Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 4665

 1                           Wednesday, 7 November 2012

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.33 a.m.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning to everyone.

 6             Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.

 8             This is the case IT-09-92-T, the Prosecutor versus Ratko Mladic.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

10             The Chamber was informed that there were some preliminaries on

11     behalf of the Prosecution.

12             Mr. Groome.

13             MR. GROOME:  Thank you, Your Honour.  Can I ask that we go into

14     private session.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  We move into private session.

16                           [Private session]

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 4666











11 Pages 4666-4669 redacted. Private session.















Page 4670

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5                           [Open session]

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honours.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

 8             Before we invite the Prosecution to call its next witness, who is

 9     taking the witness, Mr. Groome?

10             MR. GROOME:  Your Honour, if I can take this opportunity to

11     introduce Ms. Grace Harbour.  This is her first time appearing before the

12     Chamber.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Welcome, Ms. Harbour.  You will examine

14     Mr. Philipps then, I take it.

15             MS. HARBOUR:  Yes, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Before the witness is escorted into the

17     courtroom, I'd like to a deliver a decision on the Prosecution urgent

18     motion to add exhibits to its 65 ter exhibit list.

19             On the 1st of November of this year, the Prosecution filed a

20     motion to add 13 documents to its Rule 65 ter exhibit list, which the

21     Prosecution intends to use during the testimony of the witness to be

22     called, Richard Philipps.

23             On the 5th of November, the Defence filed its response to the

24     motion opposing the addition of the 13 documents on the grounds that no

25     good cause has been shown for the request and that such addition would be

Page 4671

 1     overly burdensome on the Defence's ability to prepare for

 2     Witness Philipps's testimony.

 3             The parties were informed yesterday by means of an informal

 4     communication that the Chamber will issue its decision on the matter

 5     today but were already advised that the Chamber partially granted the

 6     motion with respect to two documents, bearing Rule 65 ter numbers 28501

 7     and 28488, but denied the motion in relation to the remaining 11

 8     documents pertaining to sniping in Sarajevo.  The Chamber will now issue

 9     its decision.

10             The Chamber notes that the 11 documents which relate to sniping

11     in Sarajevo were only disclosed through the motion filed the 1st of

12     November, 2012.  The Prosecution does not present good cause for

13     disclosing these 11 documents and for requesting their addition to its

14     65 ter exhibit list just six days before the testimony of

15     Witness Philipps.  The Chamber recalls that the adjudicated facts,

16     including adjudicated facts 1860 to 1864, 1866, and 1868 to 1869, cover

17     the chain of command within the SRK and its activities in Sarajevo,

18     including sniping.  Weighing the Prosecution's late disclosure of 11

19     documents and its late request to add them to its Rule 65 ter list

20     against its submissions on their prima facie relevance and probative

21     value, the Chamber finds it not in the interests of justice to allow the

22     addition of these 11 documents and partially denies the motion in this

23     respect.

24             As for the remaining two documents sought to be added to the

25     Prosecution's Rule 65 ter exhibit list, those with Rule 65 ter numbers

Page 4672

 1     28501 and 28488, the Chamber notes that the Defence does not dispute the

 2     Prosecution assertion that these were disclosed at an earlier stage of

 3     the case.  The Chamber therefore considers that the addition of these two

 4     documents would not overly burden the Defence's ability to prepare for

 5     Witness Philipps's testimony.  The Chamber further considers that these

 6     documents are prima facie relevant and probative in relation to the

 7     command and reporting structure of the SRK.  The Chamber therefore finds

 8     it in the interests of justice to allow the addition of these two

 9     documents to the Prosecution's Rule 65 ter exhibit list.  And for these

10     reasons the Chamber grants the motion in relation to documents bearing

11     Rule 65 ter numbers 28501 and 28488.

12             Finally, the Chamber considers that the Defence's request for a

13     postponement of Witness Philipps's testimony is not justified as only two

14     documents have been added to the Prosecution's Rule 65 ter exhibit list.

15             And this concludes the Chamber's decision.

16             Ms. Harbour, are you ready to call the next witness.

17             MS. HARBOUR:  May I first seek a clarification on this ruling,

18     Your Honours.

19             We didn't limit our request to add those 11 documents to the

20     witness who is about to testify.  Does the decision preclude us from in

21     the future adding these documents to the 65 ter list or is that still an

22     available procedure?

23             JUDGE ORIE:  I think that -- let me check.

24                           [Trial Chamber confers]

25             JUDGE ORIE:  The decision is without prejudice.  That means the

Page 4673

 1     issue was raised in relation to the testimony of Mr. Philipps.

 2             Now, part of our reasoning is focussing on that as well.  I'm not

 3     in any way anticipating on what the decision of the Chamber would be if

 4     you would again seek admission to the 65 ter lest.  It was in this

 5     context that the Chamber denied it.  And what the Chamber would decide in

 6     a different context, the -- you can test it only by filing a motion,

 7     or -- in this respect.  But, again, nothing has been said about what the

 8     outcome would be.

 9             MS. HARBOUR:  Thank you, Your Honour.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

11             Then are you ready to call Mr. Philipps?

12             MS. HARBOUR:  Yes, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Could Mr. Philipps be escorted into the courtroom.

14                           [The witness entered court]

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning, Mr. Philipps.  Before you give

16     evidence, the Rules require that you make a solemn declaration.  May I

17     invite to make that solemn declaration of which the text is now handed

18     out to you.

19             THE WITNESS:  I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the

20     whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

21                           WITNESS:  RICHARD PHILIPPS

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Philipps.  Please be seated.

23             Mr. Philipps, you will first be examined by Ms. Harbour.

24     Ms. Harbour is counsel for the Prosecution and you'll find her to your

25     right.

Page 4674

 1             Please proceed, Ms. Harbour.

 2             MS. HARBOUR:  Your Honours, as a preliminary matter, I would

 3     point out that to my left there's an organisation chart which I will be

 4     referring to throughout the testimony of Mr. Philipps.  I have prepared

 5     hard copies of this organisation chart and a second organisation chart

 6     which I will also refer to, and I would ask that the court officers hand

 7     these to the Chamber and to the Defence if this hasn't already been done.

 8             I'm informed that the Defence has already received their copy.

 9     If possible, could we also give a hard copy to the witness to refer to.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

11             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the interpreters kindly get a copy as

12     well, please.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Do you have copies available for the interpreters?

14             MS. HARBOUR:  I did not prepare copies for the interpreters.

15     However, since it is just for the purpose of interpreting, I do have a

16     marked up copy for myself which I can ask that that be given to the

17     interpreters.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, that might not -- one copy might not be enough

19     for the various booths.

20             MS. HARBOUR:  I will request that copies be made and bring them

21     down as soon as possible, if that suffices.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Let's proceed but be very careful in using

23     names because even with the big one it's not the easy, but we'll manage.

24     I suggest that we proceed and if the booth have unsurmountable problems,

25     then I'd like to hear.

Page 4675

 1             Please proceed.

 2             MS. HARBOUR:  In addition, if the Defence has no objection I

 3     would ask that the witness be provided with hard copies of the other

 4     matters underlying his report which I have here.

 5             MR. LUKIC:  No objection, Your Honour.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 7             MS. HARBOUR:  Throughout the course of Mr. Philipps's testimony,

 8     I will use a pointer to guide the Chamber on this chart to the area of

 9     the chart that should be consulted on the hard copies in front of you.

10                           Examination by Ms. Harbour:

11        Q.   Mr. Philipps, the Prosecution is calling you as an expert with

12     respect to the command structure and the lines of reporting and ordering

13     of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.  Before getting to the substance of your

14     examination, I would like to ask you about your qualifications to testify

15     as an expert.

16             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the Prosecutor please be asked to slow

17     down for purposes of interpretation.  Thank you very much.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Harbour, you received the message.

19             MS. HARBOUR:  I've received the message, Your Honour.

20             Could we please have 65 ter 11344 on the screens.

21        Q.   Mr. Philipps, is this your curriculum vitae?

22        A.   Yes, that's a copy of my CV.

23             MS. HARBOUR:  Could we please turn to page 2.

24        Q.   This is a list of the military posts that you held in the

25     British Army.  In total, how many years did you serve in the

Page 4676

 1     British Army?

 2        A.   I was commissioned in 1985 and retired after 21 years

 3     commissioned service in July 2006.

 4        Q.   In what capacity?

 5        A.   I was commissioned as a second lieutenant into the intelligence

 6     corps in 1985 and then worked in various levels of the intelligence corps

 7     as a section commander, company commander, and finally as a senior staff

 8     officer at the rank of lieutenant-colonel before retiring.

 9             MS. HARBOUR:  Could we please turn back to the first page of this

10     document.

11        Q.   Mr. Philipps, what professional experience have you had as a

12     military analyst?

13        A.   I undertook many courses with the intelligence corps based on

14     operation and intelligence, combat intelligence, security and the like,

15     and went through a set of courses either at Sandhurst, which was the

16     Military Academy in the United Kingdom, and also at the

17     Senior Staff College which at the time was near Shrivenham.  I attended a

18     senior command -- a command course training me to be a lieutenant-colonel

19     from the rank of major and at the same time was also involved in a

20     variety of operations and exercises within the British Army over that

21     period of time.

22        Q.   Do you have any post-military experience as a military analyst?

23        A.   After retiring -- in fact, I retired from the army at the same

24     time as leaving the Office of the Prosecutor in 2006, and since then I've

25     done a small amount of work as a defence analyst since -- since 2006, but

Page 4677

 1     most of my experience has been prior to 2006.

 2        Q.   And while at the Office of the Prosecutor, what was your

 3     position?

 4        A.   I was an intelligence analyst or a military analyst in the

 5     Military Analyst Team.

 6        Q.   Would you like to make any changes to your CV today?

 7        A.   I can't see anything on there that is inaccurate.  So as far as I

 8     can see, that's an accurate representation of my curriculum vitae.

 9             MS. HARBOUR:  Your Honours, I would like to tender 65 ter 11344.

10             MR. LUKIC:  No objections.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 11344 becomes Exhibit P450,

13     Your Honours.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  P450 is admitted into evidence.

15             MS. HARBOUR:

16        Q.   Mr. Philipps, have you previously testified as an expert witness

17     before this Tribunal?

18        A.   Yes, I have testified on previous occasions in the case against

19     Stanislav Galic, in the case against Radovan Karadzic, in the past.  And

20     I believe that some of my evidence was used - although I did not

21     testify - in the case against Dragomir Milosevic.

22        Q.   Did you prepare the charts that you see in the courtroom as part

23     of your expert report for the Karadzic case in June 2010?

24        A.   Yes, the reports -- the -- the forms you see in front of you, the

25     charts, were prepared originally for the Stanislav Galic case and then

Page 4678

 1     had been amended and improved and enhanced and then used later on in the

 2     case against Karadzic.

 3        Q.   Would you briefly explain what these charts are.

 4             THE INTERPRETER:  Please slow down for the interpreters.  Thank

 5     you.

 6             THE WITNESS:  The chart is a simple representation of the

 7     structure of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps basically showing the command

 8     structure from the corps level through to brigades and down to battalion

 9     and company level and also showing the support troops for the corps at

10     the bottom of the chart.

11             MS. HARBOUR:

12        Q.   Along with these charts, did you prepare two alphabetical

13     indexes?

14        A.   I prepared two indexes, the purpose of which is to enable any

15     individual to look up the source of the document, of the information,

16     that provides the data on the chart.  They're alphabetical by surname for

17     individuals and then alphabetical by equipment and by unit name for each

18     of the units or pieces of equipment.

19             MS. HARBOUR:  These are in e-court as 10573 and 10574, 65 ter.

20        Q.   Would you like to make any changes to these lists today,

21     Mr. Philipps?

22        A.   There's nothing that I can see on those -- on those individual

23     alphabetical and alphanumerical lists that I can see immediately needs to

24     be changed.

25        Q.   Did you also prepare two explanatory notes to explain the

Page 4679

 1     methodology that you used for these charts?

 2        A.   I did.  There is a set of notes which explains, if you like, the

 3     history of the chart or how it was put together, what criteria were used

 4     for the selection of documents, and then also an explanation of the chart

 5     itself, what the lines mean, what the symbols mean, and the relationships

 6     between units and subunits.

 7             MS. HARBOUR:  Could we please have 65 ter 11343, page 2.

 8        Q.   Do you see on the screen one of your explanatory notes, and did

 9     you want to add a word to item 7(d)?

10        A.   Yes.  On reading through the paragraph relating to depiction of

11     data at paragraph 7(d) the word "dotted" should be inserted so that it

12     reads "depicted by dotted lines."

13        Q.   Did you wish to make the same change on page 2, item 7(d), in

14     your other explanatory note, which is in e-court as 65 ter 10674?

15        A.   The same change needs to be made in the other document at

16     paragraph 7(d) where the same error of omission was made.

17        Q.   Did you do any additional analysis to supplement your expert

18     reports for the Mladic case?

19        A.   I was provided with a disc, a CD of documents by the prosecuting

20     team.  These documents mostly related to combat reports and orders from

21     the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.  The Prosecution team said that these

22     documents had been provided by the Defence, and I looked at each of these

23     documents to see if there was any major change required based on these

24     documents but found no significant addition or change needed to be made

25     to the chart.

Page 4680

 1             MS. HARBOUR:  And for clarification, Your Honours, the documents

 2     provided were documents tendered by the Karadzic Defence in that case.

 3        Q.   Mr. Philipps, in preparing this report, could you tell us briefly

 4     which materials you relied upon to draw your conclusions and how you

 5     selected these materials?

 6        A.   Originally the -- the report was put together from any available

 7     source so that meaning newspaper reports, television, journalists, any

 8     piece of information that might relate to the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.

 9     This gave a very basic chart that was first put together in the year

10     2001.

11             As time passed, each of those pieces of data could be replaced by

12     more reliable data and those aspects of -- of materials which were

13     perhaps unreliable could be removed from the chart.  Eventually on

14     provision of Sarajevo-Romanija Corps documents during the Galic case, we

15     were able to put together a report with confirmed sources that accurately

16     reflected the structure of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps but was not based

17     on witness evidence and was not based on television reports or newspaper

18     reports but on the documents of the corps itself.

19        Q.   Are the charts that we will tender today based on witness

20     evidence or television evidence?

21        A.   There's nothing now on today's charts based on evidence from

22     television or witnesses or any other unreliable source.

23        Q.   Would you say that these charts are complete representations of

24     the SRK structures during the time-periods that they cover?

25             THE INTERPRETER:  Kindly slow down for the interpreters.  Thank

Page 4681

 1     you.

 2             THE WITNESS:  The charts are an indication of the structure of

 3     the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps down to a certain level.  To provide a

 4     complete chart of the structure of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps would

 5     require thousands of hours of analyst time and would be almost

 6     impossible.  The Sarajevo-Romanija Corps changed probably every day

 7     during the conflict and so to be an accurate -- fully accurate

 8     representation, you would need one chart for every day of the conflict

 9     showing all of the changes that took place.  So these charts can only be

10     by definition an indication of the structure over a period of time.

11        Q.   During proofing yesterday, and we will come to greater details

12     later in the examination, but did you identify one area on the 1994 to

13     1995 chart that may need to be amended regarding the 4th Republika Srpska

14     Light Infantry Brigade?

15        A.   When putting together the chart, particularly relating to the

16     4th Srpska Light Infantry Brigade, it appeared that there was another

17     unit either with the same or a similar name called the 4th Sarajevo

18     Infantry Brigade.  It's not clear whether these are one and the same unit

19     or whether they were two separate units.  The document I used referred to

20     the 4th Srpska Light Infantry Brigade and the formation of a brigade with

21     that name.  But later on I found documents relating to the

22     4th Sarajevo Infantry Brigade.  There is some confusion over this because

23     the abbreviation for both units is the same, 4 Slpbr in B/C/S.

24             MS. HARBOUR:  Your Honours, we do understand from the Chamber's

25     decision on the 1st of November, 2012, that the Chamber will defer its

Page 4682

 1     admission of these documents until the end of Mr. Philipps's testimony,

 2     and I would ask now that we mark each of them for identification.  The

 3     charts -- I was just going to list the 65 ter numbers.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If you take them one by one, then

 5     Madam Registrar will provisionally assign numbers.

 6             MS. HARBOUR:  The charts are 65 ter 28522.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  The two charts for the two periods of time in one

 8     document, if I understand you well.

 9             MS. HARBOUR:  That is correct, Your Honours.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

11             Madam Registrar.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 28522 becomes Exhibit P451,

13     Your Honours.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  And is marked for identification.

15             MS. HARBOUR:  The explanatory notes are 65 ter 10674 and 11343.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 10674 becomes Exhibit P452.

18             And document 11343 becomes Exhibit P453, Your Honours.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  P452 and P453 are marked for identification.

20             MS. HARBOUR:  The alphabetical lists are 65 ter 10573 and 10574.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

22             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 10573 becomes Exhibit P454.

23             And document 10574 becomes Exhibit P455, Your Honours.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  P454 and P455 are marked for identification.

25             THE ACCUSED: [No interpretation]

Page 4683

 1             No speaking, Mr. Mladic.  No speaking, Mr. Mladic.  You can write

 2     down whatever you want to write down.  You can consult with counsel

 3     during the next break.  Write down whatever you want to write down.

 4                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stojanovic.

 6             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] With your leave, Your Honours.

 7     With your leave, Your Honours, there has been a breakdown in

 8     communication in the exchange of notes.  The general asked for --

 9             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreters did not be able hear what.

10             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] -- in order to be able to follow

11     the chart.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  We do not allow to you speak, Mr. Mladic.  That

13     should be clear.  If there's anything you would like to bring to the

14     attention of counsel, you can write it down, and Mr. Stojanovic will then

15     address the Chamber.

16             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, just another

17     digression.  Your Honours, just another digression.  I think that your

18     instruction be that this be communicated to us by way of notes.  However,

19     we had a problem because General Mladic's notes were not being handed

20     over to us.  So could you please say that these notes be handed over to

21     us.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  If there's any note at this moment to be handed

23     over, then -- what the procedure should be is that if you are not aware

24     that Mr. Mladic wants to -- wants to pass you a note, that security is

25     invited to draw your attention to the wish of Mr. Mladic.  Then you may

Page 4684

 1     approach Mr. Mladic, and without any speaking, you can receive the note

 2     from Mr. Mladic.  The role of security will be limited to drawing your

 3     attention to the fact that Mr. Mladic would like to pass onto you a note.

 4     If that is clear.  They have no role in passing the note themselves.

 5     Please be seated.

 6             Anything to be raised at this moment, Mr. Stojanovic?  If so,

 7     please do.

 8             Mr. Mladic, you may be seated.

 9             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.  We will just

10     do our best to get a magnifying-glass during the break, and that is what

11     Mr. Mladic needs.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then we proceed at this moment.

13             If Mr. Mladic would need a magnifying-glass at this very moment,

14     then please tell me.  He would like to have it now?

15             Let's -- one second.

16                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

17                           [Trial Chamber confers]

18             JUDGE ORIE:  You may proceed, Ms. Harbour.

19             MS. HARBOUR:

20        Q.   I'd like to go over some of the conventions used in this chart.

21     There are a number of boxes and also lines connecting boxes, which have

22     dotted lines.  What do the dotted lines signify, Mr. Philipps?

23        A.   The dotted lines on the chart joining units to subordinate units

24     show a relationship of command.  But where those lines are dotted, that

25     means that the data is unconfirmed; that is, there is only one document

Page 4685

 1     that shows that command relationship.

 2        Q.   We also see on the chart that a number of individuals are

 3     represented with little green figures and others are represented by what

 4     appears to be a faceless head.

 5             Could you explain the difference between those icons?

 6        A.   The faceless icon shows an individual in a command position where

 7     only one document has been located to place that individual in that

 8     command position.  The solid green icon is used where one -- or more than

 9     one document -- I'll say that again:  Where two or more documents are

10     used to confirm that individual in that command position.

11        Q.   Where there's a dotted arrow from one person to another person

12     within the same position, what does the dotted arrow signify?

13        A.   The dotted arrow signifies that only one document supports the

14     passage of command from one individual to another.  Where a solid line

15     exists, two or more documents show the passage of command from one

16     individual to another.

17        Q.   If there's no arrow between people in the same position, what

18     does that signify?

19             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the interpreters also see the chart,

20     please.  We don't know what is being discussed at all.  We don't have it

21     visually in front of us.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we do that:  Mr. Mladic, you have received a

23     magnifying-glass now.  I would like to receive it back, since you

24     borrowed it from me.  I hope it helps.

25             Could the Defence try to provide a magnifying-glass for

Page 4686

 1     Mr. Mladic, substituting mine.

 2                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

 3             THE ACCUSED:  Thank you.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I'm not opposed against you saying thank you

 5     at this moment, Mr. Mladic.  Please be seated and use it as you deem fit.

 6             Ms. Harbour --

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Thank you.  I will keep

 8     your magnifying-glass and I will give you my own from my cell.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Harbour, have meanwhile hard copies been

10     provided to the booth?

11             MS. HARBOUR:  Your Honour, we've requested that they be printed.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

13             MS. HARBOUR:  Because they have to be printed at this size to be

14     useful, it's taking -- it will take another ten minutes, I'm told.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then let's try to proceed.  Are any of the

16     electronic copies?  Because even printed -- I don't know whether these

17     are coloured copies, I think it's very difficult to see any colours.  But

18     if electronic copies which you can enlarge very easily - I've got it at

19     800 per cent at this moment at my screen - that is far easier to use.  I

20     don't know to what extent the interpreters could be provided with

21     electronic copies as well.

22             MS. HARBOUR:  I could provide them with those immediately, and

23     Ms. Stewart has offered to take care of that.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And then everyone can choose how to zoom in or

25     to zoom out, and I find it very helpful to have that opportunity myself.

Page 4687

 1             Please proceed.

 2             MS. HARBOUR:

 3        Q.   Just a few more conventions to go over with you Mr. Philipps.

 4     Where there's a dash appearing before or after a date, what does that

 5     signify?

 6        A.   Where a dash appears before a date, it indicates that the event

 7     or individual shown was in that position conceivably before that date

 8     occurred.  And where a dash occurs after a date, the individual may very

 9     well be in that position following that date.  So the date itself relates

10     to a document, or a series of documents, that show the individual in that

11     position on that day but do not necessarily mean that the command

12     terminated on that day or commenced on that day.

13        Q.   Finally, where there's a number in brackets, either by a weapon

14     name or a unit name, what does that number signify?

15        A.   The numbers in brackets after the item names or descriptions

16     serve to differentiate between items or units with the same name.  Those

17     numbers in brackets are my additions, in order to enable individuals to

18     locate the correct entry on the cross-referencing list.

19        Q.   By the cross-referencing lists, are you referring to the two

20     alphabetical indexes?

21        A.   Yes I refer to the number 10574 and 10573, the alphabetical list

22     and the alphanumerical list.

23        Q.   For several units, you've indicated that weapons were attached to

24     the unit.  Do your charts reflect a comprehensive reflection of the

25     weapons in the SRK's control during this period?

Page 4688

 1        A.   The charts only show a very small number of the weapons available

 2     to the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.  Where a weapon was found to be part of a

 3     unit based on a document, then it's shown on the chart.  But very many of

 4     the units could not be shown as having specific weapons, as no

 5     documentary evidence was found.  However, it is clear that a battalion,

 6     for example, would have quite a comprehensive set of weapons even though

 7     these are not shown on the chart.

 8        Q.   To assist the Chamber and the Defence in understanding how the

 9     charts were created and how they relate to the two indexes, I would like

10     to go through an example.

11             MS. HARBOUR:  Could we please have P455, MFI, page 7 in the

12     English and page 11 in B/C/S.  Page 7 in the English and page 11 in the

13     B/C/S, please.

14        Q.   Let's look at Josipovic, Dragan, with number 3 in brackets.  What

15     rank and post did you list for Josipovic, Dragan, number 3?

16        A.   On the chart and on the alphanumerical alphabetical list, Dragan

17     Josipovic is shown with the rank of lieutenant-colonel and the post of

18     Operational Group Commander.

19        Q.   You listed the ERN for three documents and I would like us to

20     look at the top one, ERN Y000-3274 which, in our case, is 65 ter number

21     12113.

22             MS. HARBOUR:  If we could have that document on the screen,

23     please.

24        Q.   Looking at this document, please explain why it supports the

25     information about Josipovic, Dragan, number 3.

Page 4689

 1        A.   Well this document is a communication to the commander of the

 2     Vogosca operational group from Colonel Sladoje, and it's addressed to

 3     Josipovic.

 4        Q.   Now, where on the chart can we find this information?

 5        A.   This particular piece of information is on the chart dated 1992

 6     to 1994, and below the corps operational staff is a box showing the

 7     Vogosca Operational Group --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you show it more or less on the chart we have

 9     there.  It's easier for us to find it then in our own copies.  Yes.

10             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the interpreters see that as well,

11     please.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  I will ... let me have a look.

13             Yes.

14             MS. HARBOUR:  Could I please tender 65 ter 12113 into evidence.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.

16             Madam Registrar.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 12113 becomes Exhibit P456,

18     Your Honours.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

20             MS. HARBOUR:  If this is a good time for a break, I think the

21     time has come.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  It is a good time for a break.

23             We'll resume after the witness has left the courtroom and,

24     Mr. Philipps, would you please follow the usher.

25                           [The witness stands down]

Page 4690

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  We resume at ten minutes to 11.00.

 2                           --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.

 3                           --- On resuming at 10.54 a.m.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  May the witness be escorted into the courtroom.

 5             MR. GROOME:  Your Honour.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Groome.

 7             MR. GROOME:  While that is being done, if I can simply indicate

 8     to the Chamber with relation to the proposal I made in private session:

 9     Over the break I spoke with the supervisor of the conference interpreters

10     and she is willing to do an advance verification if the Chamber were to

11     approve such a procedure.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That's appreciated that you have sought this

13     information.

14             We'll hear when, Mr. Lukic, tomorrow?  Would that be -- could you

15     respond tomorrow orally, or?

16             MR. LUKIC:  Yes, Your Honour.  We would be able to respond

17     tomorrow.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

19                           [The witness takes the stand]

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Harbour, you may proceed.

21             MS. HARBOUR:

22        Q.   Mr. Philipps, I just have one question about terminology before

23     we get into the structure of the SRK.  What does VP stand for?

24        A.   The abbreviation VP can have two meanings.  The most common

25     meaning in B/C/S in a military context I believe is "vojni post" meaning

Page 4691

 1     "military post," and also VP can stand for firing position; that is, the

 2     location of artillery.

 3        Q.   How --

 4        A.   I was just going to add that I don't know the actual B/C/S for

 5     firing position for VP and would not want to hesitate or to hazard a

 6     guess.

 7        Q.   On your chart where we see VP followed by a series of numbers,

 8     what reference is that?

 9        A.   Where VP on the chart is followed by numbers, these are the --

10     the military numbers, the military post number, for the individual unit.

11     This is usually for a brigade and for other units a four-digit number,

12     occasionally subdivided with a dash with an additional number making five

13     or six digits.

14        Q.   Can this VP or military post number be used interchangeably or

15     synonymously with the actual name of the unit?

16        A.   Each military unit has a unique VP so no two units have the same

17     VP.

18        Q.   I would now like to turn to the general structure of the SRK as

19     depicted in the charts.  I'm told that hard copies of the charts are on

20     their way to the booths or have been provided to them, so I will -- I

21     hope that they will be able to follow along on this discussion.

22             For context, I note for the Chambers adjudicated facts 1769

23     related to the formation of the VRS in May 1992; and adjudicated fact

24     1777, which states that the SRK was to be located in the greater Sarajevo

25     area, the former zone of responsibility of the 4th JNA Corps.

Page 4692

 1             Looking at the chart for 1992 to 1994, which we have here in the

 2     courtroom, I will ask you for details in a moment, but for now I just

 3     want to orient the Chamber about the general structure of the chart.

 4     What does the long box at the top of the chart represent?

 5        A.   The box at the top of the chart shows the corps command of the

 6     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.

 7        Q.   What do the ten boxes, the row of ten boxes right below the corps

 8     command represent?

 9        A.   The boxes below the corps command linked by lines show individual

10     brigades of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.

11        Q.   Below the brigade level, there are many smaller boxes.  What do

12     these represent?

13        A.   The smaller boxes below the brigades represent the units and

14     subunits that form the brigade, such as infantry battalions, mortar

15     companies, engineering units, and the like.

16        Q.   Now along the very bottom of the chart, there are ten boxes.

17     What do these represent?

18        A.   The boxes at the bottom of the chart, linked directly to the

19     corps command with a line, show the corps support troops that were

20     directly under the command of the corps commander, such as artillery

21     regiments, engineering battalions, medical battalion, and other support

22     services.

23        Q.   Just between the corps command and the main brigade level, we see

24     to the left three boxes.  What do these three boxes represent?

25        A.   The three boxes just below the corps command show three brigades

Page 4693

 1     that at one time formed part of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.  For

 2     example, we have the Rogatica Brigade and the 2nd Motorised Brigade that

 3     in November 1992 were transferred to the Drina Corps; that is, they

 4     ceased to be under command of Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.  And we also have

 5     the 1st Gradiska Light Infantry Brigade which was temporarily attached to

 6     the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps during a specific operation of Lukavac 93.

 7        Q.   And just to the right of those boxes there is one more box with a

 8     line directly linking from the corps command down to the brigade level.

 9     What does that box represent?

10        A.   The box directly below the corps command and linked to it by a

11     line is the Vogosca Operational Group.  This was a formation of brigades

12     put together for specific purposes and temporarily - for short periods of

13     time - in order for a command to exist over brigades that were on the

14     opposite side of Sarajevo from the corps commander himself.

15        Q.   Which brigades were those on the opposite side of Sarajevo?

16        A.   At various times part of the Vogosca Operational Group was made

17     up of the Ilidza Light Infantry Brigade, the Ilijas Brigade, the

18     Rajlovac Brigade, and the Vogosca Brigade.

19        Q.   Could you please tell us where on this structure we would find

20     mortar or artillery capabilities?

21        A.   Each of the brigades had its own supporting artillery in small

22     numbers, and each of the brigades that divided into battalions, each

23     battalion would have its own supporting mortars.  Furthermore, at the

24     bottom of the chart, there were two artillery regiments that were

25     directly subordinated to the corps command.  So in other words artillery

Page 4694

 1     is found at brigade level, at battalion level, and at corps level at the

 2     bottom of the chart.

 3        Q.   And where in the structure would we find snipers or sniping

 4     capabilities?

 5        A.   Each brigade being subordinated into battalions, each battalion

 6     would have companies.  And in each of those companies, according to

 7     regulation, there would be a sniper capability.  This may consist of just

 8     one or two snipers.  Each brigade itself may have a separate platoon of

 9     snipers available for use by the brigade commander.  And some of those

10     snipers were located in documents and are shown in the chart.

11        Q.   Now, let's take a closer look at the corps command.  We see

12     inside the corps command rectangle that at the very top is the corps

13     commander.  Which corps commanders were in place during the periods

14     covered by your charts?

15        A.   There are three corps commanders during this period:

16     General Sipcic, General Galic, and General Milosevic.

17        Q.   Under the corps commander and to the very left inside the corps

18     command box, we see the Chief of Staff.  What was the relationship

19     between the corps commander and the Chief of Staff?

20        A.   The Chief of Staff is sometimes known as the deputy commander as

21     well as being the Chief of Staff.  In his role as the deputy commander he

22     takes the place of the corps commander if the corps commander is not

23     present.

24             As a Chief of Staff, his responsibility is to manage the staff in

25     the corps headquarters and ensure that the administration and the

Page 4695

 1     staffing of the corps is correct.

 2        Q.   Now under the Chief of Staff, there are five additional boxes

 3     inside the corps command.  Could you please tell us what these represent?

 4        A.   The Corps Staff consists of a series of staff divisions to enable

 5     the corps to achieve its aims.  The divisions deal with operations, they

 6     deal with logistics, they deal with intelligence and security, and they

 7     deal with morale and religious affairs.  In addition, on the chart, there

 8     is a staff division in the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps dealing with liaison.

 9        Q.   And above each of the divisions that you've mentioned, we see an

10     assistant commander or a corps assistant commander.  What were their

11     roles?

12        A.   The corps assistant commanders were staff officers who headed up

13     each of these staff divisions.  So there would be a staff officer

14     specifically in charge of logistics, a staff officer in charge of morale

15     and religious affairs, a staff officer in charge of operations - that is,

16     the Chief of Staff - and a staff officer who would be in charge of

17     intelligence and security.

18        Q.   Off to the right of the corps command, there's a very small box

19     which is labelled "Pretis factory," and there's an arrow from that box up

20     to the logistics staff division.  Could you tell us what that signifies?

21        A.   The Pretis factory supplied -- manufactured and supplied the

22     majority of the shells, ammunition used by the artillery of

23     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.  And so there was a very close relationship

24     between the factory itself and the logistics department of the

25     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps, and many documents deal with that relationship

Page 4696

 1     between the importance of supply through logistics and keeping the

 2     factory itself running during the period of the battle.

 3        Q.   Now I'd like to focus on the brigade level.  Could you tell us

 4     are the brigades arranged in any particular order on this chart?

 5        A.   To assist the understanding of the chart, I arranged the brigades

 6     in an order approximately equating to a clockwise direction around the

 7     centre of Sarajevo itself.  Often in a -- in an organisational chart

 8     units will be placed in order of precedence, but in this case I've placed

 9     them in order of location on the ground.

10        Q.   What was the relationship between the brigade and the corps

11     command?

12        A.   The -- the corps commander was directly in charge of each brigade

13     commander.  So the -- the relationship of command between the corps

14     commander was such that he could order each of the brigade commanders to

15     undertake specific tasks and the role of the staff was to ensure that the

16     appropriate administration and orders had been written to enable the

17     brigades to carry out those tasks.

18        Q.   Regarding the composition of the brigades, I refer Your Honours

19     to adjudicated facts 1779, 1781, and 1782.

20             Mr. Philipps, based on your analysis could you describe how the

21     ordering and reporting functioned between the brigades and the corps

22     command?

23        A.   On each day the soldiers in the front line around Sarajevo would

24     be engaged in various military activities.  As these activities occurred,

25     that information would be given to the platoon commander and the platoon

Page 4697

 1     commander would pass that information, usually verbally, to the company

 2     commander.  A company commander would be tasked with writing a report or

 3     giving a verbal report to the battalion commander.  The battalion

 4     commander would pass this up the line to the brigade command, who would

 5     write a written daily report on the events within the brigade area and

 6     pass that up to the corps commander.  This passage of information enabled

 7     the corps commander to understand what was happening in each of the

 8     brigade areas down to considerable detail.  For example, exact numbers of

 9     killed and wounded for each unit in -- under his command.

10             Equally, when the corps commander required action or an operation

11     to take place, through his staff he was able to provide orders to the

12     brigades, which then would be disseminated down through that same chain

13     of command to the units at the front.

14        Q.   I'd like to take a look at an example.

15             MS. HARBOUR:  If we could please have 65 ter 12143.

16        Q.   This is a 14 May 1993 report from the 1st SMBR commander to the

17     SRK command.  And, Mr. Philipps, could you please take a look at the

18     document and explain how it fits into the ordering and reporting scheme

19     that you've described.

20        A.   This is a daily report provided by the brigade up to the corps

21     headquarters, and it is in a standard format.  Number 1 nearly always

22     refers to enemy activity; number 2 refers to the activity of brigade

23     itself and what it's currently doing; number 3 refers to the -- the

24     actions within the zone of responsibility of the brigade - that is, the

25     area covered by the brigade; and in this case, number 4 refers to

Page 4698

 1     anything unusual that has been going on, any out-of-the-ordinary

 2     activity; number 5 refers to security and morale of the unit; and then

 3     number 6 relates to logistics, in this case a request for ammunition of

 4     various types showing the amount of ammunition required for each

 5     particular weapon held within the brigade.

 6             So on this page at the beginning we can see a request for

 7     60-millimetre mortar rounds, 82-millimetre mortar rounds, and

 8     120-millimetre mortar rounds, and the amounts requested are in what is

 9     called a combat kit or a BK.  BK is the B/C/S.  That refers to a specific

10     quantity of ammunition required for each type of weapon, so it's a

11     different amount of ammunition that makes up a BK.  The BK is requested

12     in this case as a -- as a decimal amount, so .12 would be 12 per cent of

13     a full BK.

14             On the original B/C/S document on the left of my screen, you can

15     see I listed all the other types of ammunition that are requested,

16     probably on the second page of the translation, such as 122-millimetre

17     artillery rounds, anti-tank rounds, and machine-gun rounds of various

18     types.

19        Q.   Do the format of these reports relate at all to the staff

20     divisions at the corps command level?

21        A.   Yes.  You could say that each of the paragraphs, if you like,

22     relates to one of the staff divisions, beginning first of all with the

23     activity of the enemy, so relating to intelligence and security and, of

24     course, ending with logistics which applies specifically to the logistics

25     staff section.  So each of the reports could be broken down and acted

Page 4699

 1     upon by each of the staff divisions up at the corps headquarters.

 2             MS. HARBOUR:  Could I please tender 65 ter 12143.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear of no objection.

 4             Madam Registrar.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 12143 becomes Exhibit P457,

 6     Your Honours.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  P457 is admitted into evidence.

 8             MS. HARBOUR:  Now I'd like to look at the evolution of the

 9     brigade structure from the formation of the SRK in 1992 until the end of

10     1995.  We'll first look at the chart from 1992 to 1994.  If we have a

11     look at all of these brigades listed, with the exception of the

12     Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade, the 2nd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade,

13     all of the dates listed for the brigades are in September.  Why is the

14     2nd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade the only one dated from May in your

15     chart?

16        A.   When the chart was originally put together, it was put together

17     for the Prosecution of General Galic, and so the documents referred to

18     related to the start of the tenure of General Galic and no specific

19     information was sought during the tenure of General Sipcic.  Information,

20     however, came to light about the 2nd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade

21     being in existence in May 1992.  So documents may very well exist showing

22     all the other brigades in existence at an earlier time, but they were not

23     originally located to cover this period.

24             MS. HARBOUR:  Could we please have 65 ter 11467.

25        Q.   As you can see, this is a 7 June 1992 order to the commanders of

Page 4700

 1     the SRK units, and my question for you has actually to do with the

 2     recipient list at the end of the document.

 3             MS. HARBOUR:  So if we could please have page 6 of the English

 4     and page 4 in the B/C/S.

 5        Q.   Mr. Philipps, please review this recipient list and it continues

 6     onto page 7 in the English, so please just let us know when the page

 7     needs to be turned.  And then once you've reviewed them, I'd like to know

 8     how these brigades that are listed on this document compare to your

 9     chart.

10        A.   We can see a list of brigades, first of all, as part of the

11     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.  The document itself is from Colonel Sipcic, at

12     that point the commander of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps, and in June 1992

13     these brigades all appear to form part of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.

14     There are some brigades that do not appear on the chart, such as the

15     Blazuj Brigade.

16             The -- on the next page, if I could get the next page.  On th

17     next page we see also the Trnovo Brigade which is not shown on the chart,

18     and then below that we have the corps support units such as a corps

19     artillery group, the engineering battalion at Pale, anti-aircraft

20     artillery.  We have a medical battalion at Pale, and we have another

21     brigade called the Novo Sarajevo Brigade.  So there are three brigades

22     that are not shown on my chart that appear in this document that I can

23     see.

24             MS. HARBOUR:  Could I please tender --

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Harbour --

Page 4701

 1             MS. HARBOUR:  Yes.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  -- before we proceed, do you have any explanation

 3     why the Ilijas Brigade is mentioned twice?

 4             THE WITNESS:  I personally don't have an explanation.  I wondered

 5     whether this was simply a drafting error when it was made.  It is

 6     possible that there were two Ilijas Brigades but it's so unlikely that

 7     they haven't got numbers.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  You wanted to tendered it, Ms. Harbour.

 9             MS. HARBOUR:  Yes, Your Honour.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

11             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 11467 becomes Exhibit P458,

12     Your Honours.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

14             MS. HARBOUR:  Could we please have 65 ter 9286.

15        Q.   Mr. Philipps, does the Rogatica Brigade which appears on this

16     document, does that appear on your chart?

17        A.   The Rogatica Brigade appears on my chart between the dates 1992

18     and 1994.  And -- but is shown as being transferred on the 20th of

19     November 1992 to the Drina Corps.

20             MS. HARBOUR:  And for the Chamber's reference, that is the --

21     just in the row just below the corps command in the three boxes.  It is

22     to the far left.

23        Q.   About halfway down the page of this order -- or of this report,

24     we see information about Muslim civilians and where a higher

25     concentration of Muslim civilians was.

Page 4702

 1        A.   This is an example of how detailed such a report might be when

 2     submitted.  It goes into detail about locations of civilians.  It goes

 3     into details about locations of the enemy forces of the ABiH.  And it

 4     gives details of the current activity of the brigade.

 5             At the bottom of the page, it also goes into detail about the

 6     exact structure of the brigade, as well as breaking the information down

 7     into the precise ages and age ranges of all the members of the brigade

 8     itself.  So this is a good example of how detailed the information might

 9     be that is passed from the brigades up to the corps headquarters.

10             MS. HARBOUR:  Could we please tender 65 ter 9286.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.  We can't read all of it because of

12     the word "unrevised."  That's one.

13             Second, you refer to it as higher concentration of Muslim

14     civilians.  That's not what the document says.  It's about population.

15     It then further explains that there are mainly women and children but

16     also unarmed men.  Now, women and unarmed men are not necessarily

17     civilians.  So I would just like to make that observation.

18             Is there any version available where we can read the whole of the

19     document?  Because the line "an enemy's group," and then I have

20     difficulties in reading the remainder of that line.

21             MS. HARBOUR:  Yes, Your Honour.  I can obtain that for us.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  May I take that meanwhile there is no

23     objection against it being admitted?

24             Madam Registrar.

25             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 9286 becomes Exhibit P459 Your Honours.

Page 4703

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  P459 is admitted into evidence.

 2             MS. HARBOUR:  Could we go to 65 ter 9608, please.

 3        Q.   Now, this document refers in the first paragraph to a VRS

 4     General Staff telegram and a conference on military and political matters

 5     in the SRK area.  Does this indicate anything about the SRK command

 6     structure, Mr. Philipps?

 7        A.   This document is a good example of the implementation of orders

 8     received by the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps from the General Staff of the VRS

 9     after a -- a conference on military and political matters.  And this

10     document is General Galic himself putting into practice and providing

11     orders to his subordinates to ensure that the -- the orders put forward

12     from the -- from the General Staff of the VRS are implemented.

13             MS. HARBOUR:  Could I please have 65 ter 9812 on the screen.

14        Q.   Mr. Philipps, once you have had a chance to read through this

15     document - and if you need to look at another page, do say so - would you

16     please explain what this is and how this document relates to the command

17     structure?

18        A.   If I could see the next English page.  The document is an order

19     from General Sipcic, although not signed by him, calling a meeting of all

20     the commanders of the brigades and of the corps supporting units of the

21     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps but also the political leadership within those

22     areas, and it is interesting from the point of view that it's not simply

23     a military meeting but it's a military and political meeting that's being

24     called.  So a combination of army personnel as well as political

25     individuals in order to come to an agreement on what -- what might be

Page 4704

 1     done next.  The -- what is interesting about this is that combination

 2     of -- of military and political leadership.

 3             MS. HARBOUR:  Could I please tender these two last documents,

 4     65 ter 9812 and 9608.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 9608 becomes Exhibit P460.

 7             And document 9812 becomes Exhibit P461.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  P460 and P461 are admitted into evidence.

 9             MS. HARBOUR:

10        Q.   In addition to some of the changes that we've discussed between

11     May and September 1992, between the two charts we noticed that there are

12     fewer brigades in 1994 to 1995.  Could you briefly explain what the

13     change was?

14        A.   Over the period of time, the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps had suffered

15     numbers of casualties and it became necessary to reorganise the brigades,

16     and so some brigades that were down to very few individuals, perhaps less

17     than a battalion in size, were subsumed or became part of other brigades.

18     So one brigade, for example, might have been down to as low as 56

19     individuals and could therefore cease to function as a brigade and became

20     a battalion or a small battalion in another brigade.  This is not always

21     possible to find exactly when it happened for all units.

22             Some brigades appear on the chart and then simply no record is

23     found of them after a certain date.  It's not necessarily the case that

24     the brigade ceased to exist, as such, or the individuals were killed, but

25     simply that the brigade was either renamed or subsumed as part of another

Page 4705

 1     brigade.  And that's the explanation for some of the brigades not

 2     appearing on later charts.

 3             MS. HARBOUR:  If we could -- if the Court Officer would mind

 4     switching the charts now we can look at -- so we can look at the 1994 to

 5     1995 period.  Mr. Philipps, does the explanation that you've just given

 6     explain why the 3rd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade appears on this

 7     chart - and that is the third box over from the right - but the Vogosca,

 8     Rajlovac, and Kosovo Brigades do not appear on this chart?

 9        A.   It appears, yes, that the 3rd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade is

10     a new formation.  Whether it is a new formation made up entirely of a

11     previous brigade or from separate battalions from other brigades is not

12     completely clear from the records, but certainly the

13     3rd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade is a new formation that's appeared

14     during this period.

15             MS. HARBOUR:  Could we please have 65 ter 28488.

16             JUDGE MOLOTO:  If I might just ask a question before you proceed.

17             I notice, Mr. Philipps, that on the 1992 to 1994 chart we do have

18     a 3rd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade which is also known as the

19     Vogosca Brigade.  So doesn't look like it's a new development.  It is the

20     seventh from the left on the -- on the first chart.

21             THE WITNESS:  Yes.  Perhaps my terminology calling it a new

22     brigade was incorrect.  A more accurate would be to say it had been

23     renamed.  Renamed at a particular point.  As far as I can tell, that

24     would be between October 1993 and March 1994.  The brigade was renamed

25     from the Vogosca Brigade to the 3rd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade.

Page 4706

 1     But, at the same time, more units were added to it.

 2             JUDGE MOLOTO:  Thank you.

 3             MS. HARBOUR:

 4        Q.   We have on our screen a 4 August 1995 Official Note.

 5             MS. HARBOUR:  And if we could turn to page 2 in the English,

 6     which is page 1 in the B/C/S.  In the third paragraph down the final

 7     sentence of the paragraph refers to "establishing [sic] the 4th Sarajevo

 8     Brigade through accelerated procedure."

 9        Q.   Now earlier today you mentioned that there may be an amendment

10     required for the chart.  Do you have any observations based on this

11     document?

12        A.   From this document, it seems that the formation of a new brigade,

13     the 4th Light Infantry Brigade, appears to be called the

14     4th Sarajevo Brigade.  On my chart for the period 1994 to 1995, I have an

15     organisation called the 4th Srpska Light Infantry Brigade.  The

16     abbreviation for both being 4 Slpbr.  This document in front of us

17     clearly shows that it's called the 4th Sarajevo Brigade and not the

18     4th Srpska Light Infantry Brigade.

19             It's very difficult to tell simply from this document whether the

20     4th Sarajevo Brigade is the same organisation as the

21     4th Srpska Light Infantry Brigade.  From a might point of view, I think

22     it unlikely that there would be two brigades given the same number within

23     a corps organisation, especially with the same abbreviation.  This would

24     lead to enormous confusion.

25             So I suspect that either the 4th Srpska Light Infantry Brigade

Page 4707

 1     became the 4th Sarajevo Brigade and that the two did not co-exist at the

 2     same time, but more research would be required to establish this being

 3     the case.

 4             MS. HARBOUR:  For the record, the 4th Srpska Light Infantry

 5     Brigade is the fourth brigade from the left on the 1994 to 1995 chart.

 6     And I would like to tender this document, please.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 28488 becomes Exhibit P462,

 9     Your Honours.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

11             MS. HARBOUR:

12        Q.   I'd now like to turn to discussing the corps support units, as

13     you called them, along the bottom of the chart, and I would like to look

14     at some documents to develop how the SRK used these units in practice.

15             MS. HARBOUR:  If we could please have 65 ter 3776 on the

16     monitors.

17        Q.   This is a 6 October 1992 order from the SRK command.  Do you

18     recognise this document?

19        A.   Yes, I do.  This document relates to an operation that was to

20     take place in -- in October 1992.

21        Q.   Where this says "scale" and indicates a scale followed by place

22     names and numbers, what does this refer to?

23        A.   As far as I can tell, normally an order such as this would

24     mention the maps to be used for the operation.  The scale relates to the

25     scale of the maps to be used.  And the place names and numbers refer to

Page 4708

 1     the map sheets that can be used for the operation.

 2             MS. HARBOUR:  Could we please turn to page 7 in the English

 3     version and page 10 in the B/C/S.  And we'll be looking at item 6.2.

 4        Q.   This item is entitled: "Artillery support."  Would you explain

 5     what we read about this in item, particularly what is called the KAG and

 6     the 4 MAP?

 7        A.   The paragraph refers to the use of artillery during the operation

 8     and the formation of a KAG or a corps artillery group.  A corps artillery

 9     group in this case is being formed from the 4th Mixed Artillery Regiment,

10     which is one of the support units for the corps itself.  This corps

11     artillery group would be put at the disposal, with the permission of the

12     corps commander, of the brigade commanders for their use during an

13     operation; that is, the brigade commanders, when given permission, could

14     call upon fire support from a corps artillery group.

15             The firing positions, in this case VP is not "vojni post" but is

16     firing position, is given for each of the parts of the corps artillery

17     group.

18             MS. HARBOUR:  Now if we could turn to 65 ter 12140.

19        Q.   Have a look at this document and see if you can explain how it

20     relates to the previous document and also what these documents tell us

21     about command and control.

22        A.   When an order for an operation is written, it is written in a

23     general way explaining what is going to occur, and then each staff

24     officer responsible and each officer responsible extracts that part from

25     the order that is relevant to his troops, called an extraction of orders,

Page 4709

 1     and he writes a specific set of orders with more detailed information for

 2     the troops under his command.  So this is an example of the detailed

 3     instruction given to the commander of the 4th Mixed Artillery Regiment,

 4     and again we can see it covers information such as map usage and the

 5     formation of the corps artillery group.

 6             I should add it's a good example of the -- how orders are put

 7     together and moved down through the chain of command so that each unit

 8     understands what it has to do during an operation.

 9        Q.   When you referred to the staff officer responsible, were you

10     referring to the chief of artillery?

11        A.   Yes.  This -- the -- the relationship of this document is -- is

12     between the chief of the artillery, of the -- of the staff officer in

13     charge of artillery and the commander of the 4th Mixed Artillery

14     Regiment.

15             MS. HARBOUR:  I would like to tender these last two documents,

16     Your Honour.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  The first 65 ter number would be?

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 3776.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Receives number.

20             THE REGISTRAR:  P463, Your Honours.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

22             The second one.

23             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 12140 receives number P464,

24     Your Honours.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  P464 is admitted.

Page 4710

 1             MS. HARBOUR:  Your Honour, I believe I'm almost at my time.  With

 2     your leave I would cover one document from one additional area and

 3     conclude.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  You are, indeed, close to your one and a half

 5     hour.  We will take a break in five minutes, so please use that time.

 6             MS. HARBOUR:

 7        Q.   I would like to ask you about a different subject, Mr. Philipps.

 8     The subject of aerial bombs.  In your analysis did you reach any

 9     conclusions regarding command and control with respect to the supply and

10     usage of aerial bombs?

11        A.   I found a variety of documents relating to the use of aircraft

12     bombs which were to be used from launchers on the ground rather than

13     dropped from aircraft, specifically direct control of those weapons by

14     the corps commander and the distribution of those weapons to individual

15     brigades.

16             As an explanation for those not familiar with what the aircraft

17     bomb launching detachment was, it was a 250-kilogram air bomb normally

18     dropped from an aircraft but modified to be fired from a ramp from the

19     back of a vehicle and using rocket motors.  So there were several

20     documents that I used to locate the aircraft bomb launching detachment

21     within the corps support units of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.

22        Q.   Were you able to locate that unit; and if so, could you tell us

23     where it is on your chart?

24        A.   Yes.  I've shown it with the corps support units.  So on the

25     chart -- the second chart, it's the fourth unit shown in the corps

Page 4711

 1     support units.

 2             Now, it appears that these -- the aircraft bomb launching

 3     detachment was positioned in brigade areas, so the brigades would

 4     actually have the detachment within the area but the use of those weapons

 5     was entirely within the control of the -- of the corps commander, not the

 6     brigade commander.

 7             MS. HARBOUR:  Could we have 65 ter 9817, please.

 8        Q.   This is a 16 June 1994 order to the SRK commander personally and

 9     it is from Ratko Mladic.  Would you please read the document and tell us

10     if you have any observations on how this document fits into the command

11     and control structure?

12        A.   The document is to the corps command of the

13     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps from General Mladic.  It covers a number of items

14     referred to which we can't see what is being spoken about in some of them

15     because they refer to other documents that -- that we don't have in front

16     of us.  But paragraph 2 refers to a request to issue 20 FAB 250; that is,

17     250-kilogram aerial bombs.  And it's saying that the request to issue is

18     justified and your duty upon receiving the order is to take them and

19     distribute them to the designated axes and store them per regulation.

20             So from this we can see that the corps commander has requested

21     these bombs be supplied and this is a -- an order saying that those bombs

22     will be issued, and then really making sure that the -- the proper

23     storage and the number of people required to actually -- to ensure these

24     weapons can be used.

25             So this -- this really is simply an example of -- of the

Page 4712

 1     communication between the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps and the General Staff

 2     as a direct order.  There are other references in -- in paragraph 4 and 5

 3     relating to other proposals which are not clear what they might be from

 4     this particular letter.

 5             MS. HARBOUR:  I'd like to tender this document into evidence.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 9817 becomes Exhibit P465, Your Honours.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

 9             MS. HARBOUR:

10        Q.   Now just a concluding question for you, Mr. Philipps.  Based on

11     your experience in the military and as an analyst on your preparations

12     for this expert report, what conclusions did you draw about the overall

13     nature and functioning of the command and control within the SRK?

14        A.   It's clear from the combat reports that I've seen and read and

15     used to put the chart together that there was a good system of reporting

16     both up and down the chain of command within the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps;

17     that is, troops at the front line were able to pass information through

18     their commanders up the chain through brigade commanders to the corps

19     command itself, and that the corps command was capable of writing complex

20     sets of orders and instructions that were passed down through the chain

21     of command to the troops in -- in the line.

22             Particularly we've seen with the artillery planning that detailed

23     fire plans were professionally put together, that the staff officers were

24     capable and trained to put together such fire plans, and that the orders

25     were passed down the chain of command and reporting came back up through

Page 4713

 1     the chain of command.

 2             MS. HARBOUR:  I refer the Chamber to adjudicated facts numbers

 3     1805 through 1808, and 1861 through 1863, and I have no further

 4     questions, Your Honours.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Ms. Harbour.

 6             We'll take a break.

 7             Mr. Philipps, would you please follow the usher.  We'll resume at

 8     quarter past 12.00.

 9                           [The witness stands down]

10             JUDGE ORIE:  As I said, we resume at quarter past 12.00.

11                           --- Recess taken at 11.52 a.m.

12                           --- On resuming at 12.17 p.m.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.

14             Perhaps I meanwhile use the time.  Revised translation of

15     Exhibit D49, which is the local statement of Witness Osmanovic.  Per the

16     Chamber's request, the English translation of Exhibit D49 was verified by

17     CLSS.  The Prosecution informed the Registry that it has received the

18     revised translation.  And could the parties take care that the revised

19     translation is uploaded and then once Madam Registrar has been informed

20     under which number it is uploaded, that the English translation may be

21     replaced.

22                           [The witness takes the stand]

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Philipps, you'll now be cross-examined by

24     Mr. Lukic.  Mr. Lukic is counsel for Mr. Mladic.

25             Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.

Page 4714

 1             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 2                           Cross-examination by Mr. Lukic:

 3        Q.   [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Philipps.

 4             I would kindly ask you to assist us with a better understanding

 5     of your chart.  But before that, let me ask you this:  Both charts that

 6     we have in this case file, as well as the supporting documents, were

 7     prepared by you whilst you were in the employment of the Tribunal OTP; is

 8     that correct?

 9        A.   Yes, that is correct.

10        Q.   Before you appeared in motions, there was some discussion about

11     whether you are an expert or not.  Can you please tell us what is your

12     area of expertise?

13        A.   In this case, my area of expertise is the structure of military

14     organisations.

15        Q.   Military organisations in general or the military organisation

16     solely of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps?

17        A.   I have studied military organisations of many armed forces:

18     During the Cold War, the Soviet army - later, the Russian army; the

19     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps; the VRS; and also historical structures of

20     military organisations.

21        Q.   When you were asked in the Karadzic case about the structure of

22     the VRS and the JNA, is it correct that you responded by saying that you

23     hadn't studied the entire structure of the Army of Republika Srpska?

24        A.   That's correct.  I've simply looked at a few of the constituent

25     corps but not of the detailed organisation of those other corps or the

Page 4715

 1     structure of the VRS in its entirety.

 2        Q.   You spent nine months in Sarajevo as a member of SFOR after the

 3     war; is that correct?

 4        A.   Yes, that's correct.  As a staff officer.

 5        Q.   The Sarajevo-Romanija Corps that you have examined here did not

 6     have the same structure at that time as the one that it had during the

 7     war; is that correct?  Can you give us an answer?  Do you know that?

 8        A.   While I was a staff officer in Sarajevo, I was not working on the

 9     structure of any current military organisation present in the former --

10     in Bosnia-Herzegovina.  I was working on intelligence and security

11     matters, mostly relating to the Croatian Intelligence Services.

12        Q.   Thank you.  Also, during your schooling or subsequent training

13     and courses that you attended, there was nothing that had anything to do

14     with the Army of Republika Srpska; is that correct?

15        A.   That is correct.  My military training related to military

16     structures and understanding military structures but was not specifically

17     related to the units of the former Yugoslavia or of the war in

18     Yugoslavia.

19        Q.   Thank you.  Let's now move to the symbols that you used.  When

20     you explained the symbols that you used in preparing the chart and

21     sketches, you said that a dotted line indicates unconfirmed staffs,

22     units, and individuals.  Then you went onto explain to say that this

23     means that some of these staffs, formations, units, or individuals were

24     found in -- only in one document.

25             Therefore, I'd like to ask you this:  In the sketch that was

Page 4716

 1     admitted in this case and that relates to period 1992-1994, can you tell

 2     us the percentage indicated in this sketch signifies the dotted

 3     categories; or can you tell us the percentage or the number of units,

 4     formations, and individuals that fall into this category?

 5        A.   A simple answer would be no.  Not without going through the chart

 6     and having a look and calculating the percentage of how many individuals

 7     or formations were only found in one document.

 8        Q.   Would you agree with me that, roughly speaking, there are 50

 9     per cent of such unconfirmed items?

10        A.   I -- I cannot answer that question.  I think I said I -- I don't

11     know.  The answer is no, I do not know the percentage.

12        Q.   Thank you.  Let me ask you about something that you mentioned

13     today, and that is that the number of brigades varied in the period

14     1992-1995, and you said that that was correct.  But what I want to ask

15     you is this:  Is it correct that your chart depicts all the brigades that

16     existed in the covered period but this does not necessarily mean that

17     they existed contemporaneously?  And I mean all the brigades indicated

18     here.

19        A.   The -- all the brigades shown on both charts did not exist

20     contemporaneously, but the brigades shown on each chart, I've given a

21     date that shows when they were in existence.

22        Q.   So, in the first chart, we have the Rajlovac and

23     Vogosca Light Infantry Brigades.  But you yourself said that the

24     Rajlovac Brigade ceased to exist in 1993; is that correct?

25        A.   The last piece of information I have for the

Page 4717

 1     Rajlovac Light Infantry Brigade was dated August 1993.  Whether it

 2     continued to exist after that date, I don't know.  I have no further data

 3     on that.

 4        Q.   The Vogosca Light Infantry Brigade was renamed

 5     3rd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade; is that correct?

 6        A.   That is correct.  My data showed that the name changed sometime

 7     between October 1993 and March 1994.

 8        Q.   And in the sketch, or the chart that we all have in front of us,

 9     both these brigades are included.  Both the Vogosca and the

10     3rd Sarajevo Light Brigade; is that correct?

11        A.   That is correct.  Because the chart covers a period of time, it

12     shows the passage of one unit to another in the same way that it shows

13     two corps commanders in the corps headquarters when, of course, there was

14     only ever one corps commander at any one time.

15        Q.   My next question is this:  Two brigades, the Vogosca and the

16     3rd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade, never existed at the same time; is

17     that correct?

18        A.   Given that one was renamed to the other, I agree that they did

19     not exist contemporaneously.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Do you mean contemporaneously or simultaneously?

21             THE WITNESS:  Yes, simultaneously would be more correct.  They

22     did not exist at the same time.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Thank you.

24             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you very much.

25        Q.   [Interpretation] Since you were focussed in your study only on

Page 4718

 1     the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps, your findings cannot be applied to any other

 2     corps of the Army of Republika Srpska; is that correct?

 3        A.   It's -- the study of one military structure can assist in

 4     understanding other military structures, but you could not say that any

 5     other corps had the same structure as the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps except

 6     that it is based on the structure from original JNA principles.  That

 7     might be the only similarity.

 8        Q.   Is it true that, for example, the auxiliary organs and the number

 9     of artillery pieces is such information that cannot apply to other corps?

10        A.   The distribution of heavy weapons, such as artillery, amongst the

11     different corps, I imagine, varied widely.  I don't think you could

12     extrapolate the weapons that were available in the

13     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps and say that, therefore, those weapons could be

14     found elsewhere.  That would not be a logical conclusion.

15        Q.   Thank you.  I apologise if I stop.  It does not mean that I'm not

16     satisfied with your answer.  It only means that I'm waiting for the

17     interpretation to be completed.

18             Can we agree that in addition to the fact that you did not study

19     other VRS corps, that you also did not study any of the corps in the Army

20     of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

21        A.   As a matter of fact, I did look in detail at the -- at the

22     1st Corps of the ABiH at one time.

23        Q.   When you say "corps," in plural, of ABH, were you referring to

24     all the corps or only the Sarajevo-based 1st Corps?

25             JUDGE ORIE:  I think the question [sic] of the witness was that

Page 4719

 1     he studied in detail the 1st Corps of the ABiH at one time.  Of course,

 2     that does not necessarily exclude for the possibility that he also

 3     studied others, but I would have expected the witness to tell us.

 4             Could we mainly focus on what -- on -- the report of witness,

 5     Mr. Lukic.

 6             MR. LUKIC:  It was my mistake, Your Honour.  I didn't see the

 7     corner of the screen and I couldn't see "1st" because it was at the

 8     beginning of the row.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Please proceed.

10             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Since you were studying the 1st Corps of the ABH, did you manage

12     to discover what was the strength of the 1st Corps of the ABH?  Can you

13     tell us this today as you're sitting here?

14        A.   That is such a test of my memory that I would fail that test.  I

15     really don't remember the details of the 1st Corps of the ABiH.

16             I produced a small chart, not in such detail as the

17     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps, based almost entirely on records that were

18     inadmissible for court purposes, such as data from

19     Jane's Intelligence Review and that sort of thing, so it's really a very

20     vague indication to me of the nature of the 1st Corps.  So I would be

21     guessing now, which is of no value to the Court.

22        Q.   If I told you that there were about 35.000 armed members of the

23     1st of ABH, would that refresh your memory?

24        A.   No.  If I were able to remember, then I would remember.  But then

25     suggesting numbers to me, I can't help you with it.  I really can't.

Page 4720

 1             It -- if you were to ask me how many were the

 2     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps, I would refer to my chart to get the correct

 3     figure, and I would look up the number from the chart.  I don't remember

 4     all the detailed numbers.

 5        Q.   [In English] Of course. [Interpretation] Well, you have asked the

 6     next question yourself.  What was the strength of the 1st -- of the

 7     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps?

 8        A.   On -- on the 9th of June - I think it says - 1993, I have

 9     established a strength of 23.000 in total, including 120 active-service

10     personnel, by which I think I understand those to be JNA -- former JNA

11     officers.

12        Q.   Since we have a smaller figure, when you made your calculation --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  No, no.  One second.  No consultations during court

14     time.  This is the last warning, Mr. Mladic.  You can write a note.  You

15     can consult with counsel during the breaks.

16             Please proceed.

17             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

18        Q.   I'm sorry, I'll have to start my questions from the beginning.

19     When you were calculating this figure, for example, did you take into

20     account the Vogosca Light Infantry Brigade and the

21     3rd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade and their manpower?  Because we can

22     find both of them in the chart that we are looking at.

23        A.   I personally didn't calculate the figures.  The number of figures

24     would have been taken from a document.  It's not simply a question of

25     counting up how many troops there are in each of the battalions and

Page 4721

 1     adding them together.  I don't have data on each of the battalions and

 2     each of the companies and each of the brigades.  I have very partial

 3     information.  Therefore, to use this chart to calculate the numbers of

 4     those present on a particular day in the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps would be

 5     misleading and not helpful.  The figure I chose has come from a

 6     particular document.

 7        Q.   This document, is it on the list that was tendered to be admitted

 8     into evidence along with your testimony?  And can you tell us the source

 9     of that document?

10        A.   Each of the items on the chart is listed in an alphabetical and

11     alphanumerical list and that then supplies the source of the data for

12     that information.  And I don't have the document in front of me, but I

13     have a reference to it.

14        Q.   Can you tell us the reference, please.

15        A.   I -- I hope I'm correct.  I believe it to be Y000-2235 [Realtime

16     translation read in error "22325"] is the first number.  This, I believe

17     with the prefix, would be a document that was submitted by the Galic

18     Defence, as far as I understand it.

19        Q.   That's the way I understand it, too.  But kindly make an effort

20     with regard to the number, because it seems to me that there's one digit

21     too many.  I think that instead of five there should be four digits.

22        A.   Oh, I see.  It's come up incorrectly.  2235.  Y000-2235.  And

23     document 10 --

24        Q.   Thank you.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Harbour.

Page 4722

 1             MS. HARBOUR:  If it assists, that's 65 ter 12075 on our exhibit

 2     list.

 3             MR. LUKIC:  And I cannot find this number 12075 on our list.

 4             MS. HARBOUR:  It's not on -- I meant to say our 65 ter exhibit

 5     list.  It's in e-court.

 6             MR. LUKIC:  Okay.  It's not on the list.

 7             MS. HARBOUR:  No, it is not on the list for --

 8             MR. LUKIC:  Thanks for your help.

 9             Just one moment, Your Honours.

10             We'll probably come back to that document, but for now we have to

11     continue.

12        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Philipps, in the corps itself, there are

13     units that are directly subordinated to the corps command, and you gave

14     evidence to that effect.  Those were units like artillery, anti-aircraft

15     defence, logistical units, medical units, reconnaissance units, and

16     engineers' units.

17             In the chart that you have drawn up, are these units subordinated

18     to the corps command or to the Corps Staff?

19        A.   The best way to understand it is that they are subordinated to

20     the corps commander, but he exercises his control over those units

21     through the Corps Staff.

22        Q.   What is a broader concept, command or staff?  What denotes what?

23        A.   I'm not sure I understand the question, but I'll try and explain

24     the difference between the command and the staff.

25             The commander gives direct orders to units that are subordinated

Page 4723

 1     to him.  He would come up with a -- with a -- an approximation, a plan,

 2     if you like, of what activity he would like to take place, but the staff

 3     are those people that put that plan into a concrete form that can then be

 4     given to those subordinates.

 5             So although the staff write the orders, they would then be given

 6     to the corps commander for his approval before going to the troops under

 7     his command.  So the staff are simply a means of facilitating the passage

 8     of orders and instructions to the troops under command and receiving data

 9     back from them.

10        Q.   So what is it that the commander does when something needs to be

11     ordered?

12        A.   The commander is the decision-maker.  He -- if he decides that an

13     attack should take place, if he decides that the units need to defend in

14     a certain way, he makes a decision.  He will then give that decision to

15     the staff who will calculate the necessary activities; that is, how long

16     it might take, how many troops should be involved, the nature of and

17     quantity of ammunition.  And they do what is called staff work; that is,

18     calculate how that might work and then put that into an order that can be

19     given to the troops.  The commander really is only there to make the

20     decision on what should be done and the staff assist him in how it should

21     be done.

22        Q.   Does the commander first make a decision or does he first present

23     his idea or concept?

24        A.   Really, the planning of an operation consists of, first of all,

25     deciding what aim needs to be achieved.  And then only the staff

Page 4724

 1     themselves can calculate whether that activity or action is possible.

 2             The commander makes the decision of what the aim is.  It may be

 3     that the staff turn around and say, We don't have the ammunition, we

 4     don't have the artillery, we don't have the troops to fulfil that aim.

 5     So sometimes the decision of the commander is changed because of the

 6     information he receives from the staff.  It's a planning meeting, if you

 7     like, a staff meeting where people coming together and discuss the

 8     capabilities of the organisation.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me see whether I understand the answer.  Are you

10     referring to a decision-making process in which the commander has the

11     last say, is that in short what you mean?

12             THE WITNESS:  Exactly that.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

14             THE WITNESS:  He is in charge.

15             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   In your testimonies you mentioned the chief of operations.  In

17     the VRS or, rather, the SRK, the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps, what is that?

18     Chief of operations.

19        A.   The -- the chief of operations falls within the staff, and he is

20     in charge of the planning of how operations might take place.  So he

21     falls under the command, if you like, of the staff officer who is the

22     Chief of Staff.  He's one of the planning officers for operations.

23        Q.   I'm going to put the Defence case to you and you're going to tell

24     me whether you agree.  The chief of operations is A NATO term.  There was

25     no such person in the Army of Republika Srpska.  Would you agree with me

Page 4725

 1     or would you stand by what you had claimed; namely, that within the

 2     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps, there was a chief of operations?

 3        A.   I'm just referring to my alphanumeric list to look up the

 4     individual Cedo Sladoje, who is in an organisation relating to operations

 5     and training with the B/C/S abbreviation OONP.  If I'm able to look at

 6     that document we could see what it says, and then we would know whether

 7     the NATO term "chief of operations" is a NATO term or whether it's used

 8     by the SRK in a document.

 9        Q.   In your diagram that shows the period between 1992 and 1994, Cedo

10     Sladoje was shown as the Chief of Staff; is that correct?

11        A.   Yes, that's correct.  But also he was shown at another date as

12     being part of operations and training.  It -- it may be the same person.

13     The reason there's a number after his name is it's possible that there

14     are two people called Cedo Sladoje.  I have no way of showing they are

15     one and the same person.

16             The document --

17        Q.   If you're willing to take my word for it, although I am not in a

18     position to testify, in the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps there was only one

19     person by the name of Cedo Sladoje.  So let us work on that basis.

20        A.   That would be fine, a good conclusion.  I have him as being the

21     Chief of Staff starting from August 1994, but during the period

22     November 1992 to November 1993, in the rank of colonel, I have documents

23     that relate to him being part of operations and training.

24        Q.   We see that in the upper left-hand corner of your chart, in the

25     box entitled: "Staff," or "Stab"?

Page 4726

 1        A.   Yes, that's correct.  And I can -- have I -- if -- if it would

 2     help with an ERN, an old type of Evidence Reference Number, from

 3     documents provided by the Galic Defence, I have a combat report from a

 4     particular date that places him in that position in -- in 1993.

 5        Q.   So with regard to this particular person or any other person who

 6     was in that position, did you consider that person to be chief of

 7     operations?

 8        A.   I would have to refer to the document to see what precise title

 9     is given to the individual.  Is -- is the -- is the B/C/S OONP?  Does

10     that mean operations and training?  My language is not up to that

11     understanding.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Wouldn't it be best that we look at the document so

13     that we can see what name is used there for Mr. Cedo Sladoje?  Could any

14     of the parties assist in getting the right document on the screen.

15             MR. LUKIC:  The witness knows.

16             THE WITNESS:  I can give the ERN if that helps.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If the -- if the ERN is sufficient, then --

18     and otherwise if the Prosecution would have a 65 ter number, that's --

19             MS. HARBOUR:  If you're just referring to the first ERN listed

20     for Sladoje, Cedo, number 2, that is the same document we referred to

21     earlier with the respect to the strength of the SRK, and that is

22     65 ter number 12075.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And that is a document dated the 9th of June,

24     1993, origin, SRK command, regular combat report, with the situation at

25     1700 hours to the Republika Srpska army Main Staff.  That's -- seems to

Page 4727

 1     be --

 2             MS. HARBOUR:  That seems to be the same document, Your Honour.

 3     And I identified this person that we've been speaking of, Cedo Sladoje,

 4     on page 8 --

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Page 8.

 6             MS. HARBOUR:  -- in the English version.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  [Microphone not activated]... see what page 8 tells

 8     us.  It says:

 9             "We urgently need people for the OONP operations and training

10     organ of the SRK, which has only 1 of 12 AVL ... NOONP, chief of the

11     operations and training organ Colonel Cedo Sladoje."

12             That's what the document tells us and that's the language used

13     here.

14             MR. LUKIC:  The translation is correct.  So it -- what our point

15     is -- [Overlapping speakers] ...

16             JUDGE ORIE:  [Overlapping speakers] ... we now have the document

17     before us.  Please put whatever questions you'd like to the witness.

18             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   Mr. Philipps, is this the document on the basis of which you

20     concluded that within the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps there's a chief of

21     operations?  Is that what this document says?

22        A.   I understood to mean that Colonel Cedo Sladoje was the chief of

23     the operations and training from -- from that paragraph.  I think this is

24     also a document that has the strength of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  This is the document in which the number of

Page 4728

 1     23.000 appears.

 2             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   I will have to go back to my question; namely, whether it was on

 4     the basis of this document that you concluded that within the

 5     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps there's a chief of operations.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Harbour.

 7             MS. HARBOUR:  Your Honour, I think the witness has repeatedly

 8     said that he has identified this individual as the chief of operations

 9     and training.  The Defence continues to refer to the chief of operations

10     as if it is a different thing.  If that is, in fact, the Defence's case,

11     I suggest that the -- I would ask that the Defence put that to the

12     witness.  Otherwise, I think this matter has been clarified.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic.

14             MR. LUKIC:  I would like to think the same way, that the matter

15     is clarified.  But I think it's clearly stated in this document as well.

16     It's organ and in VRS --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

18             MR. LUKIC:  -- the organ could be one person.  And that's exactly

19     what's mentioned here and it's --

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, well, whether it's more or less, it seems to

21     say that it -- that Mr. Sladoje is the chief of the operations and

22     training organ.  Apparently there is an organ of which he is chief, and

23     that's what the document tells us.  If you have any further --

24             MR. LUKIC:  I do have another follow-up question.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please.

Page 4729

 1             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   Can you tell us, Mr. Philipps, according to NATO standards, what

 3     is a chief of operations?

 4        A.   It's fair to say that I retired from the British Army in 2006.

 5     The chief of operations in -- from the NATO point of view is -- is -- how

 6     can I describe him?  NATO has a different set of staff divisions to the

 7     JNA.

 8        Q.   Okay.

 9        A.   So the staff -- staff divisions are the organisation at

10     headquarters in the British Army is different to that of the SRK, is

11     different to that of the former JNA, and is different to that of the

12     Russian army.  So the chief of operations would be the person responsible

13     for putting together the planning for a particular operation, and an

14     operation might be a movement from one place to another or it might be an

15     attack or it might be a method of defence.  And the chief of operations

16     would work in conjunction with all the other staff officers, divided

17     slightly differently to the -- where the corps staff is in the SRK, but

18     the outcome would be very similar.  Perhaps you might say that the

19     Chief of Staff in the SRK is more the role of the chief of operations.

20        Q.   [Interpretation] Thank you for this clarification.  Now that

21     we're on the subject, I'd like to ask you whether it is correct that the

22     Main Staff, as a strategic formation, did not have artillery weapons and

23     did not have immediate command over any part of the artillery units.

24        A.   Really, that does not form part of my report.  I haven't written

25     a chart about what the Main Staff controlled, so I have no supporting

Page 4730

 1     documentation showing precisely what the Main Staff commanded, the corps

 2     that it commanded, or whether it had artillery units or other units at

 3     its disposal.  My simple answer.

 4        Q.   Thank you.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I ask one question.  We are have looked at

 6     this document dated the 9th of June in relation to the position of

 7     Cedo Sladoje.

 8             Now, I see in your list that there are other documents as well.

 9     There's one mentioned that's the 9th of June; but also in relation to the

10     dates, you say it's 15th of November 1992, up to November 1993, which

11     suggests that you have documents -- more documents from November 1992 up

12     to November 1993.  Perhaps we could, sooner or later, clarify whether

13     that sheds any additional light on whether there was a chief of

14     operations and training or whether there was an organ of such kind.

15             Because you make a point out of that, Mr. Lukic.  Therefore,

16     let's inspect -- let's orient ourselves to all the sources which are

17     apparently used here.  Not necessarily to be done immediately but --

18             MR. LUKIC:  I think I need sometime and go through the documents

19     that we saw today after today's working day [Overlapping speakers] ...

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Could I also invite, Ms. Harbour, that you

21     look for other sources given for this same person in that position.

22             MS. HARBOUR:  I'll do that, Your Honour.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

24                           [Defence counsel confer]

25             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

Page 4731

 1        Q.   Can you tell us briefly what makes up the command of the

 2     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.

 3        A.   I would refer to my chart, first of all, 1994 -- 1992 to 1994,

 4     and it shows various staff divisions, each headed up by a staff officer.

 5     So there was part of the staff that consisted of operations and training,

 6     signals and communication, engineering staff, reinforcement and

 7     personnel, armoured operations, and artillery staff.  And that would be,

 8     if you like, one staff division, one staff organisation.

 9             And then I would point to the -- a staff organisation relating to

10     the morale of the corps.  Really, that's the morale and legal and

11     religious affairs officer.  And then intelligence and security.  And then

12     logistics.  And those would be the four main parts of the corps command.

13        Q.   The staff, as such, is it part of the corps command?

14        A.   It's part of the corps -- I see what you mean.  It's part of the

15     corps headquarters.  Part of how the corps is run, but they're not

16     directly in the chain of command.  I think we've already discussed that

17     the commander himself is the person in charge and those are merely

18     individuals who facilitate his ability to be in charge of the

19     organisation.

20        Q.   Now we're going to talk about brigades a bit, actually, the

21     brigades that were part of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.  The

22     1st Sarajevo Mechanised Brigade.  Is it correct that it actually had the

23     composition of a battalion; and do you know how many people there were in

24     this brigade?  Do you have that particular figure?

25        A.   My chart shows that the -- the 1st Sarajevo Mechanised Brigade

Page 4732

 1     that you've mentioned consisted of a series of battalions, as well as

 2     supporting artillery and -- and supporting light anti-aircraft weapons,

 3     as well as logistics and a military police company.  So several

 4     battalions with supporting troops.

 5             I don't -- I can't see a figure for numbers, but we do have data

 6     on some of the approximate numbers for one of the battalions.

 7        Q.   Can you tell us what that number is?

 8        A.   The figure for one of the infantry battalions, which was formerly

 9     the 3rd Battalion of the 1st Romanija Infantry Brigade, it was given - if

10     my eyesight doesn't deceive me - of, I could say, 800 to 1.000.  I'd have

11     to look that up because I - like many of you - I can't quite read it.

12     And that is a large battalion.

13        Q.   Also, as you've mentioned yourself just now, there's the

14     1st Romanija Infantry Brigade.  You don't know what its strength

15     was - right? - because the information we have says that it was actually

16     much smaller than what a brigade should be.  That it was actually a

17     battalion-strength level.

18        A.   I would refer to the alphanumerical list for the

19     1st Romanija Infantry Brigade which will provide the document where I

20     obtained the figures showing the strength of the

21     1st Romanija Infantry Brigade on particular dates.  I can -- I

22     can provide the ERN if people are then able to cross-reference that to

23     other data.

24        Q.   Could you please give us that ERN number.

25        A.   I have the -- the strength numbers here of 2.824, dated the 16th

Page 4733

 1     of September, 1992.  So then it would be a question of finding the

 2     document that is dated 16th of September, 1992, which would be

 3     ERN Y000-6240, which is a report by Colonel Milosevic.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Meanwhile, I can clarify what you said.  You might

 5     not be sure about reading on the chart.  By enlarging it, the strength

 6     was 800 to 1.000.

 7             THE WITNESS:  And yes, there on the screen is a document that I

 8     used when compiling the report as written by Pukovnik, Dragomir Milosevic

 9     giving the strength of the brigade of 2.824, including 131 officers, 165

10     non-commissioned officers, and 2.528 private soldiers, which is much

11     larger than a battalion.

12        Q.   This brigade?  It was singled out of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps

13     and it was attached to the Drina Corps when it was establishment; is that

14     correct?

15        A.   I have no information saying that the Romanija Infantry Brigade

16     was part of the Drina Corps.  I have it as part of the

17     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.  When was it resubordinated to the Drina Corps?

18        Q.   [In English] I mean -- it's my mistake, sorry.

19             MR. LUKIC:  Obviously it is time for a break, Your Honour.  I

20     have to organise my papers too.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I would -- I would gladly accommodate you,

22     Mr. Lukic.

23             Could the witness first be escorted out of the courtroom.

24                           [The witness stands down]

25             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll take a break, and we'll resume at 25 minutes

Page 4734

 1     to 2.00.

 2                           --- Recess taken at 1.16 p.m.

 3                           --- On resuming at 1.38 p.m.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.

 5             Meanwhile, I might use the time and draw the attention the

 6     parties to the following.

 7             On the 1st of November of this year, the Prosecution filed a bar

 8     table motion regarding eight documents which were discussed in the expert

 9     report of Dorothea Hanson and relevant to matters dealt with during the

10     cross-examination of this witness.

11             On 2nd November 2012, the Defence responded that it did not

12     oppose admission of the documents and the Chamber admits the documents

13     into evidence.  And I'll read the numbers and invite Madam Registrar to

14     assign numbers to these documents.

15             65 ter numbers being:  05980, 08028, 16029, 02625, 03687, 11311,

16     03080, and the last one, 07213.

17                           [The witness takes the stand]

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, if you're ready, please proceed.

19             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

20        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Philipps, I apologise.  I gave you the wrong

21     reference number and thank you for correcting me.

22             In your chart, on the right-hand side, I think you can see that

23     there is mention in the second line of -- actually, under the big box

24     where the staff is, we have the Vogosca Operations and Tactical Group and

25     then there are three boxes on the left.

Page 4735

 1             In the second box there is the 2nd Motorised Brigade; however, as

 2     you can see, the abbreviation is 2 RMTBR, which actually stands for the

 3     2nd Romanija Motorised Brigade.  Is that correct?  And that unit was also

 4     attached to the Drina Corps?

 5        A.   Yes, as far as I can tell that is the 2nd

 6     Romanija Motorised Brigade attached to the Drina Corps on the 20th of

 7     November, 1992.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  The commander of this Motorised Brigade is

 9     Milorad Krstic, as stated here?

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, could you please assist us in finding

11     exactly what you dealt with over the last two minutes?

12             MR. LUKIC:  Your Honour, it's the -- you see the big box?

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

14             MR. LUKIC:  Underneath the big box there are sec -- next row,

15     yeah, the exact --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Oh, there they are.

17             MR. LUKIC:  [Overlapping speakers]

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Yes.  I found it.  Thank you.

19             MR. LUKIC:  You're welcome.

20        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Philipps, Milorad Krstic is stated here as

21     the brigade commander and, indeed, the document that you studied was a

22     dispatch that contains the name of Milorad Krstic.  However, I'm going to

23     show you and put it to you and then you can say whether you agree or

24     disagree.

25             I think this is Radoslav Krstic, son of Milorad, and he was the

Page 4736

 1     commander of this brigade and later joined the Drina Corps and became its

 2     commander.  Do you allow for this possibility?  Did you find any such

 3     reference in any other document?

 4        A.   I would refer to you evidence reference number Y000-0657 for the

 5     original document where I obtained the information relating to

 6     Milorad Krstic in that position.  And that may shed light on why I

 7     thought he was the commander.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Is there a 65 ter number known for that document so

 9     that we can check?

10             MR. LUKIC:  Your Honour, we stipulate that it's mentioned in that

11     document.  I checked the document.  But still it's not correct data.  So

12     I'm just asking if this gentleman saw something else in some other

13     documents so --

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  You would say this is what the document --

15             MR. LUKIC:  Yes.  Yes.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  But you have reasons to believe that it is not

17     correct.

18             MR. LUKIC:  That's right.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Nevertheless, madam -- yes.

20             MS. HARBOUR:  Yes.  The 65 ter number is 12046, Your Honour.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.

22             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

23        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Philipps, we did agree that the

24     2nd Romanija Motorised Brigade was separated from the Sarajevo-Romanija

25     Corps and was, in fact, attached to the Drina Corps at the time,

Page 4737

 1     actually, when Drina Corps was established and it became its integral

 2     part.  Would you agree with that?

 3        A.   Yes.  My documents show that it occurred on the 20th of November,

 4     1992.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  The next box that we see here on the right, next to

 6     the 2nd Romanija Motorised Brigade, is the 1st Gradiska Light Infantry

 7     Brigade.  The data that we have say that, indeed, there was such a

 8     brigade in the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps but for one month only.  After

 9     that period expired it returned to Gradiska, which is the front line

10     close to Croatia.  Would you accept that?

11        A.   As far as I can see from my records that I state that the

12     1st Gradiska Light Infantry Brigade was temporarily attached during

13     Operation Lukovac 93 from the 1st Krajina Corps.  I have no data about

14     where it went after being temporarily attached.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Let me go briefly back to the

16     3rd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade.  It's in the next line.  And there

17     is a solid line connecting it with the staff above.  Is it true that the

18     forming of the 3rd Sarajevo Light Brigade involved the brigades that were

19     also listed in this chart, such as the Kosevo, Rajlovac, and Vogosca

20     Brigades?

21        A.   The chart does state that the 3rd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade

22     was formed from the Vogosca Light Infantry Brigade.  And then shows the

23     various constituents of it after that time, and it was renamed from the

24     Vogosca to the 3rd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade at some time between

25     October 1993 and March 1994.

Page 4738

 1        Q.   On the right-hand side, the Vogosca Brigade is actually on the

 2     left of the box where we see the -- 3rd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade.

 3     Is it true that the Rajlovac Light Infantry Brigade also became part of

 4     the 3rd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade?

 5        A.   I have no data showing that to be the case.  But if you had

 6     information showing that to be the case, then that would be a useful

 7     addition to the chart.

 8        Q.   Do you have any information that the brigade shown to the right

 9     of the 3rd Sarajevo Light Brigade is the Kosevo Light Infantry Brigade,

10     also became part of the 3rd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade?

11        A.   Again, referring to my chart, I have no data that shows that to

12     the case.  But if we look at my later chart dated 1994 to 1995, we can

13     see that the -- those brigades that you have mentioned no longer appear

14     on the order of battle, and therefore they have either been renamed or

15     resubordinated.

16        Q.   Thank you.  You said yourself that the structure of the

17     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps varied over a certain period of time and we can

18     agree on that.  But can you tell us the average number of the brigades

19     that made up the SRK.  So I'm looking for an average number.  Was that 4,

20     5, 7, or 10?  Do you have any idea about that?

21        A.   An average over which period of time?  An average based on each

22     month, an average based on each day, or an average based on each year?

23     If it had five for a month and then later it had seven, I don't

24     understand how you could come up with an average number.  On a particular

25     day it had a certain number of brigades and on another day it had another

Page 4739

 1     number of brigades, so you could work out precisely how many brigades

 2     there were on a day-to-day basis.  This -- these charts aim to show the

 3     approximate number of brigades and how each brigade may have turned into

 4     another brigade at a different time.  So if we look at a chart for a

 5     particular year or a particular period of time, we can see that, for

 6     example, the Vogosca Light Infantry Brigade turns into the

 7     3rd Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade, but their both shown on the same

 8     chart.  Not that they both existed at the same time.  But it shows the

 9     progression in the same way it shows the change of leadership.  We could

10     have a chart for every month or every day that would show a different

11     number.  The number of troops rarely changed.  It was just the

12     organisation of the brigades.

13        Q.   Just now you said that the number of troops did not change but

14     earlier you said that at certain points enormous losses were incurred

15     which affected the number of troops.  Later on we're going to look at the

16     documents supporting this assertion.  But if we take the year 1993, for

17     example, do you know how many brigades were within the Sarajevo-Romanija

18     Corps in July or any other month?

19        A.   We could take it brigade by brigade, if that would assist.

20        Q.   Can you please give it some thought because obviously we're not

21     going to finish today and can you give us an answer tomorrow.  In the

22     meantime, I would like to move on.  Thank you.

23             I'd like to ask you something about the security department.

24     This section of the staff, what was their scope of responsibility?  Or

25     was that section part of the command?

Page 4740

 1        A.   As far as I understood from the documents relating to the

 2     formation of the SRK based on -- based on the 4th JNA Corps, the security

 3     is part of the staff rather than part of the actual command.  But I have

 4     very little data on the security section itself.  The reason I have very

 5     little data, I think there's only one document that relates to that

 6     organisation.  By its very nature, they were not -- they did not produce

 7     a great deal of documentation that we have discovered.

 8        Q.   Is it correct that all combat intelligence had to pass through

 9     this section, regardless of whether they were provided by the subordinate

10     units, troops, or some other sources, including, inter alia, the

11     Main Staff?

12        A.   Essentially I cannot answer that question.  I don't know the

13     answer to that question.  I would expect that that would be the one

14     central place where intelligence would have to pass through.  That would

15     certainly be the case with the British Army.  But I have no data about

16     the functioning of that part of the staff of the SRK, except documents

17     that explain how the 4th JNA Corps were to function.

18        Q.   Thank you.  You said today that there were battalions in the SRK

19     that numbered only 60-odd people; is that correct?  Do you know how many

20     such battalions were in the SRK with so few people?

21        A.   No, I don't know how many had so few without researching the

22     document in detail.  Many of the brigades are shown with an approximation

23     of the number of battalions based on the documents we've located.  If we

24     didn't locate a document pertaining to a battalion, then that battalion

25     is not shown on the chart.  It doesn't mean the battalion didn't exist.

Page 4741

 1     It simply means that we haven't found a document pertaining to that

 2     battalion.  Most of the data did not provide the strength of battalions.

 3        Q.   The battalions are composed of companies; is that correct?

 4        A.   That's correct.

 5        Q.   Have you come across information that some battalions are -- in

 6     the SRK were made up of only two companies?

 7        A.   It's quite possible that the battalions were made up of a

 8     different number of companies based on their strength or their location.

 9     So some we have documents that show they had six companies and others had

10     fewer companies.  Six is an unusual number of companies for a battalion

11     to have.  Equally, two or one is an unusual number.

12        Q.   Have you also found information that there were companies in the

13     SRK that number no more than a dozen troops?

14        A.   I don't recall finding any data of that type, but it -- I would

15     not be surprised to find companies at the strength of very few numbers.

16        Q.   Thank you.  Let us go briefly now to the Vogosca Operations and

17     Tactical Group.  It's depicted in the chart under the big box that

18     represents the staff.  You spoke about this formation today as well.

19     What is an operations group in the VRS, or, rather, in the SRK?  What are

20     its main characteristics?

21        A.   I'm by no means an expert on the use or formation of operational

22     groups.  But it appears that operational groups were formed for specific

23     purposes, for limited periods of time, and could be formed perhaps for

24     one operation and then disbanded and then reformed again at a later date

25     for a different type of operation, but might consist of a different

Page 4742

 1     number of brigades or additional brigades depending on the situation for

 2     which they were formed.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, I found this already on page 29 of

 4     today's transcript which explains --

 5             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.  I have follow-up question.  I just had to

 6     remind the witness about this document.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 8             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Then please proceed.

10             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you.

11        Q.   [Interpretation] So is this an operations group or a tactical

12     group?  Is that one and the same thing, the -- an operations group and a

13     tactical group?

14        A.   In my opinion, no, they're probably not exactly the same thing.

15     A tactical group, I suspect, is formed for a specific reason and is

16     likely to be smaller; and an operations group will be formed for a

17     specific operation, a larger event than a tactical group.

18        Q.   So during the period that you explored, and when you called this

19     an operations and tactical group, does that mean that only one of them

20     existed at the time or did both of them exist?

21        A.   I would have to refer to the individual documents that support

22     the unit that's called Vogosca Operational/Tactical Group.  It's worth

23     remembering that this -- that box really only represents a headquarters.

24     It has no troops as such.  The troops are entirely made up of the

25     brigades that become part of that group.  Putting two or three brigades

Page 4743

 1     together with a headquarters makes an operational group.  The operational

 2     group headquarters would simply have a small staff.

 3        Q.   During the Galic trial --

 4             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] And we can call up 1D419 for that

 5     purpose.  We need page 2.  The trial date is the 16th [sic] of June,

 6     2002.

 7        Q.   Lines 9 through 13 you were asked about the Vogosca

 8     Operational/Tactical Group, and then you said:

 9              "[In English] Tell us directly.  It is possible, of course, that

10     they are two separate organisations:  One, a Vogosca Operational Group;

11     the other one a Vogosca Tactical Group."

12             Since you said today that there is a document on the basis of

13     which you have drawn a conclusion, are you quite clear today whether

14     these are two or one and the same organisational group?

15        A.   Certainly at a point in time the Vogosca Operational Group

16     existed, and at a certain point in time a Vogosca Tactical Group existed.

17     I'd have to search the documents to see whether they both existed at the

18     same time.  I think it would be surprising if they both existed at the

19     same time.  Perhaps one existed for a period and then became a tactical

20     group as it got smaller.  But that's me surmising which is of little

21     value to the Court.

22        Q.   Let us agree, if possible, that you take a look at that and we

23     shall revisit this issue tomorrow.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, when you read from the Galic transcript,

25     I think the -- the vital part was missing, so could I invite you to do

Page 4744

 1     that again, because it now -- our transcript starts with "two separate

 2     organisations:  One a Vogosca Operational Group; the other one a Vogosca

 3     Tactical Group."  Could you read the whole sentence you just read again.

 4             MR. LUKIC:  "It is possible, of course, that they are two

 5     separate organisations:  One, a Vogosca Operational Group; the other one,

 6     a Vogosca Tactical Group."

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That it's just a mere possibility was not

 8     included in your quote.

 9             Please proceed.

10             MR. LUKIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

11        Q.   [Interpretation] This formation was definitely disbanded at

12     certain point after it had been formed.  You found out that that happened

13     on the 15th of September, 1992.  Actually, rather than me citing your

14     findings, can you please tell me what kind of information did you

15     discover with relation to the formation of this unit?

16        A.   It was formed at various times and various dates, and therefore

17     one must assume that it was disbanded in between times.  I refer

18     specifically to ERN Y000-3262, which is an order by

19     Colonel Dragan Marcetic reforming the VRS Vogosca Tactical Group on the

20     19th of June, 1993.  So there's a series of documents listed in my

21     alphanumeric index that relate to the formation and disbandment of the

22     Vogosca Operational Group and the Vogosca Tactical Group.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Philipps, you referred to a date when it was

24     reformed.  On your chart we see it's the 19th of July, 1993, whereas you

25     just said --

Page 4745

 1             THE WITNESS:  Yeah, I see --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  -- reforming it on the 19th of June, 1993.

 3             THE WITNESS:  Yes, sir.  I see that.  The document I have in

 4     front of me has it in brackets the date 1906 -- 19-06, 1993, whereas the

 5     chart says July.  So it would be worth me referring to the document to

 6     confirm the date, if that's required, whether it's June or July 1993.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 8             MS. HARBOUR:  Just to provide the 65 ter number, it's 3806.

 9                           [Trial Chamber confers]

10             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Thank you for your

11     assistance.

12        Q.   When this organisation was established at different points in

13     time, you don't know whether the aim of the organisation was the same

14     every time; right?  For one operation it could have been on one side of

15     the front line, and some other time it could have had to do with a

16     different operation.

17        A.   I suspect it was formed for different operations, but I can't see

18     it changing from one side of Sarajevo to the other, simply because of the

19     name of the Operational Group.  It's based in and around Vogosca; hence,

20     the name.  I'd have thought if an Operational Group were to be formed

21     elsewhere then it would have a different name.  So this group was formed

22     and reformed and disbanded at various times using the brigades in that

23     area, such as the Ilidza Brigade, the Ilijas Brigade, the

24     Rajlovac Brigade, and the Vogosca Brigade.

25        Q.   You don't have any information, or perhaps you do, whether all of

Page 4746

 1     these four brigades in their entirety were always part of this group.  Do

 2     you know which parts; if so, can you give us some more information about

 3     that?

 4        A.   I refer to the Evidence Reference Number I gave where a 65 ter

 5     number of 3806 was provided.

 6             MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please have a look at

 7     1D419, page 3, yet again.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lukic, if you can deal with that in two minutes,

 9     it's okay as far as I'm concerned.  If not, then we better adjourn.

10             MR. LUKIC:  It'd be better to continue tomorrow, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

12             Mr. Philipps, we will adjourn for the day, and I'd like to

13     instruct you that you should not speak with anyone or communicate in any

14     other way with whomever about your testimony, whether testimony given

15     today or whether testimony still to be given.  If that's clear to you,

16     we'd like to see you back tomorrow morning at 9.30.  Could you please

17     follow the usher.

18             THE WITNESS:  Yes, sir.

19                           [The witness stands down]

20             JUDGE ORIE:  We adjourn for the day and we resume tomorrow,

21     Thursday, the 8th of November, at 9.30 in the morning in this same

22     courtroom, III.

23                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.14 p.m.,

24                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 8th day of

25                           November, 2012, at 9.30 a.m.