130628ED

Page 13538

1 JUDGE ORIE: Can you hear me now? You can hear the interpreter

2 now?

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Witness RM279, before we resume, I'd like to remind

5 you that you are still bound by the solemn declaration you've given at

6 the beginning of your testimony; that is, that you'll speak the truth,

7 the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

8 WITNESS: RM279 [Resumed]

9 [Witness answered through interpreter]

10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic will now continue his cross-examination.

11 Mr. Ivetic.

12 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

13 Cross-examination by Mr. Ivetic: [Continued]

14 Q. Sir, one question that came to me before I get back to the

15 questions we left off at last session. I want to ask you about something

16 that some of the documents show, especially the documents of intercepts

17 from the police entity. They say that the "Pale radio relay" was being

18 monitored. Do you have knowledge of what communications node of the

19 former JNA this would be in reference to?

20 A. What I do know is that the task assigned to the personnel of the

21 State Security Service was to monitor the so-called political

22 communication. The political leadership of Republika Srpska was in Pale.

23 Pale is located similarly to Zvornik. It was probably the end point

24 radio relay station, which most likely went via Jahorina and to

25 Veliki Zep. That way, they could monitor the frequency arriving from

Page 13539

1 Veliki Zep going on to Pale and the other way around, and they were able

2 to listen in.

3 Q. Thank you for that. And now I'd like to take off where we left

4 off yesterday at document 1D1067 in e-court.

5 MR. IVETIC: But if we could please not broadcast that to the

6 public.

7 Q. And this is in relation to the testimony that we just started

8 about you having received money from the Office of the Prosecution of the

9 Tribunal.

10 MR. IVETIC: And if we can look at --

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Could you just give the ID number again, please.

12 MR. IVETIC: Yes, 1D01067.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

14 MR. IVETIC: And if we could turn to page 2 in both versions of

15 this document. And now we have it up on the screen in both languages.

16 Q. As you can see, sir, this is a note to file by an attorney of the

17 Prosecution team dated 21 May, 2010, but reporting of something that

18 occurred in May of 2007. And I will not be mentioning your name, but it

19 says here that you were retained by the OTP in May 2007 as a

20 consultant --

21 MR. IVETIC: I apologise, there is a problem with the

22 translation. I'm told the B/C/S translation is not coming through to

23 either co-counsel or to the accused.

24 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand from Mr. Stojanovic's gestures that

25 it has been fixed.

Page 13540

1 MR. IVETIC: Thank you.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Let's proceed.

3 MR. IVETIC: Thank you.

4 Q. Sir, I will start from the beginning. This document talks about

5 something that occurred in May of 2007, and it says you were retained by

6 the OTP in May of 2007 as a consultant to evaluate the expert report

7 entitled: "Analysis of Interception of Radio Relay Communication of the

8 Army of Republika Srpska," dated 23 April, 2007, and the evidence of

9 Popovic Defence expert, Djuro Rodic, concerning the interception

10 capabilities of the ABiH 2nd Corps Anti-Electronic Warfare Unit. It says

11 you rendered consultative services to the OTP from 16 May to 25 May 2007

12 for which you received remuneration in the amount of 2.000 US dollars,

13 travel expenses, and the applicable daily subsistence allowance.

14 Sir, is the information contained in this letter truthful and

15 accurate that you were a consultant for the Prosecution?

16 A. This is it.

17 Q. Now, sir, is the information contained in this letter truthful

18 and accurate that you were paid 2.000 US dollars, plus travel expenses,

19 plus daily subsistence expenses?

20 A. I really don't know precisely. I said in my testimony that I

21 received around 1 and a half thousand German marks. They paid for my

22 hotel and expenses from here. I can't recall the figure exactly, but it

23 certainly wasn't more than that.

24 Q. Thank you, sir. Now if you look at the end of the letter on the

25 bottom of the page in both languages, it says you:

Page 13541

1 "Conceded that often there were imbalances in the audibility of

2 collocutors in intercepted conversations and that sometimes only one

3 speaker could be heard. He explained that this phenomena in terms of

4 duplex 2 frequencies and simplex single frequency radio transmissions but

5 noted that the VRS's poor equipment and maintenance practices, as well as

6 the failure of its personnel to follow basic protective protocols

7 contributed to the ability of the anti-electronic warfare unit to

8 intercept duplex communications on a single frequency."

9 Sir, is this letter truthful and accurate as to this recitation

10 of what it was that you told the Office of the Prosecutor back in

11 May of 2007?

12 A. This is absolutely correct. The question was how can one

13 sometimes hear both interlocutors, whereas on other occasions one could

14 only hear one on the same frequency. We were taught in school that were

15 two basic reasons for it. One of the reasons is feedback, because the

16 microphone and the headset have basically the same function. If the

17 operator speaks loudly enough, it is picked up by his own head phone and

18 that can be heard in communication. There can also be differences in

19 workstation at radio relay nodes which can be switched and that is why

20 some communication can be picked up in that fashion although not always.

21 Q. Thank you, sir.

22 MR. IVETIC: Your Honours, I would tender this document as the

23 next exhibit number under seal.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

25 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D1067 receives number D135, under seal,

Page 13547

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 MR. IVETIC: I don't know if we need to have any --

4 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

5 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

7 MR. IVETIC:

8 Q. Sir, could you tell us what criteria was used to select documents

9 for use as evidence?

10 A. As far as I recall, there was no criteria. Whatever notebooks we

11 had at the time were piled together, a list was created, and they were

12 handed over.

13 Q. I want to ask you if you considered your work in selecting

14 documents was intended to assist the Prosecution to obtain convictions of

15 former VRS officers?

16 A. I don't see it that I way. I did my job, I did what I was

17 ordered to do. There was no particular selection of documents. Only in

18 the first case did we make a selection singling out the documents

19 pertaining to General Krstic. The rest of it went in bulk.

20 Q. You said, sir, that you did what you were ordered to. Did you

21 have orders from your superiors to the effect that you should select

22 documents to assist the Prosecution to obtain convictions of former VRS

23 officers?

24 JUDGE ORIE: Could you clearly explain, because otherwise the

25 witness who is not a lawyer, Mr. Ivetic, in normal language for someone

Page 13548

1 not being a lawyer what you are seeking from the witness?

2 MR. IVETIC: Let me try and make it as simple as possible.

3 Q. Were you ordered to give everything to the Prosecution or were

4 you ordered to give only a selection of items to the Prosecution?

5 JUDGE ORIE: That's a different question. That's a different

6 question. Let me see. I gave you an opportunity to rephrase, but if

7 you --

8 What Mr. Ivetic would like to know is whether by providing this

9 material, whether selection or all of it, whether it was your purpose to

10 have persons to be convicted - that is, to be punished for what they had

11 done wrong - whether that was your intention when providing this? Is

12 this what was on your mind?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're absolutely right,

14 Mr. President. I had no agenda, no intention. Either myself or anyone

15 else. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. It seems that already

16 during the hand-over some people believed that people would be convicted,

17 but I did it in military terms. I handed over the document without

18 paying any regard to the fact whether someone would be convicted or not.

19 We had no contact with them. We simply went about our work which at some

20 points became relevant in terms of the documents relating to some events

21 in Bosnia and Srebrenica.

22 JUDGE ORIE: You may proceed, Mr. Ivetic.

23 MR. IVETIC: Thank you. I'd like to tender this document under

24 seal.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

Page 13549

1 THE REGISTRAR: Document 04712 receives number D317,

2 Your Honours.

3 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence under seal.

4 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

5 If we can have another document, 1D1068, and also not broadcast

6 this one to the public.

7 Q. Sir, what we have on the screen is a Tribunal witness statement

8 prepared by the Office of the Prosecutor and it's for an individual whose

9 name I will not mention, but I ask you to look at that name and tell us

10 if it is someone you are familiar with and in fact someone who was a

11 member of the same unit?

12 A. Well, looking at this information, I can say that the name is

13 familiar. I believe that he was here, too. Year of birth. This is an

14 engineer of safety and protection at work as far as I remember, and he

15 was a commander of a squad in facilities in the north.

16 Q. Thank you, sir. Now, if we look at the persons listed as present

17 for the interview, we see the names of various Prosecution personnel, and

18 then we see your name as well. Can you confirm that you were present at

19 this interview and at the time that this statement was taken from this

20 individual?

21 A. If it says here, I believe it's true, but I cannot really

22 remember at this moment because I spoke to many people. I can't even see

23 the date, really. Oh, yes, there it is. Yeah, probably. I know all

24 these people from the OTP, so probably I was present.

25 Q. Can I ask you, sir, how many other interviews of potential

Page 13550

1 witnesses with the Office of the Prosecutor did you participate in?

2 A. I really don't recall. Whatever -- however hard I try, I cannot

3 remember.

4 Q. Would it be more than one?

5 A. Probably.

6 Q. Do you recall why it was that you were present and what your role

7 was at the interview -- in this Prosecution interview and in this

8 Prosecution witness statement?

9 A. I think that my role here was only that of an electronic warfare

10 officer, to be present as a host.

11 Q. Okay.

12 MR. IVETIC: Your Honours, I would tender this document under

13 seal.

14 JUDGE ORIE: The statement or are you just -- I don't know

15 whether it's just a cover page, because that's apparently the presence of

16 the witness is what seems to --

17 MR. IVETIC: Be the problem, right. What I would then do is then

18 I would ask that it be MFI'd so that we can mange sure. I think that the

19 version I have is just the cover page but I notice in e-court there is

20 more pages, so I just need to -- I just need the cover sheet just to

21 memorialise the name of the other person so I can make sure that that is

22 corrected in e-court.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Then what we have in front of us is a five-page

24 document.

25 MR. IVETIC: Document.

Page 13551

1 JUDGE ORIE: You are interested in the --

2 MR. IVETIC: Cover sheet.

3 JUDGE ORIE: -- cover sheet. It will be MFI'd. And you can

4 upload the cover sheet only.

5 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D1 068 receives number D318,

8 Your Honours.

9 JUDGE ORIE: And is marked for identification under seal. I add

10 to this that D316 we discussed earlier, which was also MFI'd, is also

11 MFI'd under seal.

12 Please proceed.

13 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

14 Q. Now one last document I would look at with you, sir. It's

15 65 ter number 04713.

16 MR. IVETIC: And again, we should not broadcast the same to be

17 safe.

18 Q. And this is -- oh, I should wait for the English. Sir, this is

19 another correspondence evidencing the hand-over materials from the BiH

20 side to the -- to the Prosecutor, dated April of 1998 in relation to the

21 intercepts and notebooks, and it says here that it is being given to an

22 ICTY representative, but you'll see here that there is no title or ICTY

23 title for the person taking these materials but rather he appears to be

24 an active member of the United States army at the time of the hand-over.

25 Can you recall or explain for us why it is that the materials would have

Page 13552

1 been handed over to a member of the United States army?

2 A. I cannot explain why this was handed to a member of the US army,

3 but he was a member of that group so we didn't ask any questions. We

4 just asked for their IDs so that we could draft this record. I remember

5 the gentleman. He went to the facilities, he listened to the

6 communications, but whether he as a US army member worked for ICTY, I

7 don't know. We were ordered to put the tapes into boxes, close them,

8 glue them closed, and marked them. He received them and took them away.

9 Q. Do you know, sir, if this gentleman for the US army who was given

10 this material was, in fact, an intelligence officer of the US army or do

11 you know what branch he was from?

12 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Lee.

13 MS. LEE: Your Honours, I think the witness just testified that

14 he did not know whether -- whether he was an active member of the US

15 army. He believed that it was a member of the ICTY.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now --

17 MS. LEE: So I think this [overlapping speakers]

18 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Lee, Ms. Lee, Mr. Ivetic is entitled to put some

19 follow-up questions to further, perhaps a bit more profoundly, deal with

20 the matter.

21 So could the witness please answer, if he is able to do so, the

22 question that was put.

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, on the occasion of

24 the hand-over of these tapes, I was simply ordered to pack them, make a

25 list of them, and hand them over. The standard procedure was when I

Page 13565

1 for three years, and often operators and different people mentioned that

2 radio traffic procedures should be followed as well as protection

3 procedures. However, it all depended on the person's position.

4 MS. LEE: May I please have 65 ter number 20996AA, and it should

5 be under seal.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Lee, I'm informed that an English translation is

7 missing.

8 I see there is communication without words between

9 Madam Registrar and the team manager of the OTP. The OTP indicating that

10 it's uploaded, Madam Registrar trying to establish whether it has been

11 received.

12 MS. LEE: In the -- in the meantime, we could call up another

13 document if that assists. No?

14 JUDGE ORIE: It should be there in a second, I take it. It's all

15 about communications.

16 Please proceed.

17 MS. LEE: Thank you.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Now it's there.

19 MS. LEE:

20 Q. And in this document it says:

21 "X: Krstic has just come up here. He went back there, he'll

22 call me later. He'll look into it and will assign someone to co-ordinate

23 it ... yes, yes, I know ... hey listen, I know. Just take it easy, this

24 is an open line."

25 Witness, do you -- do you recognise this document to be one that

Page 13566

1 would have been produced by your unit?

2 A. It is probably from my unit. Without the cover page of the

3 notebook I can't say anything precisely, but it is probably from our

4 unit.

5 Q. And in this intercept it mentions an open line. Was this an

6 indication for you to know whether or not the VRS knew that you are

7 intercepting their -- that the ARBiH was intercepting their conversation?

8 A. I'll repeat yet again. The Army of Republika Srpska knew

9 100 per cent that we were monitoring such conversations. But might makes

10 right. They were the stronger one and they behaved the way they did. In

11 terms of the lie of the land, and hopefully I'm saying this for the last

12 time: In military terms, we had ideal monitoring facilities. In any

13 situation, in any terrain, and with any party, probably one will never

14 have another opportunity like that. These facilities were part of the

15 communications system of the JNA before the war.

16 Q. And -- thank you. You've testified today that the VRS personnel

17 did not always follow protocol. Do you recall saying that?

18 A. Yes.

19 MS. LEE: May I please have P -- [Microphone not activated]

20 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

21 MS. LEE: This phone was ringing.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Someone was calling, no one picks up the phone.

23 That's okay. Let's proceed.

24 MS. LEE: Actually, before we move on, can I -- may I please

25 tender 20996AA into evidence.

Page 13567

1 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

2 THE REGISTRAR: Document 20996AA receives number P1639,

3 Your Honours.

4 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence. Under seal?

5 MS. LEE: Under seal.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Let me see whether we need it under seal.

7 Could you give it some more thought, Ms. Lee, soon, whether it

8 really needs to be under seal as being just one page, one isolated page

9 of the document?

10 MS. LEE: It has -- it contains a signature.

11 JUDGE ORIE: It contains a signature.

12 MS. LEE: Of an intercept operator, Your Honour.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Under seal.

14 Mr. Ivetic, could I inquire with you. Is there any dispute about

15 awareness of the VRS that possibly they were monitored? So I'm not

16 asking anything about whether it could be done but whether there was

17 concern about being monitored, an awareness of -- well, that this could

18 happen?

19 MR. IVETIC: No dispute, Your Honour.

20 JUDGE ORIE: No dispute.

21 Ms. Lee, please proceed.

22 MS. LEE: May I please have P1305 [Realtime transcript read in

23 error "P105"] onto the screen.

24 JUDGE MOLOTO: It's supposed to be 1305, P1305. P1305.

25 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And it should not be broadcast.

Page 13568

1 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Lee, we have it on our screens now.

2 MS. LEE: Thank you, Your Honours.

3 Q. Witness, is this a document -- is this a document that would have

4 come from your unit?

5 A. The left-hand side document in Bosnian does originate from the

6 northern facility. On the right-hand side, the translation is not

7 identical to the original.

8 MS. LEE: Your Honours, this is -- I will only be referring to

9 the conversation contained in -- at conversation 11:49, and that's the

10 only conversation I will be relying on, and so --

11 JUDGE ORIE: If you then seek the corresponding B/C/S version,

12 what page is that in e-court?

13 MS. LEE: It's e-court page 2, Your Honour.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.

15 MS. LEE: Page 2, Your Honours.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, it is on the second page that we find the

17 corresponding B/C/S. There we are. I think we have established this

18 earlier. You'll find it at the bottom of the page in B/C/S.

19 MS. LEE: Yes, Your Honours.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

21 MS. LEE:

22 Q. Witness, this is an intercept from 11:49, and it says

23 participants panorama 3, switchboard, and Lieutenant-Colonel Savcic. Do

24 you see that in front of you?

25 A. Yes.

Page 13569

1 Q. And then when you read towards the beginning, it starts:

2 "C: Who wants to know?

3 "P: Panorama 3.

4 "C: Panorama B?

5 "P: Panorama 3.

6 "C: Ah-ha, you need Lieutenant-Colonel Savcic, right?

7 "P: Go fuck yourself, you stupid idiot.

8 "C: Just a moment, you're connected."

9 And further down, if we could go to the next page -- oh, on

10 B/C/S, yes, that's on it, it says:

11 "Slow down --"

12 MS. LEE: Can we go down in the English version as well. Can we

13 go to the next page on the English version? Thank you.

14 Q. It says:

15 "P: Slow down. Slow down. Don't talk too much. You should

16 know better. And tell that idiot there next time not to mention any

17 names, ranks, or last names.

18 "S: Who is this?

19 "P: We know each other well, you and I.

20 "S: And whom should I ask ...

21 "P: Panorama, man, don't do this, you're worse than the man

22 before you!"

23 Now based on this -- on -- on what you see on this intercept,

24 does this confirm that the VRS personnel did not follow the basic

25 protocols when transmitting communications?

Page 13570

1 MR. IVETIC: I would object to the [indiscernible] conclusion

2 that it goes beyond the document that is before us.

3 MS. LEE: Your Honours, I'm asking whether -- or reading by -- by

4 reading this intercept it confirms what he had testified to today in

5 D315.

6 JUDGE ORIE: So what you want to know from the witness is whether

7 he recognises this as an example of what he said --

8 MS. LEE: Said before.

9 JUDGE ORIE: -- before that procedures were not --

10 MS. LEE: Followed.

11 JUDGE ORIE: -- followed. Do you recognise this as an example of

12 not following procedures?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Next question please, Ms. Lee.

15 MS. LEE: May I please have 65 ter number 29041 on e-court,

16 please. And my I've the usher's assistance to provide this notebook to

17 the witness. I would like to have the first page, the picture page on

18 the screen, please.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, is it -- could I ask whether

20 it's the Defence's position that the Snow White and the Seven Dwarves

21 originate from 2012 or that it may have been produced earlier? 2001, I

22 apologise.

23 MR. IVETIC: It's our position, sir, that we don't know when this

24 book was produced, and there is a -- as I believe I was very precise in

25 my wording that there was a stamp on the beginning of the cover page from

Page 13571

1 the manufacturer that had this notation. And we don't know what it means

2 at this point. But we do not believe that the book originally from 1995,

3 that it was from sometime subsequent from 1995, and we're still

4 undertaking investigations to determine that.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do we have the original somewhere so that we

6 can see whether it's the stamp or --

7 MS. LEE: The original has been provided to the witness.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could we have for one second a look at it?

9 Do the parties agree, you talked about a stamp, Mr. Ivetic,

10 that's the reason why the Chamber wanted to look at it, but it is a part

11 of the print that resembles a stamp but is just part of the print of the

12 cover.

13 MR. IVETIC: From the manufacturer which is what I said when I

14 asked the witness this question.

15 JUDGE ORIE: No, no, just a minute ago you talked about a stamp.

16 And, Ms. Lee, please proceed.

17 MS. LEE:

18 Q. Witness, have you examined the document before you, the book

19 before -- notebook before you, and does it correspond to the image that

20 you have in front of the screen?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. In the bottom left corner there is a place where you have

23 presumably an image which corresponds to a finger-print of this chipmunk

24 that's appearing on the image. I just want to -- for you to see whether

25 or not the picture form is part of a cover rather than any stamp that may

Page 13572

1 have placed by anyone else?

2 JUDGE ORIE: There seems to be no dispute about that, that it's

3 not a stamp placed by anyone else than the entity which produced the

4 cover.

5 MR. IVETIC: Absolutely.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Ms. Lee.

7 MS. LEE: Yes, and I just wanted to clarify for the record that

8 there is no manufacturing stamp but it's just part of a cover that's part

9 of the image, the graphic, that's appearing as -- on the notebook.

10 That's all.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but it's agreed upon by the parties so we can

12 continue.

13 MS. LEE: Then may I please have this exhibit entered into

14 evidence?

15 MR. IVETIC: No objection.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

17 THE REGISTRAR: Document 29041 receives number P1640,

18 Your Honours.

19 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.

20 Public?

21 MS. LEE: Public exhibit, Your Honours.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Public exhibit.

23 MS. LEE: And I have no further questions for this witness.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic, before I give you an opportunity to

25 further examine the witness, I would have one question for you, Witness,

Page 13593

1 MR. JEREMY: Thank you, Your Honours.

2 Examination by Mr. Jeremy:

3 Q. Good afternoon, Witness.

4 A. Good afternoon.

5 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could the witness kindly

6 be asked to approach the microphone. Thank you.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Could you come a bit closer to the microphone,

8 Witness.

9 Please proceed, Mr. Jeremy.

10 MR. JEREMY:

11 Q. Witness, you've been informed about the protective measures in

12 place for you. In addition to these, if you feel an answer might reveal

13 your identity or relate to a private matter, then feel free to ask the

14 Judges to move into private session.

15 A. Very well.

16 MR. JEREMY: Could we please see on our screens 65 ter 29002,

17 which should not be broadcast. It is a pseudonym sheet.

18 Q. Sir, without reading aloud what is on the screen, can you see

19 your name?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And at the bottom of the screen [microphone not activated]

22 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

23 MR. JEREMY: Sorry.

24 Q. And at the bottom of the screen, is that your correct date of

25 birth?

Page 13594

1 A. Yes.

2 MR. JEREMY: Your Honours, I tender into evidence 65 ter 29002,

3 under seal as the next Prosecution exhibit.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

5 THE REGISTRAR: Document 29002 receives number P1653,

6 Your Honours, under seal.

7 JUDGE ORIE: P1653 is admitted into evidence under seal.

8 MR. JEREMY:

9 Q. Now, sir, did you testify in the case of Prosecutor versus

10 Tolimir on the 27th of May, 2010?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And did you listen to a recording of your evidence in that case

13 in preparation for your testimony here today?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And did this recording accurately reflect what you said in the

16 Tolimir case?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And do you affirm the truthfulness and accuracy of that

19 testimony?

20 A. Yes, I affirm that everything I said is accurate.

21 Q. And lastly, if you are asked the same questions today during

22 those proceedings -- during these proceedings, sorry, as you were asked

23 in that case, would you give the same answers in substance?

24 A. Yes. I believe I would.

25 MR. JEREMY: Your Honours, the Prosecution tenders, under seal,

Page 13595

1 65 ter 29001 as the next Prosecution exhibit.

2 MR. LUKIC: Your Honours, I just want to draw your attention to

3 the fact, and we also discussed it recently since we were not actually

4 aware of it, the witnesses were asked to confirm audio, and then

5 transcript was introduced. And we saw on many occasions that there were

6 discrepancies. So I think that should be cured somehow. If -- this

7 witness cannot confirm that the transcript is accurate. He confirmed

8 that audio is transcript -- accurate.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Now, if there are any concerns about discrepancies

10 between audio and transcript in relation to this witness --

11 MR. LUKIC: We don't have audio.

12 JUDGE ORIE: You don't have audio but --

13 MR. LUKIC: I think maybe we do [overlapping speakers]

14 JUDGE ORIE: But I think you have certainly access to audio.

15 MR. LUKIC: I think Ms. Stewart is nodding that we do. But I

16 didn't check audio, I was reading only transcript. And I told you only a

17 couple of days ago we actually were concerned about this issue. We were

18 not thinking about it before.

19 JUDGE ORIE: It's a valid issue you're raising, Mr. Lukic.

20 Mr. Jeremy.

21 MR. JEREMY: Your Honours, I understand that the B/C/S audio for

22 all of the witnesses we are calling has been disclosed to the Defence.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, the Chamber, of course, is aware that

24 usually the transcript is fairly accurate, and if there's -- if it's

25 noticed at any moment that mistakes are made, and mistakes, of course,

Page 13596

1 are human, then they will be corrected immediately. Now, if there is

2 anything which remained unnoticed, a discrepancy between audio and

3 transcript, then, of course, the Chamber is quite willing to consider

4 that. And most important, if you would inform the Prosecution about it,

5 I take it that they'll draw the attention of the witness to that. But

6 we, of course, we can't start comparing the original. That's a bit of a

7 problem because it is, first of all, the audio in B/C/S; second, it is

8 then the transcript on the basis of the translation by the interpreters,

9 the interpretation. If there is any concern at any moment or if there is

10 any vital matter where you would like to raise this matter, of course,

11 the Chamber is open to hear it. If it is your position that we should

12 not, for that reason, further admit into evidence the transcripts, then

13 it needs a bit more than just a loose observation.

14 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, first it's not our job to check their

15 65 ter statements -- 92 ter statements. It's their job. We will not be

16 asking them to check if our -- if we introduce some transcripts. We

17 don't have manpower to check audio and transcripts. We cannot do that.

18 They are much more powerful. So if they want to introduce transcripts,

19 they should make certain that transcript is accurate transcription of

20 audio. So it cannot be continued this way, that they check audio and

21 then introduce transcripts. And it's not our job to check it.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the general rule in this Tribunal is that the

23 parties and the Bench rely on the accuracy of interpretation and

24 transcription up till the moment where there are reasons to believe that

25 mistakes are made, identified by whomever. I think that is done all the

Page 13597

1 time. The Chamber relies on the interpretation and the transcript when

2 we are preparing for the judgements, for example, when we are evaluating

3 the evidence, and to require that a party should do that job again is not

4 something that comes to my mind at this moment. But, again, I said if

5 you want to do more than just to raise the issue in this case and without

6 any specific complaints but more in general, then you would have to make

7 more thorough submissions on the matter.

8 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour --

9 JUDGE ORIE: And we will consider them.

10 MR. LUKIC: Just again if I may, this is 92 ter statement. The

11 witness is, according to the Rules, required to confirm the accuracy.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

13 MR. LUKIC: In this case --

14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic --

15 MR. LUKIC: [Overlapping speakers]

16 JUDGE ORIE: -- I do understand that that is your position, but

17 if you want to change in a rather dramatic way the practice which was

18 applied in many cases, and was applied in this case consistently, which

19 you are fully entitled to do, then we cannot do it in five minutes with

20 oral arguments, then you should make thorough written submissions on the

21 matter, the Defence will have opportunity to respond to that, and then

22 the Chamber will consider it. Of course, the Prosecution will further

23 respond.

24 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Not to discourage you to do it, but if you do it

Page 13598

1 then you should do it thoroughly.

2 Does that mean at this moment that you object against admission?

3 MR. LUKIC: Yes, we do object against the admission.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Jeremy, any response to that?

5 MR. JEREMY: The particular transcript that we're relying on is

6 from the Tolimir case. I understand that the transcript was checked

7 carefully as that case went through, and any corrections that needed to

8 be made were made at the time. It's the -- it's been the practice with

9 all 92 ter witnesses who testified in B/C/S for whom we only have a

10 English transcript that they listen to the audio of the B/C/S and confirm

11 the accuracy of that audio, and on the basis of that we rely on the CLSS

12 translations and we rely on the accuracy of the transcripts from each of

13 the cases that we rely and to tender via 92 ter.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.

15 MR. LUKIC: If I may -- one thing before you start, Your Honours,

16 please. The previous witness --

17 JUDGE ORIE: You may add something, Mr. Lukic, although -- let me

18 see, yes. Yes. You are. You --

19 MR. LUKIC: The previous witness corrected his transcript also

20 from Tolimir case on multiple occasions, today and days before.

21 [Trial Chamber confers]

22 JUDGE ORIE: Any other objections, Mr. Lukic, apart from the one

23 you raised?

24 MR. LUKIC: We'll see at the end if there are some discrepancies

25 or not. I cannot tell you now.

Page 13599

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

2 MR. LUKIC: And that's the only objection what we can raise at

3 this moment.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If it turns out that there are discrepancies,

5 of course the Chamber will further consider those discrepancies. The

6 Chamber denies the objection and will follow the practice it has followed

7 in this case. But, as I said before, we certainly do not discourage you

8 to raise the issue in thorough submissions, we'll then receive the

9 responses, and whether that will then change anything, we'll see that.

10 At this moment, Madam Registrar, the transcript would receive

11 number?

12 THE REGISTRAR: Document 29001 receives number P1654,

13 Your Honours, under seal.

14 JUDGE ORIE: P1654 is admitted into evidence under seal.

15 Mr. Jeremy.

16 MR. JEREMY: Your Honours, as regards associated exhibits, I

17 anticipate using some of these during the course of the direct

18 examination. Although there are only four that I'm not -- already

19 admitted into evidence, but I would propose to deal with them at the end,

20 at the conclusion of the witness's evidence.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you would prepare a list later whether the

22 descriptions are -- that Madam Registrar can already prepare the

23 assignment of numbers to it and we'll deal with it at the end of the

24 testimony of the witness.

25 MR. JEREMY: Of course.

Page 13600

1 JUDGE ORIE: You may proceed.

2 MR. JEREMY: Your Honours, I would now like to read a short

3 summary of this witness's evidence, the purpose of which I have explained

4 to the witness.

5 During 1994 and 1995, the witness was an employee of the

6 State Security Service or SDB and was involved in the monitoring,

7 recording, and transcribing of intercepted radio signal communications

8 involving the VRS and the Bosnian Serb leadership.

9 He describes the location at which this was conducted, the staff

10 involved, the equipment used, and all stages of the process and

11 procedures involved in the intercepting and transcribing of those

12 intercepted communications. This witness was personally involved in all

13 aspects of this process.

14 In particular, the witness describes how the team would intercept

15 VRS communications. If an intercept operator considered an intercepted

16 conversation important, this would be recorded using a reel-to-reel

17 recorder known as a UHER, U-H-E-R, once recorded, while the first man

18 continued to monitor the radio waves, typically, a second would

19 transcribe the recorded conversation onto paper. It would then be typed

20 from the paper into a computer, encrypted, manually logged in an index,

21 and sent to the headquarters. The witness also details the meticulous

22 steps taken to ensure that intercepted communications were accurately

23 recorded and speakers within those conversations accurately identified.

24 That concludes the summary, Your Honours.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Jeremy.

Page 13601

1 If you have any further questions, you may put them to the

2 witness.

3 MR. JEREMY: Thank you, Your Honours.

4 Q. Witness, in your Tolimir testimony, Exhibit P1654, you provide a

5 brief overview of the interception process in which your unit was

6 engaged. And I'd like to fill in some of the details of that. You say

7 that you had a four-man team who worked in shifts of two. That's from

8 transcript page 2054, e-court page 9. You also state your team operated

9 from a northern location, as did the 2nd Corps of the ABiH.

10 My question is: Did your team work in the same room as the ABiH

11 or was it a different room?

12 A. We were in the same facility, the facility being one of the

13 former armed forces where all of the premises were used by the 2nd PEB

14 2nd Corps. One of such rooms was assigned to us. In the room, we set up

15 work, and that is where the entire process took place. That is also

16 where the people rested.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, could I already now ask you to focus your

18 answers on what was asked. The question simply was: Were you in the

19 same room with the ABiH. The answer simply was no, you were not in the

20 same room. And whether someone was resting there or whether -- that's

21 all, whether it was set up for work. If Mr. Jeremy would like to know,

22 he'll certainly ask you.

23 Please proceed, Mr. Jeremy.

24 MR. JEREMY: Thank you, Your Honours.

25 Q. Witness, in your written evidence, P1654, you provide an overview

Page 13602

1 of the equipment you used in the interception process. And I'm not going

2 to ask you to do that again. But what I would like you to do is -- is to

3 try and put the Court in the shoes of an intercept operator working a

4 shift. Typically, what equipment does he have in front of him and what's

5 he doing, typically, in just a few sentences, please?

6 A. Very well. In the room there were two desks. On them, we had

7 all of the equipment that was foreseen to monitor and record and

8 reproduce all intercepts. There were two operators in the room. Before

9 them were a number of scanning devices. There was one device assigned

10 exclusively to monitor one channel, then there was a reel-to-reel tape

11 recorder, an UHER, so that would be it, more or less. If you want any

12 other detail, I'll be happy to explain exactly what kind of equipment we

13 had and what each piece was supposed to do.

14 Q. Okay. And while an intercept operator is listening to a

15 communication that he has intercepted, how would he know what frequency

16 that particular communication that he's intercepted is on?

17 A. The devices had a display where one could see the frequency

18 currently being monitored.

19 Q. Now, you mention the reel-to-reel tape recorder which I also

20 understand is known as UHER, and I'd like to discuss the practicalities

21 of the process of using that recorder, that UHER recorder.

22 MR. JEREMY: Now, Your Honours, we actually have a physical UHER

23 recorder in the courtroom which, if you think would be of any assistance,

24 we thought we might show to the witness to just basically take us through

25 the mechanics of the recording process. I've discussed this with

Page 13603

1 Mr. Lukic who didn't have any objections.

2 So if Your Honours think it would be of any assistance, then I

3 propose we show it to the witness.

4 [Trial Chamber confers]

5 JUDGE ORIE: It's not entirely clear in what way it would assist

6 us, but the Chamber is willing to take the risk that it will not assist

7 us and nevertheless spend time on it. Always everyone is talking about

8 an UHER recorder, I always understood UHER to be a factory. So therefore

9 not very specific on the type of what we actually look at.

10 But if you would try to do it as efficiently as possible.

11 MR. JEREMY: Yes, Your Honour.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Then please --

13 MR. JEREMY: I'll grab it.

14 JUDGE ORIE: -- show it to us. Now, the problem, of course,

15 always is that then that becomes a piece of evidence, and should be -- it

16 should be tendered, it should be stored as a --

17 MR. JEREMY: Your Honours, we have a picture of the UHER which is

18 in -- now in evidence as P1561.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes. If you think that the actual object adds

20 anything, then that should be in evidence as well. That's the

21 consequence of -- no, if you want to show the picture, then that's no

22 problem. Even markings are more easily made on pictures than on

23 recorders.

24 MR. JEREMY: In --

25 [Prosecution counsel confer]

Page 13604

1 JUDGE ORIE: If you make experiments, you should think over the

2 legal consequences as well.

3 MR. JEREMY: Your Honours, perhaps I'll proceed with my questions

4 with the witness, and if I think it becomes necessary to use the physical

5 UHER, then we can do that.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And use the photograph meanwhile.

7 MR. JEREMY: Okay.

8 Q. Witness, so I'd mentioned I'd like to discuss the practicalities

9 of the recording of an intercept with the UHER machine. Now, in your

10 testimony in the Tolimir case, you state that:

11 "When an intercept operator hears a conversation that he wishes

12 to record, he would press the pause button and the UHER device would

13 start to record."

14 And that's at transcript page 2058. Now, can you please explain

15 this because it sounds strange to say that the recording of a

16 conversation begins once the pause button is pressed? So could you

17 explain that, please?

18 A. Yes. At the moment when I spoke those words, I had the image of

19 an UHER in my mind which continues to record when you press the pause

20 button for the second time. And there is another model where when you

21 press the pause button you would stop the recording. That may be the

22 route of the misunderstanding.

23 When you wanted to record a conversation, you would have to

24 release the pause button for the recording to start. You asked me when

25 we would start to record. We would do so at the moment when we heard the

Page 13605

1 beginning of a conversation. We even got a signal when somebody's phone

2 rang, and we were ready to release the pause button which would

3 immediately start the recording. However, if those conversations were

4 very short, we sometimes were unable to record it or catch the beginning

5 because we were busy doing something else, and then the conversation

6 could begin with -- before we were able to release the pause button.

7 Q. So if I understand your evidence correctly, the UHER machine is

8 already set to record but the pause button is on, thereby preventing

9 recording. And when a conversation begins that the operator wants to

10 record, he released the pause button and the recording begins?

11 A. Exactly.

12 Q. [Microphone not activated] Now, you mention that there was

13 sometimes -- now, you mention that there were occasions on which you fail

14 to catch the -- the beginning of a recording because you were busy doing

15 something else. Now, again, in a few sentences, can you -- can you

16 explain to the Court why that might be the case? Why there might be a

17 delay between an operator hearing a conversation and the recording of

18 that conversation actually starting?

19 A. It did happen. I don't know how often. The operator was a

20 device ready to record on the reception side, but nobody is talking. And

21 then he moves to another device and uses it to scan frequencies to find

22 another potential interesting conversation. It could happen for someone

23 to set up a connection and say, "Hello, this is so-and-so, I need to

24 speak with so-and-so," and then we couldn't react so fast as to release

25 the pause button immediately. But we would then put down on paper that a

Page 13606

1 conversation between X and Y started on channel so-and-so at time stamp

2 so-and-so.

3 Q. And you mentioned that you would make a notation on a piece of

4 paper about who the conversation was between and the time that it

5 started. Now, was this piece of paper different to those pieces of paper

6 upon which somebody would transcribe the conversation that was recorded?

7 A. Yes. That sheet of paper was separate from the other paper on

8 which that conversation was subsequently reproduced. This former sheet

9 of paper was a small slip on which we noted the conversations, including

10 the elements that are mentioned. Sometimes those conversations were not

11 urgent. It wasn't so important for them to be reproduced immediately.

12 Then we would continue to record other conversations. And when we

13 thought it necessary to reproduce them, we went back to that slip of

14 paper with the elements jotted down on it, and we also read the counter

15 of the device so that the conversation could easier be located on another

16 device. So it was a manner to save time.

17 Q. And just so that I am clear, the transcriber of the conversation,

18 the subsequent transcriber of the conversation, would they have access to

19 this small slip of paper noting down the identities of the individuals

20 involved in the conversation?

21 A. Yes. The transcriber would get it together with the tape. And

22 then he would reproduce the conversation using both of these.

23 MR. JEREMY: Could the -- Your Honours, could the Court officer

24 please bring to our screens 65 ter 21028A. And while that's coming up,

25 this is an intercept dated the 16th of July, 1995, between Main Staff

Page 13607

1 duty officer and General Mladic.

2 Q. Witness, I'd like you to look at the intercept on the screen

3 before you and let me know whether you recognise this as an intercept

4 report prepared by your unit. Please take your time.

5 A. Yes. This is our reproduction. We did this.

6 Q. And can you explain how you are able to identify this as

7 originating from your unit?

8 A. Every time we would type the heading CSB/SDB Tuzla, the date and

9 the number at which this would be filed, and then the following remarks,

10 on the above date, monitoring, et cetera. So you see the frequency, the

11 channel, the participants, and the time-frame. This is characteristic

12 and this is how we proceeded in all reports, I think.

13 Q. Now, the introduction to this intercept indicates that

14 General Mladic was inaudible and in the conversation itself the other

15 participant does not refer to General Mladic by name. Despite this, the

16 person that transcribed this intercept identifies General Mladic as a

17 participant in the conversation. Can you explain how he could have done

18 so?

19 A. Let me first say that in no reproduction of ours we stated names

20 unless we had heard them or identified them in a different way. In this

21 case, I suppose that the switchboard operator said, "You have

22 General Mladic on the line," which was not recorded nor was it

23 reproduced, but the operator noted that in the introductory part.

24 Q. And in the B/C/S version of the intercepts, we see a combination

25 of letters and numbers at the bottom of the intercept report. Can you

Page 13608

1 explain these, please?

2 A. Yes. These are the code names or the code designations of the

3 employees of state security. In any correspondence, the employees

4 instead of using their full name they would state this code which

5 consisted of a string of letters and numbers. Those were the rules.

6 Q. And is there any significance to the order in which these letters

7 and numbers appear?

8 A. Yes, I forgot to say that. It was our practice for the one who

9 recorded the conversation is mentioned first, and the second one

10 mentioned is the employee who reproduced the conversation.

11 MR. JEREMY: Your Honours, I tender that as the next Prosecution

12 exhibit.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Madam --

14 MR. LUKIC: No objection.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

16 THE REGISTRAR: Document 21028A receives P1655, Your Honours.

17 JUDGE ORIE: P1655 is admitted into evidence.

18 MR. JEREMY: Your Honours --

19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jeremy, it just disappeared from our screens but

20 I saw some handwriting. Is that handwriting on the last document

21 translated as well? Perhaps you check that. Well, to have two times the

22 B/C/S doesn't help us in seeing whether it's --

23 MR. JEREMY: It doesn't appear to be translated, Your Honours. I

24 can -- I can request a translation of the handwritten part.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please have a look at it. I take it that

Page 13609

1 the Defence is better able to identify what approximately is written

2 there and how relevant and important that is.

3 MR. JEREMY: Your Honours, we could also ask the witness.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we can ask the witness.

5 Can you read what is written next to the words "very urgent" in

6 handwriting?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. It says "negotiations about

8 civilians." This is obviously a working version and this was added as a

9 remark that this is about civilians. I don't believe that it bears any

10 deeper meaning.

11 JUDGE ORIE: And do you have any idea who could have written

12 that? Or do you either recognise the handwriting, or was there a

13 routine? Who could add handwriting to such reports?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that I may even have been

15 the one who wrote this as a suggestion.

16 JUDGE ORIE: What do you mean by "as a suggestion"? For us to

17 understand who wrote that or any other suggestion in any other way?

18 Could you please repeat your answer.

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This reproduction is from the

20 northern location, it arrived at the communication centre encrypted over

21 the radio, and it was received at the headquarters of our service. I

22 went to that room very often. When such a document came in, I would read

23 it and write such a remark for the employee who was going to receive this

24 document. I now -- I wrote this to point out that this was about

25 civilians and that's all the significance it has.

Page 13610

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And I do you definitely recognise your

2 handwriting or is it just that you consider it possible?

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is my handwriting, after all.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.

5 Please proceed, Mr. Jeremy.

6 MR. JEREMY: Could we keep the document on the screen.

7 Q. Witness, I see but next to the handwriting there is a "very

8 urgent" writing and it appears in the B/C/S version of the document. Can

9 you explain why there is English there?

10 A. Yes. In these communications, depending on the urgency of

11 individual bits of information, in the upper part, where you can read

12 this "very urgent" label, we indicated some such things. Some reports

13 weren't really all that urgent but were still labeled as very urgent.

14 Q. But why did you use the English words "very urgent" in this B/C/S

15 communication?

16 A. It was a qualification. It was part of the terminology used by

17 our service. We used this very phrase, although it's an English phrase.

18 Q. Thank you.

19 MR. JEREMY: We can take that document down.

20 Q. Witness, we've discussed the process of recording of the

21 intercepted communications, and you've referred to pieces of paper on

22 which notations were made at the start of the conversations and which

23 were used to transcribe the communications from the recorded tapes. Now,

24 were these individual pieces of paper or were they part of notebooks?

25 A. At that time, we didn't have notebooks. We couldn't procure

Page 13611

1 enough. That is why I procured sheets of paper. I even remember very

2 well how I was able to do so and how I brought them to the location.

3 They were used in a firm for electronic data processing. They were blank

4 sheets and with perforated rims, and we used those. There were also

5 other kinds of paper in use but we mostly used this type.

6 Q. And as regards the tapes that you used, the tapes used in the

7 UHER recorders, was each intercepted communication recorded onto a

8 separate tape or were the tapes reused?

9 A. In practice we would record the conversation on a tape and mark

10 it in the fashion that I've described. If at any point a very urgent or

11 important conversation would begin, we would immediately take it off

12 and -- or, rather, record it and reproduce it. We recorded those on a

13 special tape, on UHER machine, and also mark the counter readings for

14 that specific conversation as well as the exact time and date. That's

15 how we made sure that the tape from which we copied that could be used

16 for further recordings, because we didn't have a sufficient supply of

17 audiotape.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Could I seek some clarification there, especially in

19 view of the terms used.

20 You said:

21 "If at any point a very urgent or important conversation would

22 begin, you would immediately take it off -- or, rather, record it and

23 reproduce it."

24 What do you mean by reproduction, that you would copy it on

25 another tape apart from the tape on which it was initially recorded?

Page 13612

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this is what it was

2 like. There was a reception set, a tape recorder on which we recorded

3 conversations, registered them, I explained to you how we went about it,

4 and then suddenly a very interesting conversation begins. We immediately

5 remove the tape and put it on another recorder for that other person to

6 reproduce it - that is, type it up on paper - then transfer it to a

7 computer, encrypted it, and forwarded it.

8 JUDGE ORIE: You said you immediately removed the tape. That is,

9 therefore, a tape on which a number of conversations are recorded. You

10 take that tape off, put it on another recorder, and then start working on

11 writing down what then should be the last conversation that was recorded

12 on that tape. Is that how I have to understand it?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Only because it was so urgent we

14 gave it priority, but at the same time, we took the opportunity to

15 reproduce the previous ones as well. And the machine that was left

16 without a tape would then get another tape so that we could continue to

17 record. And that very urgent conversation would be then copied to

18 another tape dedicated to very important stuff so that the original reel

19 could be put back to use as we were short of supply.

20 JUDGE ORIE: So the tape with the very important conversation

21 with all the proceeding ones would be put on another recorder, and from

22 there you started working on it, including that you would copy that very

23 important conversation onto another tape which then contained only the

24 very important conversations. Is that how I have to understand it?

25 Please proceed, Mr. Jeremy.

Page 13617

1 of the Army of BiH. It also happened that some urgent conversations be

2 exchanged even before and not at the end of the day.

3 Q. And when you received an intercepted communication from the ABiH,

4 before you forwarded it on to your unit, to your headquarters, would you

5 change the substance of that intercept in any way?

6 A. Yes, that's something I forgot to say. We had also agreed to

7 include in the heading of each report that we forwarded which had not

8 been created by our department; in other words, that it was taken from

9 the 2nd PEB of the 2nd Corps, we would designate in the heading that it

10 was taken over from the 2nd Corps PEB unit. Also, the operators at the

11 communications centre of the 2nd Corps PEB unit did the same. They would

12 note down that a report or the reports in question were taken over from

13 the State Security Service.

14 Q. Witness, I'd now like to briefly look at a few intercepts. The

15 first of which is 65 ter 27536A.

16 MR. JEREMY: I'd be grateful if the Court officer could please

17 bring that to our screens.

18 Q. And this is an intercepted communication dated the

19 16th of July, 1995, at 0830 hours between General Mladic and someone

20 called Dule.

21 Witness, I'd like you to take a look at the intercept at the top

22 of the screen on the left side with number 648. Do you recognise this as

23 an intercept prepared by your unit?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. How are you able to recognise it as being prepared by your unit,

Page 13618

1 briefly?

2 A. It is based on the heading: CSB, SDB Tuzla, the date, the

3 16th of July, and based on the sentence which follows as well as based on

4 the signatures of the two people involved, one of whom recorded the

5 intercept and the other one transcribed it, so we see all of the elements

6 that were used by the personnel in my unit.

7 MR. JEREMY: Your Honours, I'd tender that exhibit as the next

8 Prosecution exhibit.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

10 THE REGISTRAR: Document 27536A receives number P1656,

11 Your Honours.

12 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.

13 Please proceed.

14 MR. JEREMY: Could the Court officer please bring to our screens

15 65 ter 21037B. And this is an intercept dated the 16th of July, 1995,

16 2230 hours, between General Mladic and someone called Mane.

17 Q. Witness, referring to the first intercept on the screen before

18 you with number 671, the same question: Do you recognise this as being

19 an intercept report prepared by your unit?

20 A. Yes.

21 MR. JEREMY: And, Your Honours, I would tender that exhibit as

22 the next Prosecution exhibit.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

24 THE REGISTRAR: Document 21037B receives number P1657,

25 Your Honours.

Page 13619

1 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.

2 MR. JEREMY: Could the Court officer please bring to our screen

3 65 ter 28429A.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can you give the number again, Mr. Jeremy.

5 MR. JEREMY: Yes, 28429A. And this is the same date. It's the

6 second intercept that we just saw appearing in that sequence. And it's

7 between -- it's dated 2250 hours between General Mladic and a certain

8 Kostic 20 minutes after the conversation we just looked at.

9 Q. And same question, Witness, do you identify this as an intercept

10 report prepared by your unit?

11 A. I don't have that report on my screen. Sorry, sorry. It is the

12 next report, the one below?

13 Q. Yes --

14 A. 672?

15 Q. That's correct.

16 A. Yes. It is also our report.

17 MR. JEREMY: I tender that as the next Prosecution exhibit.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

19 THE REGISTRAR: Document 28492A receives number P1658,

20 Your Honours.

21 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.

22 MR. JEREMY:

23 Q. Witness, I'd like to show you a final intercept, one that you

24 looked at during your Tolimir testimony.

25 MR. JEREMY: Could the Court officer please bring Exhibit P01235

Page 13620

1 to our screens.

2 Q. And, Witness, while this is being brought to our screens, I will

3 refresh your memory by stating that this is an intercept from the

4 12th of July --

5 JUDGE ORIE: One second.

6 Madam Registrar.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Could the counsel please repeat the number.

8 MR. JEREMY: P01235.

9 THE REGISTRAR: The document is under seal, Your Honours.

10 MR. JEREMY:

11 Q. And, Witness, this is an intercept dated the 12th of July, 1995,

12 at 1250 that records General Mladic discussing the departure of buses and

13 trucks with an unidentified male person before General Mladic goes on to

14 state that:

15 "They've all capitulated and surrendered and we'll evacuate them

16 all - those who want to and those who don't want to."

17 And, Witness, I'm focusing on the first intercept in this report

18 with number 570. Now you've discussed this in your Tolimir testimony,

19 transcript page 2077, so I'm not intending to again go into any great

20 detail. But I would like to ask you how General Mladic would have been

21 identified in this conversation since he doesn't introduce himself and he

22 isn't referred to by another participant?

23 A. I'd like to seize this opportunity to mention that all of the

24 people working on these tasks were ham radio enthusiasts, people who

25 could identify voices well. Mladic's voice was something one could hear

Page 13621

1 publicly and it was no problem ever to recognise him. Given that it

2 appears that I recorded this conversation, I can confirm that I am

3 positive that it was Mladic. He can be heard.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I just get a clarification, Mr. Jeremy.

5 Witness, how do you determine that you recorded this from this

6 document that's written before us? Are there any initials of yours shown

7 somewhere?

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. If you look at

9 the bottom of the document, at least in the Bosnian version, there is a

10 sequence of numbers and letters being the code of the employees who

11 recorded and transcribed the two reports.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

13 MR. JEREMY: That concludes my direct examination, Your Honours.

14 No further questions.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Jeremy.

16 Mr. Lukic, are you ready to start your cross-examination?

17 MR. LUKIC: Yes, I am, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, you'll now be cross-examined by Mr. Lukic.

19 Mr. Lukic is counsel for Mr. Mladic, and you'll find Mr. Lukic to your

20 left.

21 MR. LUKIC: I told you I am, and obviously I'm not ready yet.

22 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

23 MR. LUKIC: Can I start?

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

25 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honours.

Page 13622

1 [Interpretation] I thought I would start with some general topics

2 but my learned friend, Mr. Jeremy, bravely embarked upon his examination

3 with a document which was assigned P1655. And for the rest of the day,

4 today, I'll be dealing with it.

5 Cross-examination by Mr. Lukic:

6 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, sir.

7 A. Good afternoon.

8 Q. I'll address you with "sir" because I cannot force myself to call

9 you 316.

10 A. Very well.

11 Q. On this document for which you said you had probably received and

12 made the handwritten notation, we can see that it is an intercept dated

13 the 16th of July, 1995. The time noted down cites as the conversation

14 being intercepted at 4.15 p.m.; correct?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. [Microphone not activated]

17 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Microphone, please.

19 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. Apologies. How precise were these time designations because this

21 was not recorded, correct? It was simply written by hand.

22 A. We had a clock in the office based on which we noted down the

23 time. Now, as for how precise it was, I believe it was because later on

24 we had this report encoded and in our log-book it received a new title

25 and number. In that new number, among other things, you can see the time

Page 13623

1 of encryption; in other words, one can compare this time with the time of

2 encryption. We strove, of course, to note the exact time.

3 Q. In any case, there shouldn't be great discrepancies. If there

4 are differences, they are by a minute or two?

5 A. I agree.

6 Q. Can you see from this document what was the route? It says here

7 Pale, frequency 836 megahertz, channel 13. Can you tell us which

8 transmitter was used to have the conversation recorded?

9 A. I'll try to explain. This specific frequency was found by us.

10 There must be a date in the log-book. And it was barely audible, thus we

11 had to install new antennae and at the end we received a better signal

12 and better audibility. In my department, we did not have information on

13 the position of radio relay routes used by the VRS. At this point in

14 time, we called it the radio relay route Pale. The frequency that you

15 can see here, if you were to look at military documents, I believe you

16 would find there exactly what radio relay route it is, what the

17 transmitters that were used were. We did not investigate that and we did

18 not have the necessary resources. We believe that this signal was

19 received by reflection, when it bounced off mountains, in other words.

20 We were not within the beam where this radio relay route would be

21 dispersed.

22 Perhaps to clarify further: In order to receive a quality

23 signal, we had to install and mount an antenna, a parabolic antenna, a

24 huge antenna of some 2 metres in diameter on the mountain.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, just for my understanding, and perhaps I

Page 13624

1 address the witness as well, the question was: Can you tell us which

2 transmitter was used to have the conversation recorded. I always

3 understood that the transmitter used is to send or to repeat the signal

4 and that the recording is not done by the transmitter but by the

5 reception station, and then subsequently the reel-to-reel recorder. Is

6 that what you meant and is that how you understood the question, Witness?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, you're right. Radio relay

8 directions -- well, this one specifically is RRU 800 under the

9 terminology of the former JNA. I don't know where the transmitter is

10 located.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Because your equipment recorded it and the

12 transmitter relays the signal to the -- to its destination.

13 Mr. Lukic, I was slightly confused by the language you used in

14 your question, but there seems to be no further misunderstanding.

15 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. Sir, I wanted you to tell us, if you know, and if you don't know

17 tell us you don't know: Can you tell and do you see from this document

18 from which direction this conversation was transmitted? Can you

19 determine that? Do you know?

20 A. I don't know where it was transmitted from. Except for the fact

21 that this frequency was linked to the Main Staff of the VRS. That's what

22 we found out in our work. And channel 13, actually, was Ratko Mladic's

23 telephone line.

24 JUDGE ORIE: And could you tell us how you did find out that that

25 channel 13 was, as you said, Ratko Mladic's telephone line? Is that how

Page 13625

1 it was used or by technical means?

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, you see this

3 frequency 836. It has two lateral stretches that contain 12 channels

4 each. That is a total of 24 channels which means 24 phone lines. How

5 did we know that this was Mladic's phone line? Because he personally

6 spoke on that line and he had a secretary there or whoever it was who

7 answered calls when Mladic was out. And after a short while, we

8 established that it was his phone number.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.

10 You may proceed, Mr. --

11 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.

12 JUDGE ORIE: -- Lukic.

13 MR. LUKIC: I need five minutes. I need five minutes. I have to

14 finish it today. Just this small issue.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. With the indulgence of the interpreters, et

16 cetera, transcriber. If you can finish in five minutes --

17 MR. LUKIC: Yes.

18 JUDGE ORIE: -- you're allowed to do so.

19 Please proceed.

20 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

21 Q. Sir, channel 13 where you say the secretary was answering calls,

22 according to you was that a real telephone at the Main Staff?

23 A. I don't know what that phone looked like. But Mladic spoke over

24 that phone, and when he was absent when people were calling to speak to

25 him, somebody would answer calls saying that he was out in the field.

Page 13626

1 But you can believe me that I've never seen that equipment because I was

2 not a member of military formations.

3 Q. All right. Thank you. Would you say that General Mladic took

4 part in this conversation if I were to say to you that it is not

5 contested between the OTP and the Defence that on that day at that -- at

6 this time General Mladic was in Belgrade?

7 A. Before this I was saying that we didn't enter anything we were

8 not certain about.

9 Q. Just a moment, please. You have just given us an explanation of

10 channel 13. Now you are changing your statement and saying that we never

11 entered anything that we didn't hear. Do you have information that on

12 the 16th of July, 1995, General Mladic was in Belgrade and was it

13 possible for him to speak on this channel?

14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jeremy. Mr. Jeremy.

15 MR. JEREMY: Your Honours, I think the characterisation of the

16 witness's evidence as having changed his statement is not accurate.

17 JUDGE ORIE: I do agree with that.

18 Parties do agree that Mr. Mladic was for the whole of the day on

19 the 16th of July in Belgrade?

20 MR. McCLOSKEY: I -- I'm sorry, we believe he came back sometime

21 in the --

22 JUDGE ORIE: Okay, so --

23 MR. McCLOSKEY: -- late afternoon or evening.

24 MR. LUKIC: No, no, no, we won't [Overlapping speakers] finish it

25 now.

Page 13627

1 JUDGE ORIE: Please, please.

2 MR. LUKIC: No, they claim that Mr. Mladic was at 1800 at medical

3 academy in Belgrade.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, you put to the witness that it was agreed

5 among the parties --

6 MR. LUKIC: Yes, it is.

7 JUDGE ORIE: -- that General Mladic was on the 16th of July in

8 Belgrade.

9 One second, one second.

10 This is ambiguous language to the extent that you could

11 understand that as that he was on that day in Belgrade. You could also

12 understand it that he was in Belgrade for the whole of that day. The

13 only thing, if you put it to the witness, it should be precise. That's

14 the reason why I inquired with the Prosecution on what exactly was

15 agreed, and that is what I expect you to put to the witness if you want

16 to put to him that Mr. Mladic was in --

17 MR. LUKIC: I can easily do that.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I'm not -- of course, I expect you --

19 MR. LUKIC: Okay.

20 JUDGE ORIE: -- to be easy to do that. And then Mr. McCloskey

21 will carefully listen and will agree that you reflected it accurately.

22 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Witness, on the 16th of July, 1995, General Mladic was at a

24 wedding from the early morning hours. At that wedding he was best man.

25 The first site where he stayed was a restaurant, then an Orthodox church,

Page 13628

1 then a restaurant again, and after 2000 hours or after that -- after that

2 hour he was recorded by Mr. Lesic on video which is an exhibit in this

3 trial, and he was at a meeting at the military medical academy?

4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, just limit it to what is relevant.

5 During what time it is uncontested between the parties that Mr. Mladic

6 was in Belgrade. That's the only thing that matters. Whether he was in

7 church or a wedding or at a funeral or -- that is not relevant. You

8 wanted to put to the witness that the parties agree that up to a certain

9 point in time Mr. Mladic was in Belgrade. If you put that to the

10 witness, that's sufficient, and then repeat your question.

11 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

12 Q. At least until after 1800 hours on that same day when he was

13 recorded by the OTP witness - who is giving evidence in this trial - he

14 was recorded on video at the VMA. There are also photographs taken at

15 the wedding which were also shown here.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, again, what you apparently want to put to

17 the witness is the following: Mr. Lukic puts to you that the parties

18 agree that Mr. Mladic was until at least 1800 hours or until shortly

19 after 1800 hours in Belgrade. Now, the question of Mr. Lukic is how you

20 can reconcile this with the recording made here, that he used this

21 communication channel. Could he have done so if he was in Belgrade?

22 That's the question.

23 Mr. Lukic, that's the question, isn't it?

24 Could he have used this channel of communication when being in

25 Belgrade until at least 1800 hours? Could you answer that question.

Page 13629

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if we read the first

2 sentence carefully which says:

3 "On the above date, monitoring the Pale radio relay, on frequency

4 836.000 MHz, Channel 13, at 1615 hours, we recorded a conversation

5 between the Main Staff duty officer," in other words the man sitting by

6 Mladic's telephone, and Mladic himself who could have been anywhere.

7 They were talking to each other and he was not in his office, if I was

8 clear enough.

9 JUDGE ORIE: You say wherever he was at that time, this

10 communication as recorded here, recorded from this communication channel,

11 could have been with anyone at any place?

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Certainly. That is correct.

13 Mladic could have been on any other telephone. Here, the duty officer at

14 the Main Staff used this phone on this channel to talk to Mladic. It

15 wasn't Mladic who was available on that number.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.

17 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

18 Q. So are you saying that it wasn't General Mladic talking on

19 channel 13? You couldn't hear General Mladic?

20 A. That is correct. It wasn't possible to hear him. On channel 13,

21 we heard what was being said on that phone. Often -- very often, we

22 didn't hear the other party. Until later, we founded the other frequency

23 carrying the voice of the other participant. In this case, the duty

24 officer of the Main Staff talked to Mladic who was somewhere else and who

25 couldn't be heard.