1 Friday, 1 December 2006
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 10.05 a.m.
5 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning.
6 MR. MOORE: Good morning, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Moore, we understand there's a matter to be
9 MR. MOORE: It's a very short matter just to assist the Court, it
10 can be raised now or later.
11 JUDGE PARKER: Now.
12 MR. MOORE: Quite simply this. 002 will be coming on Monday so he
13 will then be able to see his diary. What is proposed, and I believe has
14 been agreed to by the Defence is as follows: That Mr. Lunny and
15 Mr. Borovic's legal assistant will be present with an interpreter when a
16 copy of the diary is given to him. That copy of the diary will be
17 highlighted for the parts that the Defence wish to have interpreted or
18 clarified and obviously notes can be taken in relation to that.
19 We will have, as I say, an interpreter who will then make, I
20 believe, or I hope, a transcript of that at that time for the assistance
21 of all parties. As a failsafe, what I have suggested, Mr. Borovic, as far
22 as I'm aware agrees, I don't know about Mr. Lukic, I haven't had a chance
23 of speaking with him, is for a tape recorder to be playing throughout all
24 discussions to ensure that there are no errors. And that is my proposed
1 I understand Mr. Borovic agrees to that. And we'll find out from
2 Mr. Lukic. In his case, it's sometimes Pandora's box in the nicest
3 possible way.
4 And then with an intention on timings, there is the expert for
5 Mr. Sljivancanin to be called, I believe, on the Tuesday. For
6 cross-examination probably on the Wednesday, which Mr. Weiner will do.
7 I would ask the Court if it is possible for 002 to give evidence
8 on Friday. I dealt with that witness. I will not be in the jurisdiction
9 until Thursday evening. It can be dealt with by another member of the
10 team, but I would have thought it's more appropriate if in actual fact I
11 dealt with it. I made certain arrangements when we believed that in
12 actual fact this witness would be giving evidence in the week commencing
13 the 11th, and that was the reason that I will not be present next week.
14 It is not a personal engagement, it is a professional one.
15 JUDGE PARKER: I'm trying to remember the order we made,
16 Mr. Moore, unsuccessfully just at this moment. The times ordered allowed
17 for the witness to be completed within one day, didn't it?
18 MR. MOORE: As far as I remember, yes. And I would have thought
19 the ambit should be fairly tight, so there shouldn't be any necessity for
20 us to take him in chief to any significant degree, perhaps to just clarify
21 if there are any issues, how the diary was compiled, et cetera. And then
22 the matters can go to cross-examination. That would certainly be my
23 intention, to ask a few questions at the start to clarify certain issues
24 and then for my learned friends to deal with those topics.
25 JUDGE PARKER: Very well. Thank you.
1 Mr. Borovic.
2 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I just
3 have to say what the OTP told the Chamber earlier on was entirely
4 unfounded. I must say, that remark of theirs, that there was no time to
5 complete the translation -- others seem to have taken as long as a month
6 but my assistant, Ms. Guduric and I, took a mere day. We deciphered the
7 text, we copied the transcript, and she translated it. We have several
8 days left for the other Defence teams and I believe we could start
9 questioning the witness next Monday. There will be no problem at all with
10 that diary just because we displayed good faith and good will. All these
11 extra steps that ought to be taken apparently with the witness coming here
12 and then going through the whole thing with him, that will not take more
13 than half an hour, perhaps up to an hour. Today, I do indeed agree with
14 Mr. Moore, but the important thing is to show some good will to get things
15 done, because when there is good -- where there is good will, things get
17 I've done this too for the benefit of the Chamber. We'll have the
18 English and the Serbian on the same page side by side all the relevant
19 sections, the left half of the page will be the Serbian the right half of
20 the page the English. It will be very easy to follow. It will make for
21 greater ease of handling. The Chamber will have a copy. The OTP will
22 have a copy. But formally, we might just consider doing that on Monday,
23 and I hope the OTP agree.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much, Mr. Borovic.
25 Mr. Lukic.
1 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I am slightly taken aback, and I do
2 have to place this reservation on the record. I was not party to the
3 negotiations between Mr. Moore and Mr. Borovic because of problems of my
4 own related to our case, but there's one thing that is still bugging me
5 and perhaps Mr. Moore could provide an explanation.
6 My understanding was the interpretation unit should sit down with
7 the witness as well as representatives from both teams merely for the sake
8 of translating a document. But now my understanding is Mr. Moore
9 mentioned some explanations in case questions will be asked of the
10 witness, in case the witness will be expected to offer further
11 explanations, well this is a different ballgame altogether. This is some
12 sort of an interview with both parties involved. If indeed that is the
13 case, then we should request that Defence counsel be present since this
14 can later be used as an interview of the witness in it's own right, later
15 on, during his actual appearance. If all Mr. Moore has in mind is the
16 translation itself, then I have no objections to raise, and on top of
17 that, we can have the audio recording of the interview.
18 There is another thing. Mr. Moore said this witness should start
19 next Friday, although personally I might back that motion - I was the one
20 who did P002 so I will have to prepare for Thursday - I could certainly
21 use an extra day. But my real concern is: Can we do this in a day? Can
22 we all abide by this guideline? Personally I believe that we can but
23 frankly I don't like always to be the last one left watching the clock.
24 As far as I know, the witness is only here for cross-examination and
25 redirect. I don't think there is any need, really. The witness already
1 explained during his examination in chief how he had kept the diary if we
2 abide strictly by the guidelines provided by the Chamber as suggested in
3 relation to OTP expert witnesses, if a time limit is set in the strictest
4 possible terms, as was the case with Mr. Pringle and Mr. Theunens, then I
5 agree. We'll play along. But one thing I would like avoid is -- well,
6 one thing I might say is Mr. Moore was saying another hour, and it turned
7 out to be an hour and a half so that requires some changes. If we say
8 Friday, then so be it but that's certainly not reason enough for us to
9 refrain from asking more than a 15-minute worth of questions and then the
10 questions -- and then we leave the witness to be examined for the whole
12 If that's the ruling, that's the ruling. It applies equally to
14 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Vasic.
15 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. Good
16 morning. Mr. Moore didn't mention me specifically about this but maybe I
17 can make a contribution to this debate. In your 17th of November ruling,
18 Your Honour, and it was a ruling about this, you did set a time limit for
19 Witness P002. Mr. Mrksic's Defence 20 minutes, Mr. Radic's Defence 70,
20 and Mr. Sljivancanin's Defence 70 minutes, which leaves my learned friend
21 Mr. Moore for 45 minutes for any redirect.
22 If we stick to this, this should add up to one whole day, roughly
23 speaking, which in turn should allow us to finish in a single day, that
24 specific Friday. That's all I wanted to say, thank you.
25 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Moore.
1 MR. MOORE: Your Honour, may I just clarify one or two matters.
2 The first thing is we have asked the Defence to please provide to
3 us highlighted copy of the areas that they want translated. We have not
4 received that still. So that has to be done. We asked for that to be
5 done for 10.00 this morning. That has not been received.
6 What I am trying to do is to ensure that there is a system in
7 place that there will be no difficulties either way, and that there is a
8 process whereby if there are any doubts, that the tape recorder can deal
9 with it.
10 The reason why I say Friday was twofold. One, because Mr.
11 Sljivancanin is calling his expert on the Tuesday, the Wednesday, and may
12 go into the Thursday. I also accept my own particular problem, but
13 Mr. Weiner could do that, if needs be.
14 But we still have not got the area that needs translated, and that
15 is a problem that we are finding.
16 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
17 Mr. Borovic.
18 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] My learned friend, there was a
19 verbal ruling by the Court telling us what exactly to translate and which
20 specific paragraphs. I must have told you at least three times the
21 numbers of these paragraphs was specified. I won't be highlighting any
22 questions that I may ask in yellow, that's the only thing I will not do.
23 I was asked to highlight in yellow the portions in relation to which I
24 will ask specific questions. I'm not duty-bound to do anything like that
25 because that -- that might prepare the witness for what I'm about to ask
1 and I do have a certain right to try and surprise the witness a little, at
3 But all the relevant paragraphs that will be raised will be
4 highlighted for the benefit of the OTP so why do we keep tiring the
5 Chamber with things that should not be any real concerns or serious
6 concerns? Why do we always have to tire the Chamber and the Chamber has
7 displayed enormous amounts of good will to both parties. The Chamber gave
8 us a chance to reach an agreement, so I just can't avoid asking myself,
9 what's next? By 10.00 in the morning, we sent an e-mail to the OTP
10 specifying what the circumstances will be that we will be examining the
11 witness on. If you look closely, you will see that we have sent you an
12 e-mail this very morning, and it should have been in by 10.00.
13 MR. MOORE: Three minutes ago.
14 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] Fine.
15 JUDGE PARKER: Does that then resolve the last concern you raised,
16 Mr. Moore?
17 MR. MOORE: Your Honour, I can't give you a straight answer on
18 that at this time. It's only two lines. I've got to make sure. What I'm
19 concerned about is the pages that need to be translated, that we know what
20 ones my learned friend wants. It's not a question of surprise. I need to
21 know the pages and I need to know the paragraphs. And if my learned
22 friend could just highlight it, it would just really help enormously.
23 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Borovic, my recollection of what the Chamber
24 required was that the there should be a marking of the parts of the diary
25 that were of interest to each Defence team so that those parts and only
1 those parts were translated. The objective was to limit the amount of
2 translation that was necessary. So the parts that are relevant to your
3 case need to be identified and that was so for each of the three Defence
4 teams. If that has not been done, it must be done in the course of this
5 morning to enable the process of interpretation to follow.
6 The procedure indicated by Mr. Moore is directed as the Chamber
7 understand it to interpretation only. There will be no questioning and
8 cross-examining of the witness in the absence of the Chamber about aspects
9 of what is in the diary. But if it is that the witness looks at his note
10 and says: Well, now, I can't be sure today whether that short phrase
11 there is saying this long word or another long word or what I'm trying to
12 mean, that would be noted and recorded so that it is apparent that the
13 witness, himself, is unclear about a particular word or phrase in his own
14 diary. Merely that he can't say what is meant by the words or the
15 markings that are there. That's the only issue the Chamber sees for any
16 discussion about the content of the diary by the witness when he is trying
17 to indicate his understanding of what he was writing.
18 If that can be attended to in the course of this morning by each
19 of the three Defence teams, the process seems to be one that will meet
20 everybody's needs, aided further by what Mr. Borovic has been able to do.
21 Now it will be perhaps another issue whether what you have done,
22 Mr. Borovic, coincides with what the witness says he was writing. So that
23 will be a matter for you to take up, if you wish.
24 The sitting times, I think we stick with what has been planned and
25 ordered, that is for this witness to be called on Tuesday and on
1 Wednesday. The position indicated by Mr. Moore has to be read in light of
2 the order which the Chamber made on the 17th of November which, as
3 Mr. Vasic has indicated, sets specifics times for cross-examination and
4 re-examination. That is 20 minutes for Mr. Vasic, 70 minutes for Mr.
5 Borovic, and 70 minutes for Mr. Lukic, and then 45 minutes for Mr. Moore
6 and that will conclude within one sitting day. So Friday will be the day
7 of next week for P002 to be giving evidence.
8 As the Chamber understands it, that then will be the end of the
9 evidence being -- will by then we will have ended the Defence case for
10 Mr. Sljivancanin and we will have recalled the witness who is to be
11 recalled. And the only evidence that could be outstanding then is any
12 rebuttal evidence as to which we are still waiting final indications.
13 Now, has that resolved the issues that were raised today?
14 Mr. Lukic.
15 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] There is just two issues that I'd like
16 to raise while we're still discussing housekeeping matters. One thing
17 that I announced yesterday, something that I wanted to inform the Chamber
18 about, we confirmed with Mr. Susnjar and with certain bodies in Belgrade.
19 All of this led us to drop this particular witness. We've studied the
20 jurisprudence of this Tribunal and no ICRC representatives have been heard
21 on these circumstances.
22 Serbia is a member of the ICRC as an international institution and
23 we respect its neutrality. Mr. Susnjar is a well-regarded member of the
24 National Red Cross in Serbia and we would like to avoid any possible
25 repercussions so this is our reason for deciding to eventually drop him as
1 one of our witnesses. That's one thing that I wanted to inform the
2 Chamber about.
3 I spoke to the OTP. They conferred with someone in Geneva about
4 this. I gave them my info. They gave me some sort of feedback. And I
5 think this is the best course of action to take in order to avoid any
6 possible confrontations.
7 Another technical issue, or more by way of requesting guidance
8 from the Chamber. The witness arrived yesterday, Mr. Vuka. I have
9 started consulting with him. If I have anything to share, I will be doing
10 so on Monday in writing.
11 Mr. Sljivancanin asked me if it was possible to see him, to see
12 Mr. Vuka and have Mr. Vuka visit him prior to his testimony in his prison
13 cell. They met while the expert report was started before the beginning
14 of the trial. So that's why I wanted to consult the Chamber. Mr. Vuka is
15 an expert. He can follow the trial just as Mr. Theunens did. So do you
16 think it would be possible for him to meet Mr. Sljivancanin in his prison
17 cell on Monday morning?
18 I think the prison authorities would not mind. If the Chamber
19 okayed this, we could go ahead with this so that's the other thing that I
20 wanted to ask.
21 MS. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] If I may clarify the issue of the
22 notebook belonging to P002. I was ordered to specify by this morning the
23 relevant sections of the notebook to be translated. On the 2nd of
24 November, our Defence team filed a motion for this witness to be recalled
25 and then again examined. On the 8th of November, we received a reply from
1 the OTP. Following this, on the 10th of November, this Chamber issued a
2 verbal ruling to the Defence teams to act in accordance with paragraph 4
3 of the 30th of August ruling refusing the OTP motion to tender certain
4 sections of the notebook into evidence. We were also told to address in a
5 more specific way the relevant sections of the diary on which the witness
6 was to be examined.
7 On the 14th of November, all three Defence teams submitted new
8 motions and the relevant paragraphs were specified in relation to each of
9 the teams. The Mrksic Defence, the Radic Defence, the Mrksic Defence has
10 very general paragraphs, the Radic Defence is taking it date by date, and
11 the Sljivancanin team is doing it page by page.
12 As early as two weeks ago, it was explained in detail what the
13 circumstances were that the Defence teams wanted to examine this witness
14 on. It wasn't until after that, that we received your ruling, Your
15 Honours, allowing for this witness to be heard again. Right now, we are
16 at a loss as to what the OTP still fail to understand about this. All the
17 questions have been highlighted and have been that way since the 14th of
18 November. I think it's the OTP's turn to try to be more specific about
19 their desires. We marked out or highlighted certain paragraphs in our
20 14th of December [as interpreted] motion and we have since translated
21 those for our purposes into English. I think it is now the OTP's turn to
22 tell us in clearer terms if possible what they want us to do. It appears
23 we can't do any more than we have already done.
24 As early as two weeks ago, we highlighted and marked out all the
25 relevant passages, any passages and any subjects of crucial importance to
1 our Defence teams. We can also highlight in yellow the exact pages in the
2 14th of November motion and the dates specified on the 14th of November as
3 long as, at least, we can agree that there is no problem with that. The
4 Defence has done everything and I mean everything or utmost to comply with
5 the Chamber's rulings to act in a timely manner to comply with the
6 deadlines and to translate the relevant diary pages in good time.
7 I'm really at a loss as to what exactly the Defence is being asked
8 to do next. We're just waiting for this witness to appear so that we can
9 get going. Since the 14th of November, the relevant portions of that
10 notebook have been a matter of general and public knowledge. Thank you.
11 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you for that, Ms. Tapuskovic.
12 I think I need to restate something and I hope all counsel are
13 listening, because this was the last word of the Chamber on the matter and
14 it is the operative word.
15 The objective is not to give anybody notice of what parts of any
16 diary anybody is going to be cross-examined about. The objective is to
17 facilitate the translation of the material parts of the diary that will be
18 the subject of cross-examination. To facilitate that, the Chamber asked
19 that all three Defence teams highlight the relevant paragraphs or
21 We are told by Ms. Tapuskovic that this has been pursuant to an
22 earlier indication of the Chamber. There has been some highlighting but
23 it's done in three different ways: A general, a date-by-date, or a
24 page-by-page. Now if there's only one or two sentences on a page, that
25 doesn't matter. But if there's a full page of notes and you're interested
1 in only one paragraph or part, it's not helping the translation process to
2 mark the whole page or identify the whole page. Come down to those parts
3 that are relevant to your cross-examination.
4 And that is what, if it has not already been done, should be done
5 by the middle of today. By that, I mean 1.45.
6 I think we've heard enough on this, Mr. Borovic.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Moore, the question of whether there might be a
9 meeting of the accused, Mr. Sljivancanin, and the expert before the
10 evidence commences, is there anything you wish to submit about that?
11 MR. MOORE: I think that's a matter for the Court. I would have
12 no submissions either way on that.
13 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
14 Mr. Vasic, any submission?
15 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] I leave it to the Trial Chamber as
16 well. I have nothing to add.
17 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Borovic.
18 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] I agree. Thank you.
19 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
20 One other thing that you said, Mr. Lukic. You said that you would
21 notify or give notice of any material change on Monday. As I recall it,
22 that was the date by 10.00 a.m. by which you were to give notice in
23 writing having orally given notice on Saturday, just to make sure there's
24 no further slippage or confusion. Right?
25 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] It's absolutely fine, Your Honours.
1 That is my understanding of your ruling and that is what I still have in
2 my head.
3 JUDGE PARKER: The Chamber does not make any order preventing a
4 contact between Mr. Sljivancanin and the expert before the evidence
6 The witness, who is waiting, please.
7 [The witness entered court]
8 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
10 JUDGE PARKER: Sorry for keeping you waiting. There were matters
11 that had to be dealt with. The affirmation that you gave at the beginning
12 of your evidence still applies. Now Mr. Lukic has some final questions
13 for you.
14 WITNESS: MLADEN KARAN [Resumed]
15 [Witness answered through interpreter]
16 Re-examination by Mr. Lukic:
17 Q. Good morning, Mr. Karan. With a bit of good will, we will try to
18 finish today, as soon as possible, with you, if you give me the shortest
19 answers possible.
20 My task now is to clarify certain matters that were raised with
21 you during the cross-examination. First I'm going to ask you a few things
22 in relation to what Mr. Vasic discussed, the military police and the
23 security organs. We read some documents -- could we see 435, Article 12
24 on the screen, please? You will see it now, Mr. Karan, the rules of
25 service of the military police. Mr. Vasic asked you about 13. That is
1 the article that defines the relationship between the security organs and
2 the military police and now I am slowly going to read paragraph 12 to you.
3 I'm sure that you are perfectly familiar with this.
4 Command and control over the military police is the chapter.
5 Article 12 reads as follows: "The military police is commanded by the
6 officer of the military unit and institution in whose formation the
7 military police unit is or to which it was attached."
8 In the Guards Motorised Brigade, Mr. Karan, who commanded the
9 units of the military police?
10 A. In the broadest possible sense, the commander of the Guards
11 Brigade, whereas ever unit of the military police had its own commanders,
12 like in battalions, as was the case in the Guards Brigade, the military
13 police in the Guards Brigade had its own commander of the battalion,
14 commanders of companies, of platoons, and squads.
15 Q. Could you please speak slower, that's the only thing I'm asking
16 you to do.
17 Mr. Moore asked you, and we'll go back to that within this
18 question. Do you distinguish between a command, an order, and a task?
19 And now I'm asking you within which unit was the anti-terrorist company of
20 the Guards Brigade?
21 A. In the units of the military police.
22 Q. Could a command order or task be issued to that unit by the
23 security organ, anybody from the security organ?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Thank you. Also, Mr. Vasic showed you Article 23, I think it was,
1 of the rules of service of the security organs. I'd like to have this on
2 the screen too. The whole document is from the 65 ter list, and that is
3 the guidelines for using the rules of service of the military police. We
4 thought of analysing that with our expert. Mr. Moore introduced only one
5 page of this document.
6 Could we please see on the screen the document that is in e-court
7 page 3D050222. The whole document. The first page is 3D050215. I would
8 like to see Article 14. Could we just focus this a bit? 3D050286 is the
9 English version.
10 Mr. Karan, I think that you see it now. This is the guidelines
11 for the application of the rules of service of the military police. And
12 Article 14. I would like to read it out in it's entirety because it
13 pertains to the questions that you dealt with when questioned by Mr.
15 "In a specialist sense, an officer of the security organ of the
16 command staff unit or institution shall direct the military police unit
17 and, in relation to that, shall be responsible within his jurisdiction for
18 the state specialist training and combat readiness of the military police
20 "Shall monitor and examine the organisation and establishment of
21 the military police unit, propose measures to improve and replenish the
22 unit with its own forces with standard-issue formation and material and
23 technical supplies and equipment.
24 "Shall monitor the moral and political state of the military
25 police and shall undertake measures to strengthen it.
1 "Shall jointly with the commanding officers of the military police
2 traffic service organ and operations and training organ supervise the
3 implementation of plans and programmes of overall combat training and
4 education of servicemen, commanding officers, and military police units.
5 "Shall draw lessons from the military police. Shall, with the
6 authorisation from the commander, give orders to the military police unit
7 officer and supervise their execution."
8 I'm going to pause here and I'm going to ask you the following:
9 As assistant to Mr. Sljivancanin the security organ, did he ever tell you
10 that the commander gave him this kind of authorisation to issue any kind
11 of order, task, or command, or assignment to the units of the military
13 A. As far as I understand this Article, this has to do with tasks
14 that are given from the remit of the military police, or rather security
15 organs. The commander can give a task to a security organ from his own
16 purview, but certainly he cannot, without proper authority, issue an order
17 to have any tasks carried out outside the purview of the security organs.
18 We have already discussed that.
19 Q. Now I'm going to put a concrete question to you for the 19th and
20 the 20th. Did Sljivancanin tell you whether he had received any order --
21 or rather any task to issue an order to the units of the military
23 A. I don't know about that. At our meetings, we received our tasks
24 and I don't know from whom he did and whether he received anything along
25 those lines.
1 Q. I am going to read on: "Shall participate in the control and
2 assessment of the military police units combat readiness shall propose to
3 the unit commander or officer of the institution the most adequate use of
4 the military police unit.
5 "Shall be responsible for the timely equipping of the military
6 police unit with adequate military police and other equipment.
7 "Shall monitor and influence the military police unit's manning
8 levels for both soldiers and officers.
9 "Shall propose the organisation of military police services on a
10 given territory and ensure their efficiency.
11 And, "shall organise cooperation between and coordinate the work
12 of the military police unit and public security on joint tasks."
13 Mr. Karan, is there what you were saying by way of an explanation?
14 Is there anything that the security organ has in relation to the
15 military police? Is there anything else?
16 A. This practically covers all of it. Well, you see, during my
17 testimony, I said quite a bit of this. Perhaps not in this exact order.
18 I don't think this is the exact order I used but that doesn't change
19 matters. I'm not aware of any other tasks that the security organ would
20 have or any other obligations that the security organ would have vis-a-vis
21 the military police.
22 Q. Thank you. We're moving on to another subject.
23 Mr. Vasic also asked you about Mr. Vukosavljevic and he put
24 evidence to you that Mr. Vukosavljevic came to you for briefings and even
25 submitted written reports to you a few times. You know that Vasic asked
1 you about that the day before yesterday?
2 A. I remember.
3 Q. During your stay in Vukovar, how many times did you see Dragi
5 A. A few times, I told you. Perhaps a few days after they came,
6 possibly not more than three times. It was brief, brief. The first time
7 he came to our office and we talked sort of --
8 Q. Please keep it short. Keep your answers short. During these
9 meetings, encounters, did you ever get any document, any paper -- well,
10 let me say report?
11 A. The security organs, in their communication, either write or
12 report verbally. I did not receive a single written document or written
13 report from Mr. Vukosavljevic, nor did I ask for anything like that.
14 Q. Thank you. In any one of your reports that you sent to the
15 security organ of the -- to the security organ of the cabinet of the
16 Federal Secretary for National Defence, did you mention any of your
17 contacts with the 80th Motorised Brigade in the sense of security?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Why not?
20 A. Well, we were not linked to them. Quite simply, we did not have
21 any information. For example, if that unit would say that they gave
22 something to me or that I -- or rather had I learned anything that would
23 have been of relevance to the cabinet, I would have reported about that,
24 but that would have been mutual cooperation between next-door neighbours.
25 That would not have been relations of subordination.
1 Q. You spoke rather specifically about your activities on the 19th
2 and 20th. On the 20th or 19th of November, did you see Vukosavljevic?
3 A. No.
4 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] For the Trial Chamber, the page
5 reference is 8799.
6 Q. Now we are going to move on to another topic. The question was --
7 the question put by Mr. Vasic was who you took to Mitrovica. What was put
8 to you was that Marin Vidic was not taken to Mitrovica, that Vesna Bosanac
9 went later. I'm asking you the following: Mr. Karan, do you have any
10 reason or motive to assert that you took Vidic to Mitrovica when, in
11 actual fact, you did not take him?
12 A. I really have no reason to assert anything that would be to the
13 contrary of what actually happened.
14 Q. Thank you. And in response to questions put by Mr. Moore and
15 Mr. Vasic, you said that you could not be specific regarding the time line
16 in terms of the exact hour when you left, especially when you left from
17 Negoslavci. I'm talking about the 20th. Let's be very specific.
18 When you went to Sremska Mitrovica, let me ask you something -- or
19 rather, this is my question: You kept saying some things. You said that
20 you remember that around 1.00, you came to Bijeljina, that night.
21 A. It was certainly an hour or two after midnight. To be frank --
22 Q. How come you remember that?
23 A. I know that because of my wife's comments. She was surprised.
24 She did not know that I was coming. She was surprised. Otherwise, at
25 that time, it wasn't really important for me to remember the exact time
1 when I arrived or something like that.
2 Q. Tell me, how long had you not seen your wife?
3 A. From the beginning, from my departure to the area of Vukovar.
4 Q. Now, you establish a convoy in Negoslavci. You travel to
5 Mitrovica. You go through Mitrovica. You said that you were trying to
6 find the way. You hand these persons over. You part with your
7 colleagues. You go to Bijeljina. Now, can you tell us about that? From
8 the moment when you left until you arrived, how much time elapsed? Let us
9 try to deal with the timing that way.
10 A. You mean leaving Mitrovica?
11 Q. No, from the beginning. From Negoslavci all the way to Bijeljina,
12 roughly how much time elapsed with all this travel and the handover?
13 A. About four and a half, five hours. Four, five at the maximum.
14 Q. Thank you. Now, tell me something else. When you were giving
15 answers to Mr. Moore, you said that when you went back to fetch the
16 guitar, that you saw Borisavljevic there?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Do I understand you right meaning that when you left your
19 department, you did not see Borisavljevic but only when you went back to
20 fetch the guitar?
21 A. Yes, that's right.
22 Q. Do you remember what period of time elapsed from the moment when
23 you left your offices to set out on that journey until you went back to
24 get the guitar, roughly?
25 A. To be quite frank, we did not leave immediately when I was
1 informed. There were quite a few people around and we had to secure the
2 unhindered passage of the convoy, say 40 minutes, 50 minutes, one hour. I
3 cannot say exactly how long this lasted until I went back to get the
4 guitar, until I was done with all this persuasion and so on.
5 Q. So you were absent outside your offices an hour, up to one hour?
6 A. Yes, that would be it roughly.
7 Q. Thank you. Now we're going to move on to something completely
9 Mr. Moore asked you about any contacts you might have had with the
10 Sljivancanin Defence team. Yesterday at page 68 or I think the day before
11 yesterday, we had a short session yesterday, Mr. Moore told you that in
12 The Hague, we had together compiled proofing notes of truly Biblical
13 proportions to use his phrasing, which I must say affected me in a purely
14 emotional sense to some degree, but that's not my question, is it? My
15 question is when were you first interviewed by the OTP?
16 A. I received the first summons in March 2006.
17 Q. Did they talk to you?
18 A. I've been authorise the by the state council for the cooperation
19 with the Hague Tribunal as early as September 2005 and I was given a
20 waiver on 10 specific subjects.
21 Q. That doesn't matter.
22 A. In 2006, I was finally supposed to go to Belgrade to be
23 interviewed there, and then I was called by the city's MUP, Ministry of
24 the Interior, on the 29th -- the 29th of November, that the interview was
25 postponed until further notice.
1 Q. What was the next time that you were called by the OTP for an
3 A. Around the 22nd of October that year, I believe.
4 Q. What happened?
5 A. It was something that was much along the same lines as previously.
6 I was called by a judge of the district court. It came through the SUP,
7 so the next day, or two days later, the district court judge called me,
8 told me to get back to him as soon as I could, since I was away from home,
9 and he was calling to tell me that the investigators had left for The
10 Hague on account of some urgent business and that the interview would not
11 take place.
12 Q. And finally, that's not disputed, you were interviewed on Monday.
13 The interview took two hours and eight minutes. Did you at any point try
14 to deny the OTP an opportunity to interview you over all these years?
15 A. No. Even if I had wanted to, I would not have been able to. Even
16 if I was, for example, an OTP witness, I would still be willing to talk to
17 you, for example, would be saying the same things.
18 Q. Do you remember sitting down with me, we used the gist of the
19 proofing notes and we went through them together knows; you confirmed
20 everything I read out to you?
21 A. No, that would have been an impossible exercise.
22 Q. Perhaps we misunderstand each other. You remember me reading back
23 to you certain sentences of which I was to inform the OTP in relation to
24 your testimony during the proofing. Do you remember that?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Something about the transcript, page 23, line 17, the witness
2 said: "If I were an OTP witness, I would be saying the same thing."
3 Just to clear up another enigma, the OTP asked you whether you had
4 been watching this trial on television and you said that you had seen
5 parts of it. The reference is page 71 of two days ago.
6 Mr. Karan, what was the first time ever that you mentioned the
7 family name of Dr. Dejanovic being -- that you heard the family name of
8 Dr. Dejanovic being mentioned in relation to this case?
9 A. Not before I arrived here.
10 Q. Did you follow Mr. Gjuro Njavro's testimony in November of 2005 on
11 television; do you remember that?
12 A. No. All I said is at first, the Milosevic trial struck me as
13 quite interesting but then I stopped following, and I don't think this
14 particular testimony was ever shown on our TV or anything after
15 Milosevic's trial for that matter.
16 Q. On page 75 two days ago, you were asked something else by the OTP.
17 The question was: Did you know about the distribution of tasks on the
18 19th and the fact that Ljubisa Vukasinovic who organised for buses and
19 that he was to oversee the transport to Mitrovica and that this was to be
20 secured by military police. Vukasinovic, as a security officer, would he
21 have been in a position to give any orders to the military police?
22 A. No.
23 Q. I have several questions left, but what Mr. Moore showed you on
24 page 15539 yesterday about the ammunition and the uniforms for Vukovar.
25 We asked for the transcript to be checked officially because we do believe
1 the witness's original account had been different from what was suggested.
2 So once we've received confirmation, we shall be informing the Chamber
3 in due course.
4 Mr. Moore asked you about something and you explained why you
5 thought it was better for Sljivancanin to tour the units and see what the
6 situation was like for himself. You provided a detailed explanation
7 yesterday at page 21. My question is, we saw a minute ago in relation to
8 the military police -- let me got into further in that in relation to the
9 other units in the brigade, who - and even in relation to the military
10 brigade - would have been in charge of a unit's morale? Who would have
11 been in charge of monitoring the morale of a certain unit?
12 A. It would have been the responsibility of the unit commander
13 altogether, but he normally would have had his own assistant for moral
14 guidance or for moral and political training. This was a technical
15 position and I believe that such an assistant actually existed within the
16 Guards Brigade.
17 Q. Whose responsibility was to ensure that there was discipline in
18 any unit?
19 A. The commanders and komandirs at all levels.
20 Q. What were commanders and komandirs at all levels responsible for
21 if infractions or disciplinary were established?
22 A. As I established yesterday, as I commented yesterday, if a crime
23 or a criminal offence or a disciplinary infraction was committed, the
24 first thing that was done is one had to judge whether it was a
25 disciplinary infraction or an actual criminal offence. And then one
1 decides whether the command would deal with this, whether the disciplinary
2 court would deal with this, or whether the soldiers would be
3 court-martialed but it can be the disciplinary court and the court-martial
4 at the same time once disciplinary proceedings had been instigated.
5 Q. All right. Let's go to another set of rules. Mr. Moore asked you
6 about the relationship between the Vukovar TO and you explained about the
7 TO and security and could we please have the rules of service of the
8 security organ brought up on our screens again. This is Exhibit 107, the
9 Article in B/C/S is 58, Article 58. I think that's page 35 of the B/C/S.
10 MR. MOORE: I object to this form of question. I let it go
11 before. In my submission, it is analogous to leading the witness. The
12 witness gives evidence in relation to his understanding, but if one is
13 then directed -- or the witness is then directed to a document which deals
14 with that issue, it provides the answer which may or may not be contrary
15 to what the witness has said. It's analogous to leading.
16 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I accept this objection. I will first
17 ask the question and then we'll see whether it is necessary to show the
19 Q. Mr. Karan, was there a TO staff in Vukovar?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Did it have its own security officer?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Does the name of Major Zigic mean anything to you?
24 A. No, I was never in touch with that person.
25 Q. Are you aware of the fact that TO staffs and their security organs
1 in a technical sense are linked to the security administration throughout
2 Yugoslavia as a country?
3 A. Yes, I am aware of that.
4 Q. MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] The reference Article 58, and we don't
5 need to look at it. Not even as it concerns the imminent threat of war.
6 Thank you. Mr. Moore asked you about the arrival of Mr. Vasiljevic and
7 Mr. Tumanov on the evening of the 19th and he asked you about any orders
8 and instructions for the surrender of the Croatian forces and any possible
9 exchange, and then you told them about this particular arrival and what
10 Vasiljevic had said on the occasion.
11 I'm asking you a different question. Did you know in those days
12 if anyone sent a telegram from the security administration or any set of
13 instructions at all to the effect that as many Croatian forces as possible
14 were -- should be secured for an exchange against the equivalent in JNA
16 A. Yes, we did receive such a document from the cabinet of the chief
17 of security of the Ministry of Defence.
18 Q. Mr. Moore also asked you about the heated exchange between
19 Sljivancanin and Vasiljevic, that was at page 28 yesterday. I apologise
20 to the Chamber for using the draft version. It was put to you that there
21 were people at the time who knew Sljivancanin better than you did, so
22 hence my question: Throughout the period of time that you spent after
23 this with Mr. Sljivancanin, when you stayed with him for another year in
24 the same department, almost on a daily basis until as late as August, did
25 you ever notice Sljivancanin raise his voice in the presence of senior
1 officers or officers of a higher rank?
2 A. No.
3 Q. What about those people who were present there on the evening of
4 the 19th except for Mr. Sljivancanin? Was there anyone who knew
5 Vasiljevic better than you at the time? What do you think?
6 A. I don't think so.
7 Q. Did Vasiljevic strike you as being angry that evening?
8 A. No. No. I knew exactly what Vasiljevic looked like when he was
9 angry and I remember exactly how he struck me that night, and the answer
10 is no.
11 Q. Thank you. Mr. Moore also put it to you yesterday when you were
12 talking about sleeping and about remembering, and you remembering details
13 about the 19th and the evening of the 19th, and perhaps not about the
14 18th. My question about the evening of the 19th and what you testified,
15 did you ever see Marin Vidic or Aleksandar Vasiljevic together before or
16 after this particular incident?
17 A. Save for that one evening in our office, I never saw them meet
18 again nor did I ever hear of them meeting again.
19 Q. Thank you. My second but last question, I'll just read back to
20 you what you stated in your interview to the OTP and something that was
21 misquoted to you by Mr. Moore yesterday. I'll give the OTP the exact
22 reference and, should they find that my reading was not accurate, then it
23 must be a problem with the translation.
24 So, what Mr. Moore told me about telling Mr. Sljivancanin that you
25 were tired in your interview to the OTP one hour 53 minutes, 40 seconds,
1 you said as follows -- my apologies, this is 1 minute, 59 -- 1 hour, 59
2 minutes, 51 seconds. "As I had been away from home for a long time, I
3 left subsequently. I had asked Sljivancanin to be allowed to go home for
4 a day or two, after which I returned." At time reference 1:53:40 in
5 relation to Bogdan Vujic allegedly being described as fat, your statement
6 was: "I remember that because this man is bald and he was an unpleasant
7 person to talk to. He was somewhat haughty." And then the interpreter in
8 English said "arrogant" and then in B/C/S you said, "Yes, arogantan."
9 Sir, yesterday, when examined about these circumstance, your
10 position was you didn't say the things that Mr. Moore was putting to you.
11 Finally, Mr. Moore put his position to you telling you that you came here
12 to tell untruths and certain things to do with his theory to do with
13 saying the things the way you were saying them.
14 Just one final question. At the beginning of your testimony, you
15 took an oath here, did you understand the meaning of that oath before this
16 Tribunal at the time you actually took it?
17 A. I took that oath very seriously.
18 Q. Do you stand by every single word you uttered throughout your
19 testimony? Was everything the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
21 A. I stand by every word. I told the Court about every single thing
22 that I was involved in.
23 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I thank the Chamber and I thank
24 Mr. Karan. This completes my re-examination.
25 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Lukic.
1 Mr. Karan, you will be pleased to know that that concludes the
2 questions that you will be asked here. We would like to thank you for the
3 time you have been able to spend here and for the assistance that you've
4 given to the Tribunal. You are of course now free to return to your
5 ordinary affairs.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you too, Your Honours.
7 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
8 The court officer will show you out.
9 [The witness withdrew]
10 JUDGE PARKER: Now, is there any other matter that needs to be
11 dealt with before we adjourn for the day?
12 Mr. Vasic.
13 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, thank you. It might
14 take a minute of our time at the very most. This is something that you
15 brought up today. We are nearing the end of this trial and there's the
16 issue of rebuttal which is something that we have already discussed with
17 my learned friend, Mr. Moore. I believe we talked about this some seven
18 or eight days ago as our trial was in progress.
19 I think we are nearing the end of the Sljivancanin Defence case
20 and all that remains is their expert witness. I think the moment is nigh
21 when Mr. Moore was supposed to inform us whether it was his intention to
22 call anyone on rebuttal and who so that both the Trial Chamber and our
23 Defence teams might be better able to plan our own activities. This is
24 just something that I want in an update in relation to, since this remains
25 pending from as long as seven days ago. Thank you.
1 JUDGE PARKER: Well, I don't know whether Mr. Moore is in a
2 position to tell us what we all look forward to learning but I will ask
4 MR. MOORE: Your Honour, at this time, we hope to be making an
5 application to call rebuttal evidence. It's no secret that I will be away
6 next week and I hope to clarify definitively whether that is the case or
8 JUDGE PARKER: Very well.
9 Does that tell you nothing clearly, Mr. Vasic?
10 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Nothing at all, to be quite frank, but
11 I think we are making headway to some extent at least.
12 JUDGE PARKER: I read between the lines that Mr. Moore is seeing
13 witnesses somewhere other than here next week and will decide after he's
14 done that. I may be wrong but that might help you.
15 Mr. Lukic.
16 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] A fearful question for the Trial
17 Chamber: Regardless of the rebuttal, how much time shall we be allowed
18 for our final briefs? We all want to know this. The actual thing that I
19 mentioned, how much time shall we be allowed, or if the Trial Chamber
20 could tell us anything about our closing arguments and our final briefs.
21 [Trial Chamber confers].
22 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] One thing that we saw, as far as the
23 general schedule was concerned, the 16th, the 17th and the 18th were the
24 dates left for a rebuttal and in late February, the 28th and possibly the
25 1st of March were the dates set for our closing arguments. That's in the
1 case of rebuttal. But is that the order of magnitude that we're looking
2 at in terms of the time where we would be allowed for our final briefs?
3 [Trial Chamber confers].
4 JUDGE PARKER: The programme which the Chamber had indicated
5 orally and to which we still have in mind adhering is subject, to some
6 degree, to the issue of rebuttal evidence from the Prosecution. If there
7 is rebuttal evidence, we have set aside Friday the 12th of January,
8 Monday, the 15th, Tuesday the 16th, and Wednesday the 17th of January,
9 four days, in which to deal with any rebuttal evidence.
10 The closing, the time, if that is achieved, so evidence is
11 finished by mid-January, we would require all parties to have filed their
12 written briefs by Friday, the 16th of February, and that will be by noon
13 on Friday, the 16th of February. There will then be oral addresses on
14 Wednesday, the 28th of February, Thursday, the 1st of March, and Friday,
15 the 2nd of March. Three days which is the time counsel suggested would be
16 sufficient for all final addresses.
17 Now, that is the time table to which you should plan. The only
18 possible disruption there will be the issue of rebuttal evidence which may
19 or may not have an effect on that programme. But that, if he can -- if
20 there is rebuttal evidence and we finish it in January, that will be the
21 programme to the end of the final submissions.
22 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] That was my understanding and I
23 suppose no one has any complaints about this proposed schedule. One thing
24 is the Defence entitlements under Rule 85(A) paragraph 4, in the case of a
25 rejoinder. But then we have to see how Mr. Moore might wish to move in
1 that case. That is if appropriate approvals are issued and then it would
2 only take a brief time for the whole thing to be concluded.
3 JUDGE PARKER: Well, if there is to be a proposal for further
4 Defence evidence, we would plan to hear that in the four days in January
5 along with any rebuttal evidence. We don't want this evidence to string
6 out just prolonging the time when we can get to actually come to a
7 decision. So we want to get the evidence over as early as possible so
8 that counsel then have something like four weeks for their final written
9 briefs. And then in a fortnight after that, the final oral submissions.
10 The sooner we can reach that point, the sooner we can come to eventual
11 decision in the trial, which is what everybody needs.
12 So we hope by the end of next week to know what it is that the
13 Prosecution proposes and that would give Defence counsel the following
14 week to move any motions about any further evidence that they have in
15 mind. All of that can be accomplished before we have the three-week
16 vacation. And after the three-week vacation, we want to deal with and
17 finalise any evidentiary matters.
18 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] This has now been perfectly clarified
19 thanks to Your Honour.
20 One idea about any possible rebuttal evidence. I think that was a
21 great ruling on your part, for that to be known by the end of next week.
22 One thing that will probably happen, if indeed there is such a motion by
23 the OTP and a subsequent ruling by the Chamber, the OTP will immediately
24 serve on us all the relevant documents for that witness. We can't address
25 the question of rejoinder if we only have a person's name but don't have
1 that person's statement or anything else that that the OTP should serve on
2 us to act and react in good time and comply with our own undertaking under
3 the rejoinder. So if Friday is Mr. Moore's deadline to come back to us
4 about that, I suppose that should include all their obligations under Rule
5 67 in relation to any witnesses called to testify.
6 MR. MOORE: Your Honour, could I just deal with one matter.
7 I don't in any way wish to try and affect any ruling. It is my
8 very sincere hope and desire that I will be in a position to clarify any
9 potential rebuttal evidence, but might I have liberty to apply in relation
10 to perhaps one of the issues that, of itself, may create certain time
12 As I say, I definitely want to try and have it done by Friday, but
13 I can foresee a problem in one aspect which is a time problem.
14 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Moore, if you'd paid careful attention to my
15 words, it was an expression of expectation that we would hear by Friday.
16 MR. MOORE: Yes.
17 JUDGE PARKER: There was no stipulation of an order that we must,
18 because I'm well aware that there can be difficulties in making decisions.
19 The expectation, though, is strong and clear --
20 MR. MOORE: Yes.
21 JUDGE PARKER: -- for the reasons that I've indicated. Of course
22 if any of those timetable dates becomes impossible, for reasons that none
23 of us presently foresee, we'll have to look at whatever the new
24 circumstances are.
25 MR. MOORE: Yes. Thank you. My apologies.
1 JUDGE PARKER: So what our objective is, is to know what further
2 evidence we will be needing to deal with, if any, by the time the
3 three-week vacation commences, so that at the end of the first week after
4 the vacation, we can commence hearing that evidence, whether it is further
5 Prosecution evidence or further Defence evidence, and we've allocated four
6 full days for that to occur. That ought to be reasonable provision, both
7 in time line to reach that point, and in the time allowed for the evidence
8 to deal with whatever it is that might arise.
9 And with that having been accomplished, we had in mind four weeks
10 to prepare the very important written submissions which identify in
11 crystal-clear terms, the cases for each party with the essential
12 supporting evidence both oral and documentary. And then we have the final
13 oral wind-up.
14 Now that's our expectation and it will have to be something
15 significant for us to move from that. But if the interests of justice
16 require it, of course we will. But I hope everybody is clear what we hope
17 to achieve so that we can reach the end of this trial.
18 We now adjourn. We resume on Tuesday, and we resume on Tuesday at
19 the unusual hour of 1.00 p.m. And we sit until 5.00. We now adjourn.
20 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 11.26 a.m.,
21 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 5th day of
22 December, 2006, at 1.00 p.m.