovo
24 is only ethnically Albanian. Mr. Mustajbasic from Belgrade, who was -- is
25 a retired diplomat, was in Djakovica in 1946. And he told me: I spent
1 six months in Djakovica. That is a town on the border between Kosovo and
2 Albania. There were 10.000 Albanians from Albania crossing that border,
3 crossing monthly, entering Kosovo in order to remain living in Kosovo.
4 And Josip Broz prohibited Serbs from returning to Kosovo by a law.
5 In that way Albanians became the ethnic majority, even after the
6 death of Josip Broz. The president of the state was an Albanian from
7 Albania, he was Fadil Hoxha. He did not have Yugoslav citizenship but he
8 was the president of Yugoslavia, is the president of the collective
9 leadership in Belgrade.
10 So, I believe, Mr. Prosecutor, that these are two completely
11 different things.
12 Q. Well, my first question is: So you say that Albanians have no
13 historical claim to Kosovo, dating beyond 1940s? Is that your position?
14 A. That is correct. If you find a single Albanian monument in
15 Kosovo -- I'm talking in historical terms and that can't be done because
16 there never have been any, I will give you whatever you ask for.
17 Q. Well, I suppose you realise that many Albanians in Kosovo see that
18 issue very differently and feel that the Albanian people in Kosovo do have
19 a historical claim.
20 A. That is quite normal. You're probably right there, but I'm just
21 talking -- telling you what the historic facts are.
22 Q. Well, you're really telling me what your version of the historic
23 facts are, because other people may have their own version of the historic
24 facts; correct?
25 A. Of course, history can be falsified and interpreted in whatever
1 way one pleases, but I gave you the statement of a man whom I talked to
2 who is not a Serb. He's a Muslim from Belgrade. He was a diplomat and he
3 spent those six months at the Djakovica border crossing. And I do like to
4 quote people who are not Serbs, lest it seem as propaganda. What I'm
5 saying, that is.
6 Q. What is that person's name?
7 A. Mr. Mustajbasic. He lives on Rimska Street near the Hotel Serbia,
8 and I talked to him on a number of occasions.
9 Q. And according to you, what this person says that he saw in the
10 town of Djakovica establishes the true historic facts for all of Kosovo.
11 That's what you're telling me?
12 A. Yes. Because the Serbs were prohibited from returning to Kosovo
13 by law. They could not return to their homes, to their estates, just like
14 I myself am unable to return to Croatia now.
15 Q. It's good that you mention Croatia. Let me focus back on Croatia.
16 You would also accept, wouldn't you, that some Croatians have a
17 different view from you about the history of Krajina, that they would say
18 that Krajina historically also pertains to the country of Croatia, right?
19 A. No. I'll tell you that one just need look in the registry books,
20 the real estate registry to see whose the land is. That was during
21 Austria, Venice, the Turkish empire. Just consult the land registry books
22 and you will see whom the land belongs to.
23 But that this is not even good for the Croats, Mr. Prosecutor.
24 This is now a wasteland, it is an empty space. It is not good for the
25 Croats either.
1 Q. I guess the point that I'm driving at is that people have
2 different views about historical claims. And so history, historical claim
3 to a land can't be the basis for deciding about issues of secession and
4 constitutional rights, can it? Because people are never going to agree on
6 A. I agree, Mr. Prosecutor, but here the Helsinki Accords on the
7 inviability of external borders has been violated, but only on the example
8 of Yugoslavia. I don't see why it doesn't apply to all other countries
10 MR. BLACK: Thank you. I think we're done with that document,
11 please. It can be taken off the screen. Thank you.
12 Q. Mr. Macura, at several points in your testimony yesterday you
13 mentioned Branimir Glavas. Do you remember that, do you remember talking
14 about him?
15 A. I do remember. And I remember him from television. I saw him on
16 television a number of times.
17 Q. He is an extreme right wing Croatian nationalist, isn't he?
18 A. I think that that is so.
19 Q. And as you also mentioned yesterday, he's currently being
20 investigated for war crimes in Croatia, right?
21 A. Yes. But it is very protected exercise and the witnesses are
22 actually refusing to take the stand.
23 Q. Well, let me ask you about some details and see what you know
24 about the actual proceedings against Mr. Glavas.
25 Specifically, Glavas is accused of arresting and torturing two
1 Serbs and then ordering them shot in Osijek; correct?
2 A. I don't know the details. I know that -- what I do know is that
3 many Serbs were killed in Osijek and Glavas was man number 1 of the
4 Croatian Democratic Union in Osijek. So if the Croats think him
5 responsible, he probably is.
6 What I also do know is that he threatened Radoslav Tanjga as he
7 was speaking in the Croatian parliament, that is our representative. He
8 was threatening him with a pistol.
9 Q. You said yesterday and you kind of I think alluded to this here
10 that you thought Croatia was dragging its feed in the proceedings against
11 Glavas. Right? Is that how you feel about it?
12 A. Well, I have that feeling, yes.
13 Q. Did you know that in May of 2006, that's May of this year, the
14 Croatian parliament lifted Glavas's parliamentary immunity specifically in
15 order to facilitate the current investigation of him.
16 A. I'm not aware of that, but that is ten years after the Storm
18 Q. You probably also didn't hear, then, that he actually appealed
19 that decision, but the Zagreb Court of Appeals rejected his request and an
20 official judicial inquiry was opened in July of 2006. Does that ring a
21 bell to you at all?
22 A. I don't know. I'm not following it. I am no longer interested in
23 him. I am in exile from the Krajina, I cannot go back to it anymore, so I
24 really am not following that sphere.
25 Q. I'm just asking you questions about it because you yourself
1 mentioned it. As far as you know, his trial is expected to begin either
2 later this year --
3 A. I apologise. I just remembered. I remember him, sorry.
4 Q. Okay. Let me ask you a couple of more questions about it.
5 As far as you know, his trial is expected to begin either later
6 this year or in -- early in 2007; correct?
7 A. I don't know that.
8 Q. Do you know that if he's convicted he faces 15 to 20 years in
10 A. Well, I have my doubts.
11 Q. About what do you have your doubts?
12 A. I have my doubts about that, that he will be given a sentence,
13 Glavas that is, of between 15 and 20 years of imprisonment. But seeing is
14 believing, Mr. Prosecutor.
15 Q. Seeing is believing. Why do you doubt it?
16 A. I doubt it because of the fact that the Croatian public has
17 different feelings about it and about this law and the possible punishment
18 to be meted out to him.
19 Q. You're aware, aren't you, that there are other war crimes cases
20 proceeding in Croatia, right?
21 A. There certainly are, but I'm really not following that because I'm
22 not really interested.
23 Q. Have you heard anything about the Lora prison case from Split? Do
24 you know anything about that case?
25 JUDGE HOEPFEL: What case, once more?
1 MR. BLACK: The Lora, L-o-r-a, prison case.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I followed Lora during the war. I
3 know that Serbs were tortured there, not only Serbs from the Croatian
4 Krajina but also Serbs from Bosnia, namely from another state. And I know
5 that there was a trial, that it was discontinued and later resumed, but I
6 didn't follow it from that point.
7 MR. BLACK:
8 Q. Did you know that -- you're quite right that there was a trial.
9 They were found not guilty, but then that was overturned on appeal. And
10 at the re-trial, which lasted five and a half months, two Croatians
11 received sentences of eight years in prison, another, a military
12 policeman, Croatian, was sentenced to seven years in prison, and five
13 other Croatians were given six-year terms for their role in the beating
14 and torturing of civilians. Were you aware of that?
15 A. I'm not aware of that, but it is quite all right that something
16 should be done along those lines.
17 Q. Sir, you testified yesterday about -- you just mentioned about
18 Sisak and things that you say happened in Sisak. In fact, you testified
19 that in Sisak "Serbs were killed at every step." That non-Croats
20 were "rounded up and killed for no reason at all." "And that anyone from
21 Sisak will tell you that they know at least 50 Serbs killed in Sisak."
22 My question for you is: Where did you learn this information?
23 What's your source for this information?
24 A. I know Nikola Dobrijevic who is from Sisak and now lives in
25 Belgrade. He knows of many Serbs who were killed. He knows their names,
1 they would come to their workplace, to sign some declarations, and then
2 they were shot in the back of the head. That's what he told me. I have
3 no reason not to believe him.
4 I also know some other people from Sisak whose family members are
6 Q. Okay. So besides Mr. Dobrijevic, do you know any Serbs --
7 actually, do you know any one from Sisak who can talk to you about other
8 Serbs that were killed there?
9 A. I had a student in high school whose father was killed. He was
10 also from Sisak. I was born far away from Sisak. I don't know the region
11 that well. But I heard this information and I know that Nikola Dobrijevic
12 has a lot of information on that, because he lived in Sisak.
13 Q. And when precisely do you say these things happened?
14 A. They happened during the war. There were no combat activities in
15 Sisak and this is what I would like to turn your attention to. There were
16 no combat activities in Sisak, and nevertheless there were killings. I
17 cannot give you the exact period, the duration, but I'm sure that you will
18 have an opportunity to get evidence about that.
19 Q. Can you even give us the year, maybe, in which you say these
20 things happened? Or the range of years?
21 A. Sir, I really don't have an interest in dates or years. The only
22 thing I'm interested in is what happened and the status that I'm at now.
23 I was defeated in a war. I cannot return to my place of birth, and I have
24 no other interest.
25 Q. Sir, I hope you can appreciate that for the job that we have to do
1 here, we are interested in dates. So if you don't know a date, you can
2 tell me that. But I'm going to continue at times to ask you about
3 dates --
4 A. I don't know.
5 Q. -- and I would ask you to do your best.
6 A. All right.
7 Q. Who killed these people, as far as you know, the Serbs who you say
8 were killed in Sisak?
9 A. They were killed by their co-workers, by Croats who lived in the
10 same town. But of course the authorities were to blame and the power was
11 held by the Croatian Democratic Union, because it is impossible for people
12 to be killed or hurt without the knowledge of the authorities.
13 Q. You know, when we first started talking about this, I think you
14 said that people were killed when they came to work. Is that right? Is
15 that what you're saying?
16 A. Yes. In the offices they were killed as well.
17 Q. You know, yesterday you said that non-Croats were "rounded up and
19 Do you have any examples of that, of people being rounded up and
21 A. We heard on the news, but this was not confirmed later on, so I
22 cannot claim that it actually happened. But anyway, near Spacvanska
23 forest, I'm referring to the withdrawal of forces in the course of
24 Operation Storm when the Serbian forces withdrew in a column as refugees
25 headed towards Serbia, there were around 10.000 people in this group --
1 Q. Let me interrupt you, because I think maybe we're talking at
3 Are you still talking about Sisak? Because I'm interested in what
4 you said were crimes against Serbs in Sisak. Do you know of any cases
5 where Serbs in Sisak were rounded up and killed?
6 A. I heard some stories. There were some of them that they were
7 thrown into furnaces in the Sisak plant, ironworks. This is what I heard.
8 And in fact this is how this crime was left without any tracks. I cannot
9 confirm that. I didn't see it. These were stories that I heard.
10 Q. But is that what you meant when you said that Serbs or non-Croats
11 were rounded up and killed? Is that what you were referring to, that they
12 were burned in ovens?
13 A. What I'm trying to say is that these were mass killings. Not
14 individual cases. That's what I'm trying to say.
15 Q. Okay. Well, what I am putting to you, sir, and my point in these
16 questions is that you were pretty loose in the way you talked about what
17 happened in Sisak, weren't you?
18 A. I was loose because I was not present there myself. I was not an
19 eye-witness, so I think that this can be confirmed by the people who were
21 Q. So you were just repeating what you had heard, and you don't
22 really know first-hand what happened in Sisak, do you?
23 A. Correct. I don't know first-hand.
24 Q. And you don't really know, although you testified this way, you
25 don't really know about people being rounded up and killed for no reason,
1 do you?
2 A. I don't know for sure. I can only relate what I was told, that
3 many Serbs were killed in Sisak. Many. I don't know the exact numbers.
4 Q. Okay. Because yesterday you said that anyone from Sisak will tell
5 you that they knew at least 50 Serbs who were killed there. But that was
6 just a number you threw out there. That's not a number that you can
7 backup with anything, is it?
8 A. What I'm trying to say is that Sisak is not a big town. And among
9 the refugees from Serbia whose relatives were killed, they know exactly
10 which people are no longer alive, and which people were killed.
11 Q. Okay. Do you have any idea how many people, how many Serbs were
12 actually killed in Sisak?
13 A. I heard a figure of 250. I don't know if this is accurate.
14 Q. First of all, what time-period approximately? You said you have
15 trouble with dates. But approximately what time-period are you talking
16 about that you heard 250 Serbs were killed in Sisak?
17 A. It was during the war. But as I said, there were no combat
18 activities in Sisak and yet people were killed.
19 Q. And from whom did you hear this figure of 250 Serbs killed?
20 A. I heard it from several people. I don't know their names. I can
21 give you the name of Nikola Dobrijevic who can give you the exact names,
22 if he testifies. I don't know if he is a witness before this Court or if
23 he will be summoned.
24 Q. You know you also testified about Serbs being killed in Zagreb.
25 Do you remember talking about the Zec family?
1 A. Sir, a film was made about this, Pavilion 22 I believe was the
2 name. The Croats filmed this. The film about how Serbs were executed.
3 So if the Croats made the film themselves, then it seems that they are
4 willing to confess that crimes were committed.
5 Q. If you would please just wait for my questions then you will know
6 what I'm going to ask you about instead of kind of giving speeches.
7 My question is: Three people, three members of the Zec family
8 were killed, right?
9 A. That is possible. I know that the whole family was killed. I
10 think perhaps one of the children survived. I don't remember the details,
11 but this was written down and published.
12 Q. And you don't know any other examples of Serbs killed in Zagreb,
13 do you, during the war?
14 A. I don't, but others do.
15 Q. Let me change topics now and ask you about something different. I
16 would like to focus your attention on the summer of 1990.
17 And you told us yesterday that some policemen in Knin had refused
18 to wear a new insignia that was introduced by the Croatian authorities;
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And by that you were referring to the chequer-board, that
22 red-and-white chequer-board, right, that's the insignia you meant?
23 A. The insignia that you could see on the photograph where the
24 Ustasha is holding the head. The decapitated head.
25 Q. And what does that insignia look like? I don't remember the
1 photograph exactly.
2 A. It was on the photograph today. The person who was standing next
3 to Ambassador Galbraith wore it on his cap. It was a chequer-board in the
4 shape of a letter U.
5 Q. In the shape of a letter U or in the shape of a shield, right?
6 That's like a crest, that's the shape you're talking about?
7 A. Right, right. You are saying a shield. I'm saying it's U-shaped.
8 Q. Well, that same symbol, with the same shape that you call a
9 U shape, that was a Croatian symbol of Croatian kings since the middle
10 ages, wasn't it, that chequer-board with that same U shape.
11 A. I don't know which kings you're referring to. There are legends
12 and there are historical facts.
13 Q. All right. Well let me ask you about something. Do you agree
14 with me that the Kingdom of Yugoslavia is a historical fact, right? That
16 A. Yes, it existed, and it was established thanks to Serbian
18 Q. And its coat of arms included this same red-and-white
19 chequer-board with what you call a U shape. That was part of the coat of
20 arms of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, wasn't it?
21 A. That is possible. I don't know.
22 Q. Do you know that the same chequer-board and the same U shape was
23 part of the coat of arms of the People's Republic of Croatia and then
24 formerly -- subsequently the Socialist Republic of Croatia during the
25 entire time that Croatia was part of Yugoslavia?
1 A. Please, this is repetition. Even the money, the currency that was
2 introduced by Ante Pavelic was reintroduced, the kuna.
3 Q. Sir, let me interrupt you right there because I'm not talking
4 about Ante Pavelic. I'm not talking about the kuna. I'm asking you about
5 this chequer-board and whether it was just, do you know, yes or no, or you
6 don't know, that it was part of the coat of arms of Croatia when Croatia
7 was republic of the SFRY, of Yugoslavia?
8 A. Yes. It was on the seals.
9 Q. Okay. And so then you would agree with me that the independent
10 state of Croatia and the Ustashas, they weren't the creators of this
11 chequer-board symbol. They were simply one of several governments over
12 history who incorporated that into their own symbolism, right, you would
13 agree with that?
14 A. They changed the insignia. I don't recall which insignia they
15 used, but I know that they changed it, and that's why the police refused
16 to accept a new insignia, new symbols.
17 Q. Who changed it? You say: "They changed the insignia. I don't
18 recall which insignia they used."
19 Who are you talking about?
20 A. The authorities in Zagreb. The new Croatian government led by
21 the HDZ.
22 Q. Okay. So then I guess you haven't really answered my question
23 which was that the NDH and the Ustashas, they didn't invent the
24 chequer-board symbol. They were simply one of several governments over
25 time that incorporated that into their own symbolism, right? Just answer
1 that question.
2 A. I know that many Serbs were slaughtered by soldiers wearing this
4 Q. You haven't answered my question, have you?
5 A. [In English] Okay.
6 Q. I don't think you have answered my question, which is: Isn't it
7 true that the NDH and the Ustashas did not invent or create this
8 chequer-board symbol. They were simply one of several governments, over
9 history, that incorporated that into their own symbolism. Please answer
10 that question.
11 A. [Interpretation] Yes, and they abused it.
12 Q. And yet you considered this solely or primarily an Ustasha symbol.
13 In fact, you even said it is in the shape of a U, rather than the shape of
14 a crest. That's the way you saw this symbol, right?
15 A. Yes. On a statue in the Jasinovac camp there was a flower which
16 was also U-shaped. This was done on purpose, so it could be a memorial to
17 the victims of the Serb, victims.
18 Q. In fact, it was really the U, that was really the most
19 recognisable specifically Ustasha symbol, wasn't it?
20 A. It's not only that, they wanted to change the uniforms. And I
21 don't know the details, but I'm sure you can get this information from the
22 people who were in the police forces. Who know more about uniforms.
23 Q. Okay. You talked -- kind of following from this same issue, you
24 mentioned yesterday of a letter from some policemen in Knin to the federal
25 authorities objecting to the new insignia. Do you remember talking about
1 that letter?
2 A. Yes, I know this letter was drafted, and it was published in the
4 Q. One of the people who signed that letter was Milan Martic, right?
5 A. Probably.
6 Q. Well, you say "probably." You know that to be the case, don't you?
7 A. I don't know any details about this matter. I'm not a policeman.
8 I had other duties. I know of the existence of this letter, and I know
9 that it was published in the media.
10 Q. Okay. And in all the time that you were a --
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm sorry.
12 Witness, it's a very simple question. Do you know or don't you
13 know whether Martic was a co-author of this letter? If you don't know,
14 there is no crime.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know --
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- if he was the co-author or not.
18 MR. BLACK: Thank you, Your Honour.
19 Q. So, Mr. Macura, in all the time that you were ministers together
20 in a government and the time that you spent as a colleague of Mr. Martic,
21 he never -- it never came up in conversation. You don't know one way or
22 the other whether he was one of the people who signed that famous letter
23 in July 1990?
24 A. I never discussed it with him. Mr. Martic had many other
25 obligations. We didn't meet very frequently.
1 Q. Okay. I understand what you're saying, that you never discussed
2 this letter with him. You say you didn't meet very frequently. You were
3 ministers in the same government together, weren't you, in the SAO Krajina
5 A. Yes, sir, but I had other duties to attend to. I was the general
6 manager of the radio, and I was a minister on a voluntary basis. Free of
7 charge. I was never paid for this. Each of us had other jobs and we
8 performed these ministerial functions on a voluntary basis.
9 Q. Even before May of 1991 when you became a minister in the
10 SAO Krajina government, I take it you had contact with Mr. Martic before
11 that date as well, right?
12 A. I met him only sporadically.
13 Q. You were vice-president of Knin municipality in 1990, right?
14 A. That is correct. But Mr. Martic was in the police forces, and
15 there wasn't much connection with the civilian authorities.
16 Q. Okay. Are you aware that around the 5th of July, 1990, Croatian
17 authorities, high-level Croatian authorities, including the Minister of
18 Interior, Josip Boljkovac, and also I believe his deputy, Perica Juric,
19 came to Knin to meet with Martic and other police who had signed that
20 petition? Are you familiar with that meeting, the beginning of July
22 A. If this was when they came to the police station and people
23 rallied around, there was a spontaneous rally. I'm not sure if you're
24 referring to this event. I remember on one occasion that people rallied
25 around the police station. Are you referring to this?
1 Q. Yes. That's the time -- that's the occasion that I am referring
3 A. Yes, I remember this. I was present there, together with other
4 people in the street. I remember it. But I was not inside the building.
5 Q. You say that people spontaneously gathered at the police station.
6 In fact, that was kind of -- it was an organised effort to get people out
7 to show support for their policemen, right?
8 A. That was not my impression.
9 Q. Did you know that the Croatian authorities actually needed
10 protection in order to be able to leave that meeting unharmed? They had
11 to be kind of escorted from the building?
12 A. That is probably so, and I think they were escorted. Nobody was
14 Q. And it was really from that point onward that Milan Martic and
15 other policemen in Knin, at least, believed that the Croatian authorities
16 had no further authority in Knin, right? From that point on, that was the
17 belief, that Croatia had no authority there.
18 A. Perhaps, in terms of the police, the way they were thinking.
19 Q. And specifically that's what Milan Martic, that was his position,
21 A. I cannot claim this. Perhaps it was his position, but I don't
22 know. I never asked him. You're probably right.
23 Q. Okay. Did you ever see on TV this famous statement where Milan
24 Martic tells a Croatian journalist that the police in Knin was the
25 people's police and that they don't listen to the Croatian government
1 anymore? That was some time in August 1990. Did you see that?
2 A. I haven't seen it, but I heard about it.
3 Q. Okay. And did you hear that that was what he said, that
4 basically "they don't listen to the Croatian authorities anymore in Knin?"
5 A. I think that he mentioned the chequer-board.
6 Q. That was actually a different statement. Did you hear about the
7 statement where he said -- yeah, I understand the confusion. I will ask
8 you now about that chequer-board. He made kind of a famous speech where
9 he said as long as he lives the Croatian chequer-board won't be shown in
10 Knin, or words to that effect, right?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And was that the one that you said that you didn't see but that
13 you heard about?
14 A. Yes, I heard about it.
15 Q. Actually, I'm going to show you a quick video clip on the
16 Sanction, if we could move to the Sanction, please. It is Exhibit 4. The
17 transcript is actually marked Exhibit 5, but ...
18 Please just watch along, Mr. Macura.
19 [Videotape played]
20 MR. BLACK: Thank you.
21 Q. Mr. Macura, did you ever see that --
22 A. I saw it now. I see Mr. Martic, and the journalist is Heni Erceg
23 who studied with me at the University of Zadar.
24 Q. Do you know who -- I'm sorry, I didn't catch her name, but do you
25 know who the woman was working for at the time?
1 A. She came with TV Split, Croatian Television from Split. And we
2 studied together at the university. I can see that it was her on the
4 Q. In fact, it was also your view that Croatian authorities
5 essentially lost control or had no more authority in Knin after the summer
6 of 1990, right?
7 A. That is correct.
8 Q. During your evidence yesterday, the Defence counsel asked you
9 whether the federal or the Croatian authorities ever did anything towards
10 a peaceful solution of this issue regarding the new insignia. And you
11 said that the federal authorities tried, but that "the people in Croatia
12 would not listen to anything."
13 A. At any rate, many things were done to reach some kind of peaceful
14 solution from the federal level. But since the Croats had decided to
15 secede from Yugoslavia, they were doing -- they were taking action which
16 had nothing to do with the federal state. Or the constitution.
17 Q. Just because I think you're getting ahead of me. I'm still really
18 just focused on, let's say, August/September of 1990. You know, when --
19 this meeting that we discussed, where there are people gathered outside of
20 the police station and the Croatian authorities came to meet with
21 Mr. Martic and others, that was -- that was an attempt by the Croatian
22 authorities to peacefully deal with the situation, wasn't it?
23 A. I do not share your opinion. I disagree. I think that the right
24 way would have been to talk to politicians who had won the elections and
25 not to discuss matters only with the police. But the politicians did not
1 want to talk to us.
2 Q. Well, this particular issue was a police issue, right, because it
3 was the police in Knin who refused to wear the new police insignia, and so
4 it made sense that Croatia would send the minister of interior, who headed
5 the police, to try to work out this issue. And he tried to do so
6 peacefully in July of 1990, right?
7 A. I think this is a much wider issue.
8 Q. Well, let me, then, I guess, move to something just slightly
10 On the 10th of September, 1990, Milan Babic signed an agreement
11 with officials from the Croatian -- of course Milan Babic was a
12 politician. And he signed an agreement with Croatian officials to
13 peacefully resolve the outstanding issues and even to return weapons that
14 had been taken in August of 1990. That's true, isn't it?
15 A. I don't know of this agreement.
16 Q. Perhaps we could see Exhibit 180 on the e-court, please.
17 Mr. Macura, it's a little hard to read, I understand that, this
19 A. I can. I can read. No problem.
20 Q. This is basically a public announcement of this agreement that I
21 just mentioned to you between Mr. Babic and others on the Serb side and
22 Josip Boljkovac and others on the Croatian side. Have you ever seen this
23 announcement before?
24 A. No. I'm seeing it now for the first time.
25 Q. Do you see Mr. Babic's signature down at the bottom near his name?
1 A. I do, I do. I see all the signatories.
2 Q. And did you -- you never, despite your close association with
3 Milan Babic, you never heard about this agreement in September of 1990?
4 A. No. No, sir. Never. Although I was at Mr. Babic's side wherever
5 he went, always.
6 Q. Well, apparently wherever he went except when he went to negotiate
7 this agreement, right?
8 A. No, I did not mean at the local level. I had to accompany him at
9 all his talks with the international community. Otherwise, I would stay
10 behind in Knin whenever he went around travelling locally, because I was
11 his deputy. So I could not follow him at those talks, because I had to
12 work at the municipality.
13 Q. Okay. Did you -- did you never hear that this agreement was
14 actually rejected by the Council of National Resistance, and Milan Babic
15 was even accused of being a traitor for having signed it. You never heard
16 about that?
17 A. No, no, never.
18 Q. Let me focus your attention for a moment on August of 1990,
19 specifically on the 17th of August, 1990, and a few days, I guess, before
20 or after that.
21 You testified yesterday that the Croatian authorities moved to
22 seize weapons from police stations in Benkovac and Obrovac in order to
23 prevent the Serb referendum.
24 A. No, not in Obrovac. No. They removed weapons only in Benkovac.
25 In Obrovac they didn't succeed because the people came out in the streets
1 and stopped them. They did it only in Benkovac.
2 Q. Thank you for the correction. They attempted to do it in Obrovac
3 but it wasn't successful. Is that what you're saying?
4 A. Yes, yes.
5 Q. Okay. And you said yesterday that the reason for those attempts
6 to seize police weapons was to prevent the Serb referendum, right? That
7 was what you said?
8 A. Correct, correct.
9 Q. According to you, then, local Serbs erected barricades in response
10 to those, let's say, operations by the Croatian authorities.
11 A. Yes, correct.
12 Q. My first question is that, you know, the weapons, the weapons
13 which were seized were reserve police weapons, right? That's what was
14 seized from Benkovac?
15 A. That was the arsenal of the reserve police, but there were Serbs
16 among the reserve policemen and not only Croats.
17 Q. Right. But that was the arsenal of the reserve police in
18 Benkovac; correct?
19 A. And it should have been in Benkovac. It shouldn't have been
20 removed, correct.
21 Q. But those weapons, they belonged to, they were the property of the
22 Croatian MUP; correct?
23 A. That maybe correct, I don't know anything about ownership. But I
24 know that there existed reserve policemen who were responsible for some
25 weapons, because they had been issued with those weapons, and they should
1 have stayed in Benkovac at their disposal. They should not have been
2 removed and taken away God knows where. That means that practically the
3 reserve police were disarmed.
4 Q. My question -- you know, you say you don't know anything about
5 ownership, but you don't really dispute, do you, that -- I mean, those
6 were police weapons. And so when the Croatian MUP went to, as you say,
7 seize those weapons, they were only taking control of what was in fact
8 already theirs. That's correct, isn't it?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Who do you say those weapons belonged to, if they didn't belong to
11 the Croatian MUP?
12 A. The reserve policemen were listed. There was no doubt as to who
13 reserve policemen were, and it was exactly known what kind of weapons they
14 had been issued with.
15 Q. Sir --
16 A. So those weapons were issued to a certain number of reserve
17 policemen, and every policeman was responsible for his own weapon.
18 Q. Okay. The policemen may have been responsible in a sense for
19 those weapons. But it's just like in the army, right, all the weapons of
20 an army, whether it be guns or tanks, that doesn't belong to the
21 soldiers. It belongs to the army. And in the same way, these weapons
22 belong to the Croatian MUP. Right?
23 A. If that had been so, the SFRY would still exist today.
24 Q. So are you saying that that was not so?
25 A. Obviously not.
1 Q. I'm afraid I don't understand you. Are you saying that those
2 weapons did not actually belong to the Croatian MUP? They belonged to
3 someone else? Or to no one?
4 A. I think the weapons belonged to those who were responsible, in the
5 sense that they had been issued with those weapons. What happened instead
6 was the weapons were taken away from them.
7 Q. So according to you, --
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry.
9 MR. BLACK: Thank you, Your Honour. Please.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: I just wanted to find out from the witness who had
11 issued these weapons to this reserve people?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Their superiors, I suppose.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Who were their superiors?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know who they were,
15 inspectors, or whatever. At any rate, there were some sort of superiors.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Would their superiors have the right to take them
17 back from them, for whatever reason.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that the point is that they
19 had the intention to disarm the reserve police, and they had been
20 threatening all the time that they were going to ban the referendum.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: That wasn't my question. Would their superiors
22 have the right to take them back? I think you should be able to say yes
23 or no, or you don't know. That's the only appropriate answer you can
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know. I don't know.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Fine.
2 You may proceed, Mr. Black.
3 MR. BLACK: Thank you, Your Honour.
4 Q. So just so I understand, Mr. Macura. You're saying that you don't
5 know whether the police arsenal in Benkovac belonged to the police, the
6 Croatian police, the Croatian MUP. You just don't know?
7 A. I don't know.
8 Q. Would you agree with me that the Croatian operations to take
9 control of those police weapons, they were about taking control of
10 weapons. They weren't about preventing a referendum. They were about
11 taking control of weapons, right?
12 A. That's not the way I see it.
13 Q. Well, do you really think that the Croatian MUP couldn't have
14 prevented the referendum by force, if that's what they were after, instead
15 of actually going and seizing weapons which belonged to them from specific
16 police stations in Krajina?
17 A. I don't think they could have done that.
18 Q. Do you think that by seizing weapons from Benkovac they were --
19 how is it that you think that that was an attempt to stop the referendum?
20 Was Benkovac the only place where the referendum was going to be held?
21 A. I think their intention was to do that, in all municipalities
22 under our control, under the control of our authorities. So the intent
23 was to do it in all municipalities, and when they failed in Obrovac, they
24 gave up.
25 Q. You make a reference to municipalities under your control. I
1 mean, isn't it the case that the Croatian police wanted to take control of
2 these weapons because -- precisely because they were located in places
3 where the local police were hostile to the Croatian government? They
4 wanted to take control of those weapons so that the local police wouldn't
5 use them against the Croatian government. Isn't that what the operations
6 at Benkovac and the failed operation at Obrovac were really about?
7 A. It is certain that they intended to take control.
8 Q. But my question to you really was that -- the reason that they
9 needed to control or felt they needed to control those weapons was
10 precisely because the local police were hostile to the Croatian
11 authorities. It wasn't about the referendum. It was about making sure
12 that reserve police weapons weren't misused by local police who were
13 against the Croatian government.
14 A. They had hinted and stated enough times that they were going to
15 stop the referendum. The Croatian authorities made no bones about it, and
16 I stand by that position.
17 Q. Okay. Well, let me move on to something related but slightly
19 MR. BLACK: Actually, Your Honour, I am going to move to a new
20 subtopic and perhaps it's -- it makes more sense to stop today rather than
21 risk going a couple of minutes over.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: I think that is more sensible to do that. Thank
23 you very much.
24 We have come to the end of the day today. The case is postponed
25 until tomorrow morning at 9.00.
1 Court adjourned.
2 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.42 p.m.,
3 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 14th day of
4 September, 2006, at 9.00 p.m.