Witnesses: Mr. Milenko Kuljanin & Mr. Wolfgang Navrat
align Page 5577
1 Tuesday, 5th August 1997
2 (10.00 am).
3 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Morning ladies and gentlemen. Can we
4 have the witness? Could you please invite the witness.
5 MR. NIEMANN: If your Honour pleases, for the Prosecution, my
6 name is Niemann, and I appear with Mr. Turone and
7 Ms. McHenry, and we are assisted at our table by
8 Ms. Van Dusschoten.
9 (Witness enters court)
10 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: May we have appearances for the
11 Defence, please?
12 MS. RESIDOVIC: Good morning your Honour, my name is
13 Edina Residovic, I am Defence counsel for Mr. Zejnil
14 Delalic. My co-counsel is Mr. Eugene O'Sullivan,
15 Professor of Law from Canada.
16 MR. OLUJIC: Good morning, your Honours, my name is Olujic,
17 defence counsel for Mr. Mucic. With me in the team is my
18 colleague Michael Greaves, attorney from the
19 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
20 MR. KARABDIC: Good morning, your honours, my name is Salih
21 Karabdic. With me in the team is Mr. Thomas Moran,
22 lawyer from Houston Texas.
23 MR. ACKERMAN: Good morning your honours, I am John
24 Ackerman. I appear on behalf of Mr. Esad Landzo, and
25 with me is my co-counsel, Cynthia McMurray.
1 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Will you kindly remind the witness you
2 are still under oath.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Mr. Kuljanin, you are still under oath.
4 MILENKO KULJANIN (continued)
5 Cross-examined by MS. RESIDOVIC
6 Q. Good morning, Mr. Kuljanin.
7 A. Good morning.
8 Q. Mr. Kuljanin, I should now like to go back to some
9 questions that were discussed yesterday in the course of
10 the examination-in-chief and the cross-examination by my
11 colleagues. I think these will be questions that can
12 very easily be answered because you have lived in Konjic
13 for a long time and you are familiar with the conditions
14 there. Have I made myself clear?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Yesterday, Mr. Kuljanin, you said that you knew that the
17 house of Mr. Zejnil Delalic was situated on the road
18 leading out of Konjic to Mostar; is that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. You also stated that in that house there used to be a
21 car wash service or a car maintenance shop as you said;
22 is that correct?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. You confirmed in this courtroom that you knew that on
25 the ground floor of this house, a modern discotheque had
1 been built and had functioned there before the war, is
2 that so?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. As far as I can recall, you also said that earlier, you
5 yourself personally had visited the car repair shop and
6 especially the discotheque, is that so?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. You also said that sometimes in view of your occupation
9 and the discotheque's needs, you had provided beer for
10 the discotheque?
11 A. Maybe you did not understand me, I accompanied my
12 colleague who was supplying the discotheque with beer.
13 Q. Thank you for this clarification, I obviously did not
14 understand you quite well. Now it is quite clear.
15 Since I have now repeated in order to verify whether
16 I understood properly what you said yesterday, I am sure
17 you will agree with me if I say that even before the
18 war, you knew very well where Mr. Delalic's house stood
19 and that you were able to describe it, is that so?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Therefore, Mr. Kuljanin, you did not need the war nor to
22 spend time in Celebici to be able to tell anyone who
23 would ask you where that house is and what it contained,
24 is that not so?
25 A. It is.
1 Q. As both of us knows, further details regarding the
2 position of the house, but for the benefit of the court
3 I would like to ask you to clear up a few more details
4 with me.
5 You said that viewing the house from the direction
6 of Sarajevo or Konjic, the main road from Konjic to
7 Mostar passes the house on the right-hand side of the
8 house if you are going from Sarajevo, then the house is
9 on the right. Right of the house is the main road and
10 on the left is the Nerveta river?
11 A. When you are going along the main road from Sarajevo to
12 Mostar the house is on the right-hand side, and next to
13 the house also on the right-hand side is the Nerveta
15 Q. On the left side of the house is the main highway?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Both the house and the road are situated under a steep
18 slope, is that so?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. You know, Mr. Kuljanin, that particularly in the autumn
21 and in the spring but also in the event of heavy rains
22 in Konjic, there may be a great deal of water, mud and
23 stones coming from that slope; is that so?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. You also know that if that occurs the traffic gets
1 jammed on this highway because there is no other road
2 leading in or out of Konjic, is that not so?
3 A. It is.
4 Q. You are also aware, Mr. Kuljanin, that in such a
5 situation the public maintenance service in charge of
6 sanitation and hygiene take steps to clear the road of
7 the mud and the pebbles and stones, is that not so?
8 A. Yes, under normal conditions of life that was so.
9 Q. That is what I am asking you. There is debris collects
10 on the road, it also spreads to a part of the garden or
11 front garden of Mr. Delalic, is that not so?
12 A. Yes, it is.
13 Q. Mr. Kuljanin, the situation was rather like that, was it
14 not, when you visited this region as regards the debris,
15 the mud and the stones?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. At that time, there were quite a lot of troops there?
18 A. Yes, in the yard.
19 Q. You were talking also about the arrest of Juka Prazina?
20 A. I had not heard about that.
21 Q. At that time when you visited the house you saw nobody
22 but the troops?
23 A. Only the security guards who were watching the garden,
24 the yard and the house.
25 Q. Thank you, Mr. Kuljanin, we have now clarified the
1 circumstances that you referred to before this Tribunal
2 yesterday. I would now like to go back to Bradina and
3 the period of time you testified about, but to look into
4 some details which have not been cleared up so far,
5 namely you said that the combat operations on
6 May 5th when they broke out, you were in Bradina, is
7 that not so?
8 A. It is.
9 Q. And that a day later or
24 hours later into the combat
10 operations, you decided to retreat in the direction of
12 A. Yes, I did flee from the onslaught of Muslim units.
13 Q. Is it true that in Jasica you met Momir Mrkajic, Brano
14 Gligorevic and Milovan Gligorevic?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Those are all your neighbours from Bradina or the region
17 of Bradina?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Since you decided to cross into areas under the control
20 of the Serb forces with these neighbours of yours, you
21 intended to go to Hadzici by crossing Mount
23 A. We did not have a clear idea of where we wanted to go.
24 Q. But on that day in the hamlet of Jasica, in the house of
25 Mirko Dordic, you met your neighbour Zara Mrkajic 6?
1 A. Yes, at that same spot.
2 Q. You then learned from Zara Mrkajic that Rajko Dordic
3 with another group of people, local people, was also
4 leaving Bradina in the direction of Borci?
5 A. We had heard that they were moving somewhere, but Zara
6 did not tell us in which direction and we did not know
7 in which direction.
8 Q. With this group, which included Rajko Dordic, you met up
9 with this group in the village of Laniste?
10 A. It is not a village, it is a mountain and that is where
11 we met.
12 Q. You met there?
13 A. Yes, but by chance.
14 Q. And then you decided to try and proceed together to try
15 to reach Borci?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. If I am correct, and I may be refreshing your memory
18 when I give you the names of the people, in the group in
19 addition to yourself were the following people, Rajko
20 Dordic, Dragan Vujicic, somebody called Kulas from
21 Tarcin whose name I do not know, then another young man
22 from Tarcin known as Jacor, Zara Mrkajic, Branislav
23 Gligorevic, Milovan Gligorevic, Momir Mrkajic, Rajko
24 Kuljanin, Jelenko Kuljanin, Velimir Kuljanin, Milovan
25 Kuljanin, Snjezan Gligorevic, Mladen Gligorevic, known
1 as Hasko, Aleksa Gligorevic and some others whose name
2 I am not familiar. Have I listed correctly a certain
3 number of people who were with you in the group?
4 A. You enumerated roughly the names of the people that were
5 with us, but some of them joined us at the village of
7 Q. At the time Mr. Kuljanin, there were about 30 of you?
8 A. Less, I think. There were less than 30.
9 Q. Along the way, you met with a number of TO ambushes
10 which you tried to avoid?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And when you met up with this other group in the village
13 of Blace, you decided, all of you, to head for
14 Kalinovik, reckoning that the road leading to Kalinovik
15 was safer?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. However on that road too near the village of Ljuta,
18 somebody fired at you so you scattered and fled towards
19 Nerveta and Zara Mrkajic got lost and separated from the
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. That was the time when you captured the TO member whom
23 you referred you?
24 A. The man was captured later when he happened to run into
1 Q. And then you took his M48 from him, is that so?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. That boy promised to take you to Kalinovik?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And you led you for 2 or 3 kilometres?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And about 3 kilometres before reaching the village of
8 Ljuta you captured 2 more TO members?
9 A. When we captured the young boy we separated into two
10 groups and the second group, which I was not a part of,
11 they were the ones who probably captured those army
12 members, but I am not familiar with that.
13 Q. If I remind you that the young man you captured was
14 called Dzevlan?
15 A. I have no idea what his name was.
16 Q. If I say Karadzic Sucro, does that mean anything to you?
17 A. No, I only know the young man that we captured whom
18 I can remember his face, but I do not recall his name.
19 Q. The first to enter the village of Ljuta was Zara Mrkajic
20 and he was captured there?
21 A. He entered the village.
22 Q. And he called you to come down into the village as well?
23 A. He did.
24 Q. And in the village you met with Mirsad Fisic known as
25 Kolombo, a member of the TO, who also promised to take
1 you to Kalinovik?
2 A. I have no idea what his name was or who he was.
3 Q. But you know that a TO member put you up in the school?
4 A. There was not one member, there were several members.
5 Q. And they treated you correctly?
6 A. Yes, until they locked us up in the school.
7 Q. But Mr. Kuljanin, you can surely confirm that some people
8 from your group were not brought to the school in the
9 village of Ljuta but that in the process of fleeing,
10 they managed to cross over into Serb controlled
11 territory. Let me give you the names, Mitar Kuljanin.
12 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Counsel please, take it more slowly so
13 that the interpreters can get it.
14 MS. RESIDOVIC: I am sorry, I keep warning others but
15 I myself forget often. Mr. Kuljanin, until you were put
16 up in the school, there was no mistreatment, you were
17 given correct treatment?
18 A. Yes, until the school.
19 Q. However, in the course of the night just before dawn
20 some other persons entered the school, not those you had
21 surrendered to, and then your troubles began?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Some of them said that Juko Karadzic, a TO member, had
24 been killed?
25 A. I have no idea.
1 Q. But you do know that one of the three captured persons,
2 Juko, Karadzic was killed on that occasion?
3 A. I only know of one person captured. I do not know about
4 the other two, nor am I familiar with the killing of
5 anyone, because the group I was in did not come across
6 those two people, nor did it kill anyone.
7 Q. Mr. Kuljanin, I will not ask you about your crossing over
8 Bjeljasinca by truck to Konjic as you have told us about
9 that in detail during the examination-in-chief. Your
10 honours, I apologise. I do not know whether this is an
11 error, but I am being told that the list of names which
12 was confirmed by the witness does not appear in the
13 transcript, so is that a mistake or will the names be
14 added subsequently?
15 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: It was the period when you were so fast
16 that the interpreter could not get the names
17 accurately. If you still want to return to it, perhaps
18 you might repeat the question and go back to it so that
19 it will be correctly recorded.
20 MS. RESIDOVIC: Thank you, I will do that. Mr. Kuljanin,
21 I have already asked you but in view of the fact that
22 your answer has not been fully recorded in the
23 transcript, will you please confirm it once again, that
24 the group of about 30 people included the following
25 people, a group that you were in and that was heading
1 for Kalinovik. Mirko Dordic, Dragan Vujcic, Kulas from
2 Tarcin, whose name I do not know, Veko from Tarcin, Zara
3 Mrkajic, Branislav Gligorevic, Milovan Gligorevic, Momir
4 Mrkajic, Jelenko Milosevic, Rajko Kuljanin, Jelenko
5 Kuljanin, Velimir Kuljanin, Mitar Kuljanin, known as
6 Mico, Milorad Kuljanin, Milovan Kuljanin, Snjezan
7 Gligorevic, Mladen Gligorevic, known as Hasko, Radjov
8 Zivak, Aleksa Gligorevic. Will you please confirm, is
9 this part of the group that was moving with you towards
11 A. It is.
12 Q. Thank you. Since you have confirmed that some persons
13 from the group got separated and whom you did not see
14 later on and who were not brought to the school in
15 Ljuta, will you please confirm whether they are the
16 following persons: Mitar Kuljanin, Mladen Gligorevic,
17 known as Hasko Snjezan Gligorevic, Milorad Kuljanin,
18 Milovan Kuljanin, Zdravko Zuza and Jako from Tarcin; is
19 that correct?
20 A. I think it is.
21 Q. Thank you. I apologise, your Honours, I shall do my
22 best when such important things at least are in question
23 that I speak slowly and clearly so that everyone can
25 Mr. Kuljanin, you did not know the persons who
1 arrested you; is that correct?
2 A. That is correct.
3 Q. You did not know the persons either who took you aboard
4 the vehicle from the place of Ljuta to Bjelasnica and
5 later on to Konjic; is that correct?
6 A. That is correct.
7 Q. These are people that you did not know from Konjic, your
8 native town?
9 A. I did not know those people who took us from Ljuta and
10 from Igman to the Celebici camp, that is correct, I did
12 Q. Thank you. Mr. Kuljanin, if everything which I have just
13 asked you and what you have confirmed stands in the
14 statement which you gave to the military investigative
15 commission in Celebici in the way in which you have
16 answered me, then that is correct?
17 A. I did not understand the question.
18 Q. If what I have just now asked you, or rather to put it
19 better your answers to my questions are contained also
20 in the statement which you made in Celebici, then that
21 part of the statement is correct, is that so?
22 A. That is correct, I do not know what stands in the
23 statement, but what you have just read to me now is
24 correct. I have just confirmed that that is correct.
25 Q. I should like to ask now, with the assistance of the
1 usher, for you to be shown the statement of June 8th,
2 which the proposal of my learned colleague Mr. Ackerman
3 was admitted yesterday as evidence, 15 D4. In the
4 Bosnian language, please. (Handed). Mr. Kuljanin,
5 I shall not ask you about the content of the statement.
6 Please take a look at the top of the statement. Is it
7 true that it reads:
8 "Good for co-operation", or "co-operative", on the
9 top of the first page?
10 A. Yes, I can see those words.
11 Q. I would also like to ask you to see whether it is 1K
12 written there?
13 A. Yes, I see there.
14 Q. That could be the mark of the category to which you have
15 been assigned?
16 A. I have no idea what that means.
17 Q. You knew, Mr. Kuljanin, that the first category of
18 prisoners was that category which was considered to be
19 the more difficult category?
20 A. How can this difficult category be prisoners who are
21 co-operative? I fail to see that.
22 Q. I cannot give you an answer to that question. We shall
23 have to ask some of the members of the commission.
24 A. I cannot give you an answer either.
25 MR. ACKERMAN: I think it would be helpful if the witness
1 could be reminded to wait for the translation before he
2 answers. It is starting to all run together. Even
3 though Ms. Residovic is moving slowly, the witness is
4 answering immediately rather than waiting for the
6 MS. RESIDOVIC: So we have the same warning as the one
7 I gave yesterday, so please be so kind as to wait for
8 the translation of my question and to answer me only
10 A. Okay, yes.
11 Q. I should like to ask you, Mr. Kuljanin, also to take a
12 look at the top of the first page . There are two
13 signatures; is that correct?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Please look at the last page of the statement, also
16 there are two identical signatures; is that so?
17 A. Yes, it is.
18 Q. If I remind you in order to refresh your memory a bit,
19 can you, on the basis of these signatures, remember that
20 your interrogation was conducted by Mr. Sacir Pajic and
21 Mr. Nusret Secibovic?
22 A. I have no idea who interrogated me, nor did I know those
23 people, nor did I know them then.
24 Q. Thank you. This exhibit can be returned.
25 Mr. Kuljanin, after Rajko Dordic called you to come
1 down to Ljuta, members of the TO first ask that one of
2 you should collect the weapons and surrender them to TO
3 members; is that correct?
4 A. No.
5 Q. I did not understand.
6 A. No, that is not correct.
7 Q. Did you, when you came down, surrender those weapons?
8 A. No, I did not.
9 Q. You did not even hand over the rifle that you had taken
10 from the member of the Territorial Defence?
11 A. I had no rifle, so I had nothing to surrender.
12 Q. But before this court, you have said that your group had
13 disarmed a member of the TO and taken his rifle from
15 A. Yes, I stated that he had been disarmed and a rifle had
16 been seized from him. In fact, I said it was taken by
17 the members of the other group.
18 Q. So if a third person were to say that on that occasion
19 you surrendered 24 pieces of automatic and other
20 weapons, that party according to your memory would not
21 be saying the truth?
22 A. Yes, you stated that there were 30 of us in the group,
23 and that
24 of us had surrendered the weapons and now
24 you enumerated a list of the people in the second group,
25 of which there were 15, I believe.
1 Q. So the mistake could be in the number of weapons
3 A. I have no idea neither regarding the weapons or the
4 person who surrendered the rifle.
5 Q. Mr. Kuljanin, okay, I will not ask you about the weapons
6 any more, you have been asked enough about that subject.
7 You have known Mr. Rajko Dordic from before; is
8 that correct?
9 A. Very slightly.
10 Q. But you did know that he was working for the Territorial
11 Defence headquarters; is that correct?
12 A. No, I only knew that he was working somewhere in Konjic
13 and that --
14 Q. And that he resided in Konjic?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. But you saw Mr. Rajko Dordic in April and May in Bradina?
17 A. Yes, I did when he came home.
18 Q. The battles in Bradina lasted until May 27th; is that
20 A. I do not know about the combat. I do not know how long
21 the attack lasted. I do not remember.
22 Q. The attack was still going on when you left Bradina; is
23 that correct?
24 A. Yes, the Muslim units were setting fire to houses and
25 killing civilians in the village called Suljina Strana.
1 Before they advanced to the centre we started to pull
2 out from the encirclement that we were in.
3 Q. And when you were taken to Konjic to the Drustveni Dom
4 to the social centre, Zilic ordered that all your things
5 and documents be seized; is that correct?
6 A. As far as I remember, it is.
7 Q. And everything was taken away from you except from the
8 things which you managed to hide?
9 A. Yes, that is correct.
10 Q. Documents, your identity card, your watch was taken away
11 from you?
12 A. Yes, my papers and some other documents, my ID -- I did
13 not have an ID.
14 Q. You have stated before that in Celebici, during the
15 first few weeks, you used to see soldiers with HBO
16 insignia and the military police HBO insignia as well as
17 with lilies insignia?
18 A. I do not recall having stated that.
19 Q. If this were contained in the statement which you gave
20 to the investigator then it would not be correct?
21 A. I have replied to questions regarding the statement
22 which I have signed many times and I do not wish to
23 comment upon what is contained there any more. I do not
24 subscribe to that statement.
25 Q. My learned colleague, Mr. Ackerman, has asked you in
1 connection with that particular statement whether the
2 investigator of the Prosecution had warned you at the
3 time that some of those people had been indicted and you
4 confirmed that you had?
5 A. I have not understood. What have I confirmed as
7 Q. That when making that statement, you had been warned
8 that Mr. Delalic, Mucic, Landzo and Delic had been
9 indicted and you confirmed that; is that correct?
10 A. What did I confirm?
11 Q. That you had been warned of that?
12 A. Oh yes.
13 Q. You gave that statement in October 1995; is that
15 A. I think so, I do not remember.
16 Q. Are you aware of the fact that these persons were
17 indicted only in March 1996?
18 A. I have no idea when.
19 Q. So you claim that the investigator of the Prosecution,
20 if he told you that, gave you false data?
21 A. I do not know. I do not care very much about their
22 indictments so I did not remember the dates which he
24 Q. So, Mr. Kuljanin, you were not interested at all whether
25 on the basis of your statement some people could be
2 A. Not even today am I interested in these indictments.
3 Q. Let me ask you something in connection with your stay in
4 tunnel 9. Please tell me whether it is true that you
5 reach the door of tunnel 9 by a small assent?
6 A. I think that it is.
7 Q. Is it also true that after entering tunnel number 9, it
8 has a slight gradient sloping towards the end of the
10 A. Yes, it is.
11 Q. That would mean that the door of the tunnel are at sort
12 of the top of this decline or ascent of this entire
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. From the door, the tunnel goes downward?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Mr. Kuljanin, is it true that in a space of about a metre
18 from the door of this tunnel, there was some kind of a
19 bucket or container with water or some vessels with
20 water in which you received your food?
21 A. I do not remember.
22 Q. Let me refresh your memory. Please pay attention. Is
23 it true that after this space there sat prisoners in
24 tunnel number 9?
25 A. Yes, they sat there, the prisoners sat there.
1 Q. As it was a narrow tunnel two people could not sit
2 facing each other, they had to sit one next to the other
3 in a row; is that correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. As far as you remember, the first sitting next to this
6 space was Mirko Mrkajic called Bruba?
7 A. Yes, he came several days, I do not remember how many
8 days, after us.
9 Q. Next to him was sitting his son Velimir known as Vele;
10 is that correct?
11 A. I think so.
12 Q. And the third next to him was sitting Desimir Mrkajic
13 about whom you talked yesterday with my colleague
14 Ackerman; is that so?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And next to him Velibor Mrkajic was sitting?
17 A. Yes, you already mentioned Velibor.
18 Q. No, that was Velimir, Vele and this one is Velibor?
19 A. I think so.
20 Q. Then Brane Mrkajic?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Bradko Kuljanin was the next?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And in front of you was Nikola Mrkajic?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Then you yourself?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And then followed Andelko Kuljanin?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And so on. Let me not enumerate all the rest. So my
6 information is correct on the basis of what we have
7 heard so far from the witnesses about the exact sequence
8 of the people seated in the tunnel in the way in which
9 you have just now confirmed; is that correct?
10 A. Yes, it is.
11 Q. So you were the ninth person sitting in this row?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. If perhaps in the course of the hitherto interrogation
14 you did say something different, that is because it is
15 hard to remember all the facts after the lapse of so
16 much time; is that correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Thank you very much. Let us now go back to the question
19 of your final departure from Konjic. I shall ask you
20 again whether criminal proceedings had been instituted
21 against you?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Do you know of having been abolished?
24 A. I have no idea.
25 Q. As you told us yesterday, you were neither liberated nor
1 exchanged, but you fled?
2 A. But why would I have to be pardoned or criminally
3 prosecuted? From whom did I need abolition or pardon,
5 Q. Mr. Kuljanin, yesterday we discussed in depth this
6 situation. The process is such that I put the questions
7 and you answer my questions. It is not your business to
8 ask me questions. Thank you.
9 A. I was just answering your question.
10 Q. Thank you. Actually, on November 3rd 1994 or 1993,
11 I beg your pardon, yes 1993, of course, with a group of
12 prisoners, you overpowered a TO member, captured his
13 weapon, seized his weapon, and together with him,
14 reached Croatian territory, or rather territory under
15 the control of Croatian forces where you felt you were
16 quite safe?
17 A. We reached the territory halfway between Croat and
18 Muslim territory and then he went back home.
19 Q. But you had known this person?
20 A. I had not, I knew him as one of the guards in the
22 Q. He was Salko Bilanovic, is that not so?
23 A. I think his name was Salko, I do not know his surname.
24 Q. And you know he was killed later?
25 A. Let me make this clear. Salko came with us, as I had
1 already said, until we reached a territory that was
2 halfway between Croat and Muslim territory. Salko
3 treated us correctly in the prison, that is true. It is
4 also true that we did disarm him and seized his rifle,
5 but we spoke as normal people and we said goodbye
6 normally. Of course we did not dare give him back his
7 rifle and Salko left. What happened to him I learnt
8 only much later from other prisoners when they were
9 released from the Musala camp. As far as we were
10 concerned, Salko was released and treated quite
12 Q. Is it true that you said that a doctor had appeared and
13 carried out an examination?
14 A. That is true, I heard that from prisoners in the Musala
15 camp and they said that it was probably his heart or
16 something, that the doctors had established that he had
17 died from his heart attack or heart failure.
18 Q. But it is true that Salko Bilanovic, after your escape,
19 did not return to Konjic alive?
20 A. He did not return, but it is not true that we killed
21 him. I already told you why he did not return.
22 Q. Is it true, Mr. Kuljanin, that you and your group were
23 under suspicion of having killed this person; is that
25 A. Yes, we were under suspicion by certain people who know
1 nothing about anything, and then the doctor came and the
2 commander of the camp came and said what had happened.
3 The commander knew him and I was close to him even
4 before the war. He told the other prisoners that we had
5 not killed him, that the truth is so and so, that it was
6 heart failure he had suffered from.
7 Q. So, Mr. Kuljanin, in a rather strange way, you were
8 suspected twice, once of having killed a TO member at
9 the village of Ljuta whom you had disarmed and captured
10 and then again when escaping that you had killed the
11 person who you had overpowered and disarmed, even though
12 that is not true.
13 A. That is not true, this is the first I hear from you that
14 I was a suspect. If I had been suspected, surely
15 criminal proceedings would have been conducted against
16 me in the Musala camp itself, as was the case with some
17 other people who were taken to trial even while I was at
18 the Musala camp.
19 Q. But you know that both Salko Bilanovic and Karadzic --
20 let me just find his name -- that these persons are
22 A. I heard of Bilanovic, for the other person that you
23 mentioned, I do not know whether you mentioned him first
24 or second, anyway in the village of Ljuta I had no idea
25 about him.
1 Q. Suko Karcic. So you have no idea about him? Very well
2 then, thank you. I have only a few more brief questions
3 to put to you. Mr. Kuljanin, you said that before the
4 war you were not a SDS member?
5 A. I was not. I was not a member of the SDS at the time.
6 Q. Fine, but as a citizen of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the
7 former Yugoslavia, you know that people were highly
8 sensitive to certain insignia from the Second World War
9 which were reminiscent of the crimes committed during
10 that war?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. You knew that it was very badly seen to carry insignia
13 with the letter U because they represented the Ustashas
14 and the special cockard hats that were a symbol of the
15 Chetniks, did you know that?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Both these had committed very serious crimes during the
18 Second World War, had they not?
19 A. I did not participate in the Second World War, so I do
20 not know.
21 Q. And you did not study about it in history?
22 A. I was not a very good pupil. If I had studied history,
23 I probably would not have been in the camp.
24 Q. So because you did not study history and because you
25 were not familiar with this, frequently before the war
1 broke out, you wore various signs on your cap?
2 A. Never in my life, madam. I went to the camp and have
3 left the camp and never in my life did I put any kind of
4 signs on my clothes and I would like anyone to come and
5 tell me in my face that they had seen me wearing any
6 kind of signs of this kind. I have no reason to find
7 excuses. If I had worn a cockade, I would admit it
8 before this honourable court, but that, madam, is simply
9 not true.
10 Q. I am asking you, it is up to you to answer.
11 A. I have answered you.
12 Q. Thank you. That is why you were seen in cafes wearing a
13 pistol and also singing Chetnik songs?
14 A. Madam, you are misinformed 100 per cent. If I had sang
15 such songs, I would not conceal the fact. I would like
16 to have a drink and who drinks usually also since.
17 Q. But if you did sing such songs and carry such insignia?
18 A. Madam, I cannot say that. I cannot say that I have
19 never sang a song now and then, but I can say I never
20 sung such songs before the war or during the war, before
21 the camp or after the camp madam.
22 Q. But your behaviour, and even if you drank and sang
23 Chetnik songs, would provoke misunderstanding and cause
24 difficulties with representatives of other ethnic groups
25 and the police?
1 A. Never, never.
2 MR. TURONE: Objection, your Honour, asked and answered.
3 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I believe you.
4 A. Never, madam, did I wear any kind of insignia or signs
5 and it would appear from what you are saying that all
6 I did was sing, that I never did any work at all.
7 MS. RESIDOVIC: Your honours, my question -- my first
8 question was whether this provoked misunderstanding
9 amongst members of other ethnic groups and the police.
10 A. Never did I have any problems with my neighbours, with
11 members of other ethnic groups, or the police for that
12 sort of thing. I never had any difficulties with the
13 police on account of nationalism and I was very good,
14 I had very good relations with my neighbours from the
15 very first day. What happened later on we have all
17 MS. RESIDOVIC: Thank you, Mr. Kuljanin. I have no further
19 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much, Ms. Residovic.
20 Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES
21 Q. Mr. Kuljanin, I am just going to be fairly short with you
22 I hope, because I think quite a lot of the ground has
23 already been covered. Can I ask you please to start off
24 and just tell us a little more about the military
25 service you did between 1987 and 1989. You were in the
1 military police. What rank did you end up with please?
2 A. I was a soldier, I had no rank.
3 Q. Apart from being in the military police, did you receive
4 ordinary infantry training, prior to going into the
6 A. When I did my military service and when training like
7 any other soldier, the normal training that anybody was
8 given in the military service at the time.
9 Q. Basic training in how to be a soldier, how to be an
10 infantry man, before going on into the military police;
11 is that right?
12 A. All this was happening in the military police.
13 Q. You ceased to be in the military police in 1989.
14 Thereafter, did you remain fit and healthy until the
15 beginning of the war?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. In 1992, that was just, what, three years after you had
18 completed your military service?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. All that you had been taught and all you had learnt in
21 the military police, all that was still fresh in your
22 mind at the time, was it?
23 A. I do not know.
24 Q. Your evidence is that you took no part in any fighting
25 of any kind, nor were you recruited to any militia or
1 anything like that, despite the fact that you had recent
2 military service, is that it?
3 A. Yes, that is it, but I did my military service because
4 I had to, and I served in the police not because
5 I wanted to do it but because I had to do it; it was an
7 Q. Did you carry out any military service after your escape
8 in 1994, Mr. Kuljanin?
9 A. No, not for a single day.
10 Q. I want to turn now to the circumstances in which you
11 made your statement to the Office of the Prosecution.
12 That was in October 1995, Mr. Kuljanin. You have been
13 asked about it, you recall the man who was interviewing
14 you was called Ole Hortemo; is that right?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Help us about this: how was it that you came to be
17 interviewed by the office of the Prosecution? How did
18 they get in touch with you?
19 A. I have no idea how they got in touch with me. We spoke
20 on the telephone, we made an appointment. At first
21 I did not know what it was about. When I got there,
22 they told me what it was about. I did not have enough
23 time because I had to rush back to work and that is how
24 we got in touch.
25 Q. What was your work at that time, Mr. Kuljanin, in October
2 A. I was working in a company as a machine operator.
3 Q. But you spent, what, two complete days with Mr. Hortemo?
4 A. Two days, yes, but a few minutes, that is the question.
5 Each day I could spend maybe so many minutes, a certain
6 limited amount of time anyway.
7 Q. And the rush that you have described to us was not
8 personal business, but you just had to get back to work,
9 was that it?
10 A. Yes, I had to go to work. Nobody else could work
11 instead of me. In that sense, it was private.
12 Q. Just help us about this. You have told us yesterday
13 that you recall having had a further visit from some
14 people after 20th and 21st October 1995. Do you
15 remember telling us about that yesterday?
16 A. Yes, there were some other visits but I was not very
17 keen about the whole thing. I had not intended to
18 appear in the Tribunal in this honourable court, so
19 I did not pay very close attention to the whole thing,
20 nor was I prepared to make any detailed statements.
21 Q. You say visits; there was more than one visit, was
23 A. As far as I can remember, somebody came twice to put
24 questions to me.
25 Q. Was that somebody from the office of the Prosecution or
1 from some other body?
2 A. Probably from the Prosecution, as far as I can recall.
3 I do not know.
4 Q. Having answered some questions, did you put anything
5 down in writing and sign it?
6 A. Yes, I think that I did sign what I had stated.
7 MR. GREAVES: That being so, I would invite the Prosecution
8 to say whether they have any other statement from this
9 man that they have so far not disclosed concerning this
10 man's evidence.
11 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Is it now you are asking for that?
12 MR. TURONE: We can say, your Honour, that we have only one
13 statement which was the one which was disclosed
15 MR. GREAVES: Thank you. I am grateful to my learned friend
16 for that information. Mr. Kuljanin, let us move on
17 please if we may. I want to ask you now about the
18 incidents you described to us yesterday concerning the
19 war and your detention and your escape. That took a
20 period of your life of about two and a half years, would
21 that be about right?
22 A. Something like that.
23 Q. And in general terms, would you agree with this, that
24 those events were the most significant set of events in
25 your life?
1 A. Most significant? I did not want the war, I did not
2 want the camp, I did not want any of it. It happened.
3 What I experienced is what I had wanted least, so that
4 I do not consider it significant. It cost me my life
5 and my health. I do not see for whom that could be
6 considered significant.
7 Q. Perhaps another word might help you. The most memorable
8 incident of your life, Mr. Kuljanin; would you accept
10 A. I do not remember too well and I want to forget
11 everything I experienced and I survived and I am turning
12 to other matters. I want to start another life. I am
13 no longer interested in Bosnia or anything related to
14 that, not even the camp in which I spent so much time.
15 Q. No doubt, Mr. Kuljanin, but just for the moment, for the
20 minutes or so you are going to be here answering
17 questions and I would like you to help me if you can
18 please. You understand how important it is, the
19 evidence that you are giving, do you?
20 A. It depends for whom.
21 Q. Let us just ask you about this. I want to ask you about
22 the incident where you claim to have been locked up in a
23 manhole, Mr. Kuljanin. Would you agree with this, that
24 that is one of the most serious incidents that occurred
25 to you during your detention?
1 A. It was serious, whether it was the most serious I do not
2 know. It is difficult to measure. There were various
3 incidents and terrible experiences.
4 Q. If your account is right, you and several other people
5 were close to death from asphyxiation, were you not,
6 Mr. Kuljanin?
7 A. No -- yes, I was close to death every day and also in
8 the manhole.
9 Q. Something of which you have a clear memory; is that
11 A. I do.
12 Q. Something you are going to remember for the rest of your
14 A. I do not know if I will remember it for the rest of my
15 life. It is only now that my memories have been
16 refreshed, since I have been visiting here with the
17 Prosecution and the court, otherwise I do not remember
18 too well and I want to forget it as soon as possible.
19 Q. You see, I suggest to you, Mr. Kuljanin, that it was so
20 serious an incident you could not possibly have
21 forgotten it, even if you were in a hurry or in a
22 dilemma about whether you would give evidence or not; is
23 that right, is it not?
24 A. I have not forgotten it completely, but I am doing my
25 best to get over it.
1 Q. You did not mention it in your statement when you were
2 trying your best to remember things for Mr. Hortemo, did
4 A. Maybe I did not remember everything, maybe there are
5 many other things that I should have said but I did not.
6 Q. Let us go through a few of those things, Mr. Kuljanin.
7 The visit of the film crew that you described to us
8 yesterday. Another major incident during the course of
9 your detention, was it not?
10 A. Yes, I suppose so.
11 Q. Why did you not mention that in your statement when you
12 were speaking to Mr. Hortemo?
13 A. I have already said how little time I had with him and
14 I spent 18 months in the camp. How can I be expected to
15 tell him everything within half a hour? Is that
16 possible? That is not possible.
17 Q. For example, the two incidents you describe of stealing
18 food with Mr. Mucic; again not mentioned in your
19 statement, was it, Mr. Kuljanin?
20 A. Absolutely it was not mentioned but I lived through it
21 and I experienced it and participated in it.
22 Q. Tell us a little bit about that incident. Did Mr. Mucic
23 take you off in the vehicle on his own to deliver the
24 food wherever it was going?
25 A. Yes, he drove the van himself to his house, to the
1 destination where we unloaded the food which he provided
2 for his home.
3 Q. And he was on his own on both occasions, was he?
4 A. Yes, he drove the car, we went in that we had loaded.
5 Q. Bearing in mind your escape in 1994, why did you not
6 escape on that occasion if you only had Mr. Mucic to deal
8 A. This was in the centre of the town, I escaped from the
9 frontline where it was much easier, much simpler. It
10 was impossible to escape in these other circumstances,
11 even though he was alone and there were four of us.
12 Q. Let us move on to another incident that you did not
13 mention in your statement, the incident where you saw
14 Mr. Mucic making up a list for transfer of prisoners and
15 the actual transfer of those prisoners. You did not
16 mention that in your statement, did you?
17 A. I did not mention it because I did not remember it.
18 Q. And the incident in which you described to us yesterday,
19 your meeting with Mr. Delalic and going to his home and
20 doing some work there; you did not mention that either,
21 did you?
22 A. I did not say I had met with Mr. Delalic, I said
23 something quite different regarding Mr. Delalic.
24 Q. You know the incident to which I am referring, do you
25 not, Mr. Kuljanin?
1 A. The incident that occurred in front of his house, yes.
2 I did not say that I had met Mr. Delalic, I never stated
4 Q. I am sorry for having misled you and I apologise for
5 that, but you know which one we are talking about. You
6 did not put that in your statement, did you?
7 A. No, I did not. I have already given the reason why.
8 I had little time at my disposal and one needs much more
9 time to remember everything, and even now I did not
10 mention all the things that may have occurred to me
11 overnight and this morning, even.
12 Q. And your interrogation at the camp, again something you
13 did not mention in your statement, did you?
14 A. No, I did not mention it.
15 Q. The visit of the Red Cross, again something that you did
16 not mention in your statement, did you?
17 A. No, I did not mention it.
18 Q. In fact the only mention that you make concerning
19 Mr. Mucic in your statement was this, that he was the
20 commander for the first ten months in Celebici. Now
21 Mr. Kuljanin, you were not even --
22 A. I do not know for how many months, I just know that he
24 Q. That is what you put in your statement, Mr. Kuljanin.
25 You were not even in Celebici for ten months, were you?
1 A. I beg your pardon? I did not understand that.
2 Q. It is a quite simple question, Mr. Kuljanin. You were
3 not in Celebici camp for ten months, were you? It was
4 only a matter of four months.
5 A. Yes, but he was in Musala too, he was in charge of
6 Musala too. I was in Musala.
7 Q. Nor do the Prosecution suggest, as I confirmed with
8 Mr. Turone yesterday, that he was the commander for more
9 than six months, Mr. Kuljanin. I suggest to you that the
10 only fact which you recorded in your statement
11 concerning Mr. Mucic was one that was wholly incorrect,
12 was it not?
13 A. What is incorrect?
14 Q. The one single statement that you made about Mr. Mucic in
15 your witness statement to Mr. Hortemo was one that you
16 got wrong, was it not?
17 A. I still do not understand what is not correct, what is
19 Q. Mr. Mucic was not commander for ten months, that is what
20 you got wrong, Mr. Kuljanin, is it not?
21 A. I was about -- I do not know exactly how long I was in
22 the camp, but when I was transferred to Musala, Mr. Mucic
23 came there and he formed lists of people and he was
24 carrying a list, what kind of list it was I really do
25 not know.
1 Q. Thank you, Mr. Kuljanin. I am grateful to my learned
2 friend for just reminding me of one point. You say that
3 Mr. Mucic's house was in the centre of Konjic; is that
5 A. Not in the centre, in the very centre, but it was in the
6 broader area of the town of Konjic. I was not so
7 specific, I do not have a map to tell you exactly where
8 his house was. Konjic was not such a big city, it was
9 all near, everything was near.
10 Q. How close to the centre of Konjic? Within a kilometre?
11 A. I cannot tell you exactly.
12 Q. Just remind us of the date when you were transferred to
13 Musala camp, please?
14 A. I just do not know the date, I am sorry, I do not
15 remember dates very well.
16 Q. Would you accept December 1992?
17 A. I think so, November/December roughly. I just cannot
19 MR. GREAVES: Thank you very much, Mr. Kuljanin.
20 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, a housekeeping matter, I do not
21 think anyone moved to introduce the OTP statement
22 yesterday. I provided the Registry with a copy of it
23 and I move to introduce the statement that this witness
24 gave to the Office of the Prosecutor for the limited
25 purpose of impeachment only.
1 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I thought it was introduced on behalf
2 of the Defence.
3 MR. MORAN: No, your Honour, the other two statements that he
4 gave were. Nobody ever got around to moving the
5 introduction of the OTP statement. That is what I am
6 doing now, again, just for the limited purpose of
8 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Which statement is that? Let me have a
9 look at it.
10 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, I do not know if it has a number,
11 but it is the one with the OTP cover sheet on it, dated
12 20th and 21st October 1995. I believe the only two
13 statements that were provided to the court yesterday
14 were the records of his interrogation by the Army of the
15 Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
16 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, also the statement refers to two
17 attachments which I do not have, one of them is a
18 diagram of the way people were seated in the camp and
19 the other is a record of some physical examinations that
20 he says he attached and I do not have.
21 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Will you kindly help us?
22 MR. TURONE: The Prosecution has no objection to show the
23 extent to which the witness has and has not been
24 impeached. Thank you.
25 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Mr. Moran, you cannot directly put it
1 and admit it as such.
2 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, we did yesterday and he admitted it
3 was his statement. I would be happy to do it again. It
4 is exhibit number ...
5 THE REGISTRAR: D8/3.
6 MR. MORAN: If the usher would take that to the witness and
7 he could identify his signature.
8 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Let us have it numbered appropriately.
9 THE REGISTRAR: It will be numbered D8/3.
10 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, I have just been handed one that
11 does apparently have the diagrams on it. It does have a
12 few other markings on it. Would the court like to
13 substitute that? It has a couple of diagrams on it, no
14 medical records. We can substitute that one.
15 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Is this one which the court has? The
16 one I have has no diagrams on it.
17 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, I believe this one is more complete
18 than the one I was provided it.
19 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Why do we have two different types?
20 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, I do not know, I just got the one
21 out of my file box that had this witness's name on it.
22 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Which of them is the OTP statement?
23 MR. MORAN: They are both the OTP statement, your Honour.
24 MR. TURONE: We have a complete copy, if your honours wish,
25 of the English statements with the attachment which were
1 drawn by the witness in front of the investigator and we
2 can provide that.
3 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, we move to substitute that one and
4 let him identify the one that is in Mr. Turone's hand.
5 Mr. Kuljanin, if you just look at that piece of paper
6 that the usher is about set to hand you, is that your
7 signature on those documents?
8 MR. GREAVES: There is no translation coming through at the
9 present time.
10 A. Yes.
11 MR. MORAN: And that is a true and correct copy of the
12 statement you gave to the Office of the Prosecutor in
13 October 1995?
14 A. I have already said in connection with this statement
15 that I did not make it exhaustive, I did not remember
16 all the facts when I made that statement. I have
17 repeated this several times. I do not mind, I can go on
18 repeating it.
19 MR. MORAN: No, sir, all we are trying to do is just to
20 guarantee the copy that you are identifying right now is
21 in fact a true and correct copy of whatever you did in
22 October 1995. We are just basically proving that the
23 document is authentic. Your Honour with that, I would
24 move to introduce for the limited purposes of
25 impeachment only.
1 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: All right. I think the Prosecution
2 wants it admitted.
3 THE REGISTRAR: This will be exhibit D8/3.
4 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Do you have any re-examination?
5 Re-examined by MR. TURONE
6 Q. Just a clarification coming out from the
7 cross-examination done by Mr. Ackerman yesterday.
8 Mr. Kuljanin, one of the Defence lawyers yesterday,
9 Mr. Ackerman, asked you some questions about your
10 knowledge of Mr. Landzo's first name. He showed you your
11 OTP statement, this one, where you referred to Mr. Landzo
12 with the first name of Senad. You said that in fact you
13 did not know for sure Mr. Landzo's first name, but you
14 said it might be Senad, so in order to clear up any
15 confusion over this matter, I would ask you to look
16 around in this courtroom and see in this courtroom
17 whether the person that you are referring to in your
18 evidence as Landzo is present in this room. Please look
19 around and see if you see Mr. -- the person you name as
20 Mr. Landzo in this room?
21 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I actually object to that. There
22 is no way he could fail to make that identification. It
23 is of absolutely no relevance whatsoever. It is obvious
24 that there are certain persons sitting in the dock here,
25 I think it is totally inappropriate to make an
1 identification like that, therefore I object.
2 MR. TURONE: May I respond this as a question of
3 re-examination? It comes out from the cross-examination
4 of yesterday. By the way, in yesterday's transcript on
5 page 5541, Mr. Ackerman said exactly: "Your position
6 here today is that as far as you know, the person named
7 Landzo who did the things that you have described, was a
8 person named Senad Landzo; correct?
9 Answer: I repeat, I am not sure about the name,
10 the first name. I am sure about the surname and his
11 face and his physical appearance. That I am sure of."
12 So as your Honour said, quite often the
13 cross-examining party has to bear the consequences of
14 cross-examination. On the other hand, the objection of
15 Mr. Ackerman goes to weight, not admissibility. May
16 I please ask the witness to answer this question?
17 MR. GREAVES: Your Honour, this is a matter of general
18 importance, in my submission. This is a process known
19 in my jurisdiction, and I suspect those of others in the
20 common law system, as what is called a dock
21 identification. In the 1970s, as a result of a number
22 of cases involving identification evidence, the process
23 of dock identification came under scrutiny by the legal
24 system in the United Kingdom. As a result of that, Her
25 Majesty's Attorney General announced that because dock
1 identifications were so inherently and fundamentally
2 unreliable and dangerous, no Prosecutor would be
3 permitted from that day forward to carry out that
4 exercise in a court in the United Kingdom.
5 I respectfully submit that the point made by my learned
6 friend, Mr. Ackerman, is an entirely proper one. It is a
7 dangerous proceeding and one which should not be
9 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I see no danger in it at all. The
10 witness is very familiar with the person he is talking
11 about. If there is any ambiguity, he is entitled to
13 MR. TURONE: May I invite you to --
14 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Let us hear from the witness.
15 A. Yes, I had said that I was not sure and I still do not
16 know his real first name, but I know his surname and
17 I know the nickname that was used in the camp itself.
18 Yesterday, I said, I do not know whether you heard me,
19 that I could recognise him and that I know him well and
20 it is absolutely no difficulty for me to recognise him
21 among the accused and point a finger at him. As for his
22 name, I again say I am not sure. I think that was his
23 name, I did not know. I could have found out his real
24 name, but I was not interested. As for his physical
25 appearance and his description, I can easily show, point
1 a finger, to Landzo called Zenga, for the benefit of
2 your honours.
3 MR. TURONE: Please do that, point him out.
4 A. Mr. Landzo Zenga (indicates).
5 Q. Do you mean the person sitting on which?
6 A. Between the two policemen (indicates).
7 Q. For the record, may we -- let the record reflect that
8 the witness identified the accused. All right,
9 Mr. Kuljanin, just to make quite clear, is the person
10 that you pointed to now, is this person the one you have
11 been talking about yesterday as the person who beat you
12 and did many other things which you referred to as
13 Landzo, the Landzo who was in Celebici?
14 A. Absolutely so.
15 MR. TURONE: All right. Your Honour, my re-examination is
16 finished. Thank you very much.
17 (The witness withdrew)
18 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I think the end of this witness's
19 evidence. Thank you very much for your assistance. The
20 Trial Chamber will now rise and I think re-assemble at
22 (11.40 am)
23 (A short break)
24 (12.15 pm)
25 MR. MORAN: Excuse me, your Honour, before the next witness
1 is called, I have a little housekeeping matter I would
2 like to bring to the court's attention. Back on
3 24th July or thereabouts, I received in my office, and
4 I think the rest of the Defence lawyers received by
5 telecopy a letter from Mr. Niemann setting out who
6 witnesses were going to be and the order in which they
7 were going to be called. This morning we received
8 another list from Mr. Niemann which, although it is
9 similar to the list of July 24th, there are some
10 significant differences in it, and the list we got this
11 morning is substantially longer. I have copies of those
12 for the Tribunal, if you would like to take a look at
13 them. The only thing I would request, I understand that
14 the Prosecution may have problems lining up witnesses
15 and making sure who is going to be where when they are
16 supposed to be there, just as I am sure those of us on
17 the Defence side will have the same problem, but when
18 you are given notice from the Prosecutor that says:
19 "Below please find the witnesses we expect to call
20 during the two week court session, please be advised
21 this proposal is based on our current assessment of
23 You prepare for that, you start beginning
24 preparing for these witnesses, and then when at
25 10 o'clock in the morning you are handed another list
1 that is somewhat different and in fact includes the
2 names of witnesses that the Trial Chamber has not
3 authorised the Prosecution to call, it affects our
4 preparation, and again, we understand that the
5 Prosecution have some problems, but your Honour, we
6 would like to just bring this to the court's attention
7 and ask, if we get something, let us stick to it.
8 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much, except my first
9 appeal to counsel on both sides, because this is a
10 matter which need not even come before the Trial
11 Chamber, these are things you could have thrashed out,
12 because you all have identical difficulties in getting
13 witnesses and arranging, prosecution or defence. All
14 you need is to have a joint view as to how this case has
15 to go on. I am sorry this is appearing to affect how
16 you would respond to whoever is called as a witness.
17 Obviously that has to be, but I think Mr. Niemann might
18 have some explanation to this, because it is a little
19 difficult on the Defence.
20 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, your Honour. It seems to me that it is
21 unfortunate that counsel could not discuss it with us
22 first. Difficulties like that can sometimes be resolved
23 rather than making it a matter for your honours to have
24 to deal with. If that is the way it is to be, that is
25 the way it is to be.
1 Your Honour, the situation is that we are
2 unfortunately in a very flexible and liquid situation
3 where it is not easy to -- fluid situation where it is
4 not easy for us to be as definite as one would be in a
5 national jurisdiction where we have powers of ensuring
6 that people can be brought before the court under pain
7 of penalty. Regrettably we are not in that position and
8 we do not have that luxury. People do decide at the
9 last moment either not to come forward or whatever.
10 Indeed, it reaches situations where people simply say
11 "I am not coming this week because I am attending some
12 function and too bad". When confronted with those sorts
13 of problems, it makes it very hard for us to apply rigid
14 procedures which would obviously make the Defence work
15 easier, and no doubt they will experience a similar
16 thing, but hopefully when they are confronted with a
17 similar problem they can raise it with us and we will
18 endeavour to try and co-operate with the problems that
19 they are going to face in the same way as we have faced
21 Insofar as unauthorised lists are concerned,
22 unauthorised witnesses, that may be the case, your
23 Honour, but the situation is that we are giving the
24 Defence notice. If your honours decide they are not to
25 be called, obviously those witnesses will fall off the
1 list, but the Defence cannot be heard then to complain
2 that they were not given the list of witnesses that we
3 anticipated to call in anticipation of your Honour's
5 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Actually what is being complained about
6 here is perhaps the precipitation by which this change
7 was caused. If they are given some time they will know
8 how to adjust or discuss it with you. Whether it has
9 been authorised or not authorised, you know how to meet
10 the situation.
11 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, your Honour. That is the reason why we
12 gave the list, including unauthorised witnesses so they
13 are on notice. I wish I could say here now that the
14 list will not change. Sadly, that is not the luxury of
15 this jurisdiction, your Honour. It is a very fluid and
16 changeable situation and we unfortunately, all of us,
17 suffer from that.
18 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, just so the record is clear,
19 although this Trial Chamber issued an order yesterday
20 having to do with some of the witnesses, the court will
21 recall that at least on behalf of Mr. Delic, we had no
22 objection to the prosecution calling whoever they wanted
23 to call. We had no objection to them adding to their
24 witness list.
25 MS. RESIDOVIC: Your honours, I should like to subscribe to
1 the argumentation stated by my learned colleague, but
2 I do have to emphasise that the list which we got this
3 morning contains 21 names, of which a significant number
4 differs from the list which we received seven days ago.
5 I believe that that, despite the problems, the
6 Prosecutor's side would have to have, for the Defence, a
7 number of witnesses, a list of the number of witnesses
8 which will be invited so that we can prepare ourselves
9 in advance, because on the basis of the list that we
10 received on 24th July, we prepared ourselves
11 unnecessarily for some of them.
12 Also, there are nine persons on the list which we
13 received this morning which were never on the
14 Prosecutor's list, and on the basis of the decision of
15 yesterday, which we received yesterday, it has not been
16 yet decided whether they will feature on the list at
17 all. Now we do not know whether the court will at all
18 admit these people being summoned as witnesses, but we
19 have to exert maximum efforts on our side to prepare
20 ourselves for the witnesses so that we have to know,
21 I comprehend the problems which occurred in the month of
22 May, but four months after this time, I believe that the
23 court should ask the Prosecution side to give us a total
24 list, because the Defence, in view of the needs of its
25 investigators in the field and in view of its necessary
1 preparations, should have to be informed on time. Thank
3 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I hate to continue this
4 discussion, but I do want to rise to say that
5 I subscribe to everything Mr. Niemann has told you in
6 terms of the problems they are having and agree that we
7 are probably going to have the same kinds of problems.
8 I suppose that if anything, what we are all trying to
9 say to the court and probably could have been said just
10 as easily to Mr. Niemann directly, is that the fear that
11 we have is that all of a sudden a witness is going to
12 pop into the courtroom without us having adequate notice
13 and time to prepare cross-examination. I would think
14 that at least 48 hours would be a reasonable time to
15 have notice and perhaps even more than that, depending
16 upon whether it is a witness we have known about for a
17 long time or not. I think that is the concern that is
18 being expressed. I do not think it is a technical
19 matter about lists and that sort of thing.
20 MR. OLUJIC: Your honours, I fully subscribe to what my
21 distinguished and learned colleagues have just said, but
22 perhaps I should also like to draw the attention of the
23 distinguished prosecution to the fact that in May and
24 June, during this process, the prosecution should
25 know -- we are in the fifth or sixth month of this
1 process and the prosecution should know what its
2 complete list should be. We want to have a complete
3 list. We are completely aware that we have a lot of
4 work to do and that we will have a lot of work to do in
5 connection with some witnesses which will perhaps not be
6 heard in this court in view of all the objective
7 circumstances which my learned colleague Niemann has
8 already mentioned, but we want to have a systematic
9 preparation of our Defence possible, so I should like to
10 appeal on our distinguished colleagues on the opposite
11 side to provide us with a complete list, with the risk
12 being involved that perhaps not all those witnesses will
13 also be present at this court.
14 In that case, we shall be able to proceed in a
15 normal way without this nervousness. Thank you.
16 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much. You now see that
17 counsel can start from now to talk about whether a whole
18 list can be given to you or the period within which a
19 change could be made be communicated to you so that
20 things will be much easier for both sides.
21 Might I just make a short announcement for some
22 reasons of confidence? This Trial Chamber will sit at
23 2.30 pm tomorrow, after today's sitting, so we will not
24 have a morning sitting. That might give some
25 opportunity to discuss a few things
1 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, I want to thank you very much for
2 that extra time.
3 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much. Could we have
4 your next witness.
5 MR. NIEMANN: Thank you, your Honour. I call Wolfgang
7 WOLFGANG NAVRAT (sworn)
8 Interpreter, sworn
9 Examined by MR. NIEMANN
10 Q. Mr. Navrat, would you please state your full name?
11 A. Wolfgang Navrat.
12 Q. Perhaps you might just leave that turned on, I think,
13 Mr. Navrat. What is your date of birth?
14 A. 6th November 1960.
15 Q. What is your country of citizenship?
16 A. I am an Austrian citizen.
17 Q. What is your occupation?
18 A. I am a senior detective with the Vienna police
20 Q. Can you describe the position that you occupy with the
21 Vienna police department?
22 A. At present I am in charge of
25 officers who work in the
23 area of national security.
24 Q. What position did you hold in March 1996?
25 A. I was in charge of 24 officers who were involved -- not
1 only national security but also in the protection of
2 individuals and of property.
3 Q. In what year did you first obtain that position that you
4 held in March 1996?
5 A. On 1st May 1995.
6 Q. You have mentioned briefly the position that you had in
7 the Vienna police. Can you tell us what is involved in
8 terms of the investigation work that you traditionally
9 were engaged in, especially in March 1996?
10 A. I myself basically do not carry out any investigations
11 any longer. I am in charge of the officers, in terms of
12 supervising their work.
13 Q. Mr. Navrat, have you had occasion to give evidence in
14 court before in relation to your duties as a police
16 A. Once I testified as a witness before a Vienna court.
17 Q. Mr. Navrat, I would now like to take you back, if I may,
18 to March 1996 in relation to your involvement in the
19 matters pertaining to this case. Can you tell the court
20 what your role in the investigation relevant to these
21 proceedings were, and how you first became involved in
22 the matter?
23 A. On 18th March 1996, I became acquainted for the first
24 time with this case, and on that day, I was to carry out
25 a search at the INDA-Bau company.
1 Q. Who informed you that you had to carry out this search?
2 A. That was Vic Schilt, who is in charge of the department
3 of my officer Gschwendt, those two gentleman also being
4 involved in the case.
5 Q. Were you performing other duties at the start of that
6 day, 18th March 1996?
7 A. I take it that in the course of the morning I was
8 involved in other activities.
9 Q. What instructions were you given in relation to this
11 A. I was briefly informed about the case. Allegedly there
12 was a certain Mr. Delalic who had been arrested in Munich
13 and that was why in Vienna the search had to be moved
14 up. I happened to be available and that is why I was
15 given this assignment.
16 Q. In addition to being given instructions about the
17 matter, were you provided with any form of
19 A. With a view to carrying out this search, I was provided
20 with a search warrant and a prefilled document, a search
21 record that is required under Austrian law for searches
22 of this kind.
23 Q. When you say prefilled, what do you mean by that?
24 A. It had been filled out in part, and certain entries had
25 been typed in there; in other words the reference number
1 of the search warrant, the address of the INDA-Bau
2 company was on there, the name of the individual
4 Q. Turning back to the search warrant if I may, did you
5 happen to notice whether or not this warrant had been
6 signed when it was handed to you?
7 A. I assume that the search warrant bore the name of
8 Dr Seda as the warrant was from the Vienna court.
9 Q. But at this stage you cannot recall precisely whether or
10 not you observed that.
11 A. I merely assume that, because I take it that Dr Seda was
12 in charge of this matter.
13 Q. When you received this search warrant, what did you do
14 with it?
15 A. I read it, had a look at the grounds for the search, and
16 it was planned that two officers would be carrying out
17 this search together with me.
18 Q. I will ask you to look at the document you are now
19 shown. For the assistance of the Defence, your honours,
20 this is a document that they have had marked for
21 identification D3 774, which I think is also an annexure
22 to a motion that is indeed the search warrant of
23 15th March 1996. Might the witness be shown the
24 document, and perhaps Mr. Usher, you would just pass it
25 to the Defence so they can look at it briefly before it
1 is given to the witness. Thank you. (Handed). There
2 are copies of this in the English language which might
3 also be shown to the Defence, too. Might it be marked
4 for identification with the next prosecution exhibit
5 number? Might the English version of the document be
6 marked with the same prosecution number, but be given
7 the letter A, to indicate the English version?
8 THE REGISTRAR: It will be marked as number 163, and the
9 English translation 163A.
10 MR. NIEMANN: I am grateful to the Registrar.
11 Mr. Navrat, would you please examine this document
12 fully? Once you have fully examined it let me know and
13 I will ask you some questions about it if I may.
15 A. I have had a look at the document.
16 Q. What is the document?
17 A. This is a search warrant against Zdravko Mucic.
18 Q. Do you recognise this document?
19 A. This is not the document that I received in respect of
20 the INDA-Bau company.
21 Q. Perhaps I might have another document, and I apologise
22 to your honours. Perhaps you might have a look at this
23 document for me, please. I am sorry about that, your
24 honours. (Handed). There is also an English
25 translation of that document. (Handed).
1 Would you have a look at that document for me,
3 A. This is the search warrant which I was given in
4 connection with the search in question.
5 Q. When you were given that search warrant, did this
6 accompany you to the premises that are referred to in
7 the warrant?
8 A. That is right.
9 MR. NIEMANN: I tender that, your Honour. Might it be given
10 the next prosecution number in order? There is an
11 English version of it if that could be marked with the
12 letter A.
13 THE REGISTRAR: It is marked as number 164.
14 MR. NIEMANN: I am grateful to the Registrar. Mr. Navrat,
15 when you received this document, you went to the
16 premises, did you not, that are referred to there, in
17 Exhibit 164?
18 A. I did not go directly to that locality; rather I went to
19 the 16th District Police Station in Vienna, and I took
20 along two officers, they are the two officers who were
21 to carry out the search together with me.
22 Q. These two officers which you collected at the
23 16th District Police Station, had they been previously
24 involved in this matter prior to that time when you went
25 there to collect them?
1 A. No.
2 Q. Did you then proceed to brief them on what it was that
3 you were about to do?
4 A. I told them as much as I knew, and there upon we went to
5 the company at the address indicated.
6 Q. Who was the senior police officer in charge of this
7 group of three, when you went to the premises?
8 A. I was the one in charge of this search.
9 Q. Who was responsible for determining what would be
10 gathered or collected at the premises and searched for?
11 A. That was my task.
12 Q. In order to determine what it was that you were going to
13 search for, and if necessary seize at the premises, what
14 did you rely on in order to determine this?
15 A. I worked on the basis of the search warrant. Where
16 there is a reference to documents about war crimes and
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina, in particular video recordings about
18 the torture of prisoners.
19 Q. I think you are actually reading from Exhibit 164 at the
20 moment, are you?
21 A. That is right, yes.
22 Q. When you arrived at the INDA-Bau premises, was the
23 premises occupied by anyone, or was there nobody there?
24 A. There were two people present at the INDA-Bau premises.
25 Q. Did you know who these people were?
1 A. In the course of the search we found out that there was
2 a Mr. Kosanovic and then there was a girl there whose
3 name was Delalic.
4 Q. Were these persons present at the premises of INDA-Bau
5 throughout the whole period that you carried out your
7 A. Both of these persons were there throughout the search
8 and were involved in it, so to speak.
9 Q. Can you describe, for the benefit of their honours, the
10 approximate layout of the INDA-Bau premises that you
11 went into?
12 A. With regard to the company premises there was a small
13 entrance hall. Then there were two larger rooms, two
14 toilets, and a tiny room that was apparently used as a
16 Q. In what rooms of the premises did you primarily conduct
17 your search?
18 A. Basically all of the rooms were searched, but the main
19 focus, for various reasons, was on the largest room on
20 the INDA-Bau company's premises. That room gave on to
21 the street.
22 Q. What was it that was in this room that attracted your
23 attention such as to cause you to concentrate your
24 search in this room?
25 A. In that room, amongst other things there was a TV set,
1 and there were video tapes there, and there were
2 documents in that room as well, which were subsequently
3 seized on a temporary basis.
4 Q. Apart from the video and television which you have
5 described, what other furniture was in this room, if you
6 can recall?
7 A. Apparently it was meant to give people a possibility to
8 sit down, there was also an office there and then the TV
9 set was on a piece of furniture and then along one of
10 the walls there was a set of shelves, a piece of
11 furniture there as well.
12 Q. You mentioned the fact that you saw some videos that
13 attracted your attention in this room. Are you able to
14 recall where it was approximately in the room where you
15 found these videos?
16 A. Some of the video tapes were near the TV, and there were
17 other video tapes that were to the left of the TV, and
18 the piece of furniture there, as far as I can recall.
19 Q. Can you tell their honours what observations you made in
20 relation to these video tapes in terms of identifying
22 A. Now, the fellow officers and myself put one of the video
23 tapes into the VCR that was there in the room and had a
24 brief look at it soldiers could be seen on that video
1 Q. As a result of what you saw what did you then do?
2 A. Thereafter, various video tapes were seized on a
3 temporary basis and were placed in a cardboard box.
4 Q. You mention the words "temporary basis". What do you
5 mean by that?
6 A. In Austria items are seized on a temporary basis; that
7 is to say they are considered to be on a temporary basis
8 until the judge or the court rules.
9 Q. Perhaps you might elaborate just a little for us on
10 that. When you say "the judge rules", which judge are
11 you referring to?
12 A. Items are seized on a temporary basis, and subsequently
13 there is an analysis carried out at the police station
14 and different matters that are not relevant, or items
15 that are not relevant to the court, are given back to
16 the individuals concerned. The court receives only the
17 items that it feels are relevant to the case.
18 Q. Is there any order made by the court in relation to
19 items that the police do not consider relevant?
20 A. The court is kept informed, and an official note or a
21 transfer document, the non-relevant items are mentioned,
22 that is to say the items that are given back to the
23 individual, that is to say one should find a reference
24 to such items in the said document.
25 Q. Going back if I may to the videos that you examined and
1 seized at the INDA-Bau premises, how many of these
2 videos did you seize?
3 A. According to the record, 51 video tapes.
4 Q. These 51 that you referred to, who decided that they
5 should be taken back to the police station?
6 A. I decided that.
7 Q. At that moment that you seized them, did you mark them
8 or in any way place any form of police identification on
9 the videos that you had received?
10 A. I did not put any markings or identification numbers on
11 them. That was done subsequently at the police station
12 by the relevant department.
13 Q. When you were in the INDA-Bau premises and you seized
14 these videos, where did you put them the moment you
15 seized them?
16 A. The video tapes were placed in a cardboard box.
17 Q. Thank you. I think that you mentioned earlier in your
18 evidence that in addition to the search warrant that you
19 had, you also had in your possession when you went to
20 these premises a partially completed document; is that
22 A. Yes, that is right. That is the search record.
23 Q. In relation to this document, did you do anything when
24 you were at the INDA-Bau premises?
25 A. The document was filled in, I did that, that is to say
1 the service numbers of the officers involved were
2 indicated, the names of those persons present on the
3 INDA-Bau premises were entered as witnesses, and the
4 items which I seized were indicated on that, and then
5 that document bore the signatures of the persons present
6 at the search.
7 MR. NIEMANN: I would like you to look, if you would for me
8 please, at the document you are now shown. For the
9 assistance of the Defence, your honours, this is the
10 Niederschrift document which they themselves have had
11 marked for identification D341. There is also another
12 document which has been described as D25/1. It is both
13 in English and in German, as I understand it, your
14 Honour. Perhaps once that is marked -- I ask that the
15 document I have given to be marked with the next
16 prosecution number, and the English version be given the
17 letter A.
18 THE REGISTRAR: This will be marked as number 165 and the
19 English translation 165A.
20 MR. NIEMANN: Perhaps, Mr. Usher, you would be so kind to show
21 it to the Defence before you give it to the witness.
22 (Handed). Thank you, Mr. Usher. If you could give that
23 to Mr. Navrat and perhaps you might retrieve the
24 documents that are presently in front of him, in case he
25 be confused with those.
1 Mr. Navrat, please look at the document you have
2 now been handed. Tell me, do you recognise that
4 A. This is the document that --
5 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I think it is convenient for us to stop
6 here and go for lunch so that you can have a freer go at
8 MR. NIEMANN: Mr. Navrat, I will ask you to examine that for
9 me and I will ask you some questions after the
11 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Trial Chamber will now rise and
12 re-assemble at 2.30 pm.
13 (1.00 pm)
14 (Adjourned until 2.30 pm)
1 (2.30 pm)
2 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Two of you are starting.
3 MR. GREAVES: Your Honour, there is a matter I would like to
4 raise, a matter before my learned friend resumes his
5 examination-in-chief, with your Honour's indulgence.
6 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: We can hear you.
7 MR. GREAVES: Your Honour, some weeks ago, the Prosecution
8 revealed during the course of some discussions in court
9 that the witness, Sabina Manke, had been part of the
10 process of transporting documents from Vienna to
11 The Hague. Shortly after that, your honours will recall
12 that she came into the public gallery whilst Officer
13 Moerbaur was giving evidence, and that was a matter that
14 I raised with the Tribunal and she knew immediately that
15 she should not be in the public gallery, and left.
16 Having made that complaint, that should have been
17 sufficient reminder to the Prosecution to exercise
18 proper control over its witnesses acting in a proper
19 manner. This lunchtime, I observed that Sabina Manke
20 came back from lunch deep in conversation with this
21 witness, who is, of course, in the middle of giving his
22 evidence. It may well be that they were discussing
23 matters that were wholly innocuous, however it gives the
24 appearance of impropriety that someone who is both
25 employed by the Prosecution's office and who is, and
1 remains, a potential witness in this case should be
2 speaking to this witness whilst he is giving his
4 I would simply ask this, that the Prosecution
5 exercise proper control over their witnesses to ensure
6 that there is, at the very least, no appearance of
7 impropriety in the way in which their witnesses behave.
8 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You can carry on.
9 MR. NIEMANN: Your Honour, I know nothing of the matter and
10 I will make some enquiries.
11 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You can carry on with your witness.
12 MR. NIEMANN: Thank you, your Honour. Mr. Navrat, just before
13 the luncheon adjournment I had shown you a document
14 which I think you still have before you; is that right?
15 A. Yes, the document is right here on the table.
16 Q. And I think that I had just begun to ask you some
17 questions about that document, and I would ask if you
18 can tell me, do you recognise the document?
19 A. Yes, I do recognise the document.
20 Q. What is it?
21 A. This is the record of the search, and on the rear side
22 you can see the list of the items seized.
23 Q. Perhaps you might just quickly read for us the items
24 there that you are referring to, if you would.
25 A. The list of items provisionally confiscated, 51 video
1 tapes, two folders with newspaper articles, two folders
2 relating to Mucic and 8 folders relating to Delalic.
3 Q. That list you have just read out, in whose writing is
5 A. That is my handwriting.
6 Q. Does your handwriting appear in any other place on this
7 particular document?
8 A. On the front side of the sheet.
9 Q. Can you just tell us briefly what is your handwriting?
10 A. First page here, the service numbers of the officers
11 involved in the search were written down there by me.
12 Then the names of the witnesses present were written
13 down by me, none other than myself. And on the back
14 side, the list of items provisionally seized.
15 MR. NIEMANN: That you have just referred to. I tender that,
16 your Honour.
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: It already has a number.
18 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, I understand, your Honour, it is 165.
19 There is an English translation, 165A.
20 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: It is an exhibit. It is admitted as an
22 MR. NIEMANN: As your Honour pleases. Just in relation to
23 that document that has now been admitted as 165,
24 Mr. Navrat, there is a date that appears on the top of
25 that document which has been typewritten, after the word
1 "Vienna", three lines from the top of the document. Do
2 you see that date?
3 A. Yes, I do see the date.
4 Q. What date does that represent?
5 A. That is 19th March 1996.
6 Q. What is it put there for? What is the purpose of
7 putting that date there?
8 A. That was meant to be the date on which the search took
10 Q. Just to assist us again, the date shown there is
11 19th March. What date did the search take place?
12 A. The search took place on 18th March 1996.
13 Q. So far as you are concerned, does that appear to be an
15 A. Yes, apparently an error was made, as it had been
16 planned that the search would take place the following
17 day, but the search had to be moved up.
18 Q. Thank you. Mr. Navrat, apart from the videos that you
19 referred to previously in your evidence, what other
20 materials were seized at the INDA-Bau premises on
21 18th March 1996?
22 A. Alongside the video tapes altogether 12 folders were
23 seized containing a fairly large number of documents.
24 Q. Can you describe the way that you -- withdraw that, your
1 Can you describe how you found these documents,
2 where you found them?
3 A. These documents were in these folders and these folders
4 were in the large room that gives on the street in the
5 INDA-Bau premises.
6 Q. Were the documents contained inside the folders when you
7 seized them?
8 A. Yes, that is right.
9 Q. I think you said that the list that appeared on the back
10 of Exhibit 165 was the material that was seized. Does
11 that list there refer to the folders that you have just
12 referred to?
13 A. These documents were in these folders or binders
14 referred to in the list of items seized.
15 Q. And the eight plus two plus two, does that represent the
16 twelve folders?
17 A. Yes, it does.
18 Q. Who sorted them into those categories?
19 A. I did.
20 MR. NIEMANN: Would you look now please at the folders that
21 I now show you? Perhaps I might explain, your Honour,
22 because I apprehend the Defence may not have copies of
23 these, that this is merely to establish the chain of the
24 evidence. We are not seeking to tender them for their
25 contents or any other reason other than just establish
1 the chain, but perhaps the Defence might have a look at
2 them before they are shown to the witness. Perhaps they
3 may be given just one composite -- it may be easier to
4 give them one composite exhibit number rather than
5 individually number them.
6 Your honours may recall that in the evidence of
7 Mr. Moerbaur, he referred to folders from which documents
8 were taken. These are those very folders. We are not
9 interested in what is in them for the purposes of these
10 proceedings, we are merely producing them to show that
11 these were the folders from which the exhibits were
12 taken that Mr. Moerbaur referred to.
13 JUDGE JAN: Before you ask that, please ask him whether he
14 put some mark of identification in his own handwriting
15 on these folders, to make sure these are the folders
16 actually recovered from the larger room.
17 MR. NIEMANN: I have to do that through two witnesses, your
19 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Your honours, it appears there have been
20 some stickers added to these documents which may or may
21 not be identifiable. We do not know where the stickers
22 came from. Yellow tags like this, labels.
23 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: They were already there? Perhaps he
24 will be able to tell us.
25 JUDGE JAN: Perhaps Mr. Niemann will tell us who placed the
1 stickers. (Handed).
2 MR. NIEMANN: Mr. Navrat, would you please look at these
3 documents that have just been shown to you, go through
4 them one by one, and I will ask you some questions about
5 them. You do not need to open them at this stage, if
6 you can tell me what they are just by looking at the
7 outside. Could you tell me what they are? Do you
8 recognise what those documents are?
9 A. I take it that these twelve folders are those that
10 I provisionally seized.
11 Q. In order to satisfy yourself that they are the documents
12 that you seized, would you care to inspect them in
13 greater detail? You may look inside if that assists
15 A. I think that it might be helpful for me to have a closer
16 look -- if I could have a closer look, that might help.
17 Q. Please have a closer look. While you are doing that, if
18 it is at all possible to do both the tasks together,
19 could you attempt to sort them in the same order as you
20 have set them out in the record of the search document,
21 the Niederschrift, Exhibit 136, which I think is before
22 you -- 165, sorry. (Pause). Now that you have had a
23 chance to look at them, do you recognise those
24 documents, Mr. Navrat?
25 A. Yes, I do recognise them. I have striven to break them
1 down according to what I put in the search record.
2 Q. I think you have set them out in three separate piles on
3 the desk, is that right, in front of you?
4 A. Yes, that is right.
5 Q. I take it -- is the large pile the one relating to the
7 A. Yes, that is right.
8 Q. Which one relates to the two Mucic documents? Can you
9 just point to it with your finger?
10 A. These two to my right (indicates).
11 Q. And the other two documents -- and the other two, are
12 these two which I referred to as containing newspaper
13 articles (indicates). Mr. Navrat, do you see on those
14 folders that you have been looking at stickers, both
15 yellow and white stickers?
16 A. Yes, I do see them.
17 Q. Dealing first with the yellow stickers, did you put
18 those yellow stickers on those documents?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Do you know who did?
21 A. No, I do not.
22 Q. Do you see also on each of the documents white stickers?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Did you put those white stickers on the documents?
25 A. No.
1 Q. Do you know who did?
2 A. No, I cannot say.
3 Q. When you seized those folders at the premises of
4 INDA-Bau, what did you then do with them?
5 A. I put these folders in a plastic bag and we put all the
6 seized items together, that is to say I took these and
7 the video tapes to the police station.
8 Q. When you say police station, which police station is
10 A. That is my department, that is in Vienna, in the
11 1st district, Schotenring 729, 3rd floor.
12 Q. Where did you go in the building on the 3rd floor?
13 A. In the department concerned I believe it is room 326.
14 Q. When you went into room 326, what did you do then?
15 A. I handed over the box with the videos and the bag with
16 the folders. I put those on Mr. Panzer's desk and I told
17 him I was done with the search and then he took over
18 these items for further processing.
19 Q. That is Mr. Panzer, is it?
20 A. Yes, that was Mr. Panzer.
21 Q. What position does Mr. Panzer hold in the Vienna police?
22 A. He is a team leader in that department, or shall we say
23 of the group, dealing with operations relating to the
24 former Yugoslavia.
25 Q. Do you know whether or not he was involved in this
1 particular investigation?
2 A. He was involved in it, yes.
3 Q. At the time that you handed these folders that are in
4 front of you to Mr. Panzer, was there anyone else in the
5 room at the time that you can remember?
6 A. I cannot really remember. Perhaps Mr. Moerbaur was
7 really present at that time.
8 Q. The room that you went into where you handed these
9 folders to Mr. Panzer, was that his room where he
10 ordinarily worked?
11 A. That was the room where that team worked.
12 Q. When you say that team, do you know who the members of
13 that team were, or some of the members perhaps?
14 A. I know all the team members, yes.
15 Q. Can you name them, the team members, or at least some of
17 A. Mr. Panzer, Mr. Moerbaur, Mr. Bycek, Mr. Grensch.
18 Q. Did these gentlemen ordinarily work in this room, all
19 these gentlemen ordinarily worked in this room?
20 A. That is right, yes, they do.
21 Q. I wonder if you might do something for me. I will hand
22 to you some yellow stickers and a pen. I was wondering
23 if you would be kind enough to mark the newspaper items
24 with the letter N, two folders with the letter N for the
25 newspapers, and put the sticker on the folder. In
1 relation to the folders that you say relate to Mr. Mucic,
2 would you put the letter M on those? In relation to the
3 folders that you classified as relating to Mr. Delalic,
4 would you please put a sticker with a letter D on them,
5 please. (Pause).
6 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Your Honour, I would like to object and
7 perhaps my learned friend can clarify what the point of
8 all this is, putting these yellow stickers on at this
9 time, what the purpose of all this is.
10 MR. NIEMANN: I am happy to explain, your Honour. Your
11 Honour, as I say, the Prosecution has been put to strict
12 proof on these documents in terms of the chain, and
13 these folders contained the original documents that were
14 referred to in the evidence of Mr. Moerbaur and are
15 indeed the folders that Mr. Moerbaur referred to when he
16 spoke of taking documents from the folders. The folders
17 were classified by this witness at the time that he
18 searched the premises and he classified them into three
19 different categories, the first category being newspaper
20 articles, the second being documents that he classified
21 as relating to Mr. Mucic, and documents that he
22 classified as relating to Mr. Delalic. There is nothing
23 on the covers of these documents to reflect the
24 classification that this witness carried out at the time
25 of the search. The purpose of putting the stickers with
1 the letters N and M on the outside of the folders is so
2 it can be ascertained which folders he had classified
3 according to the classification that appears in the
4 record of the search which has been tendered in these
6 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Your Honour, I want to make sure I have
7 understood my learned friend correctly. Is it his
8 contention that for the first time this witness is being
9 asked to put his mark on these twelve folders? I want
10 to make sure I have understood that correctly.
11 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, the first time he has put his mark on
12 them. It is the first time he has marked them according
13 to the classification. He is reconstructing the
14 classification that he carried out on the day of the
16 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: What you have just explained is your
17 explanation and not what you have from his evidence.
18 All he did here was to have separated those documents in
19 the order in which he thought he moved them, but this
20 question of identifying them with these stickers are
21 your own.
22 MR. NIEMANN: That is the next witness, your Honour. It is a
24 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: It is you who suggested the stickers,
25 because he had not identified material for any of those
2 MR. NIEMANN: The witness from his evidence was able to
3 identify the folders, indeed. He said yes, he
4 recognised these as the folders that he seized. The
5 only thing we are doing by this exercise is merely
6 reorganising the folders according to the classification
7 that the witness applied when he drew up his record of
8 search. That is all that is being done.
9 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: That is your doing. You are not the
10 one giving evidence.
11 MR. NIEMANN: I am asking the witness to do it, your Honour.
12 JUDGE JAN: These are common folders easily available. He
13 has not put any mark of identification when he sees
14 them. What the evidence comes to is he sees folders of
15 this type from INDA-Bau, nothing more.
16 MR. NIEMANN: And he classifies them.
17 JUDGE JAN: He does classify them, but they are common
19 MR. NIEMANN: Maybe so, your Honour, but the witness was
20 asked to look at them and tell me whether he recognised
21 them, and he did.
22 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: But similar folders to this could
23 present the same thing.
24 MR. NIEMANN: Forgeries could, your Honour.
25 JUDGE JAN: Not forgeries, folders like that.
1 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: He could still say the same thing.
2 MR. NIEMANN: He could tell lies if he did not recognise
4 JUDGE JAN: Why should he tell lies? Look at his answer
5 that he gave. "I take it that these are the folders
6 which I recovered".
7 MR. NIEMANN: That is why I asked him to have a closer look
8 and at the contents.
9 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I thought it was even too fast for him
10 within such a short space of time to be able to identify
11 all these folders and the documents in them. If he had
12 seen them some few hours before now, one might suggest
13 he knew what he was coming to see.
14 JUDGE JAN: You should pay attention to the words he used.
15 "I take it these are the folders I recovered". Carry
17 MR. NIEMANN: Your honours, these documents are not designed
18 to prove anything other than the chain of the evidence.
19 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You should have stopped there.
20 MR. NIEMANN: That is all I sought to do.
21 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: It is sufficient he said he collected
22 these documents, these are the type of documents which
23 he collected. How can he go forward to identify them
24 without examining the documents which he puts into those
25 folders? I find that fairly difficult to accept.
1 MR. NIEMANN: I can only rely on the answer the witness gives
2 me, your Honour.
3 Might those folders collectively now be marked for
4 identification as MFI16.
5 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Your Honour, I object. They have not been
6 identified by this witness.
7 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: He has.
8 MR. O'SULLIVAN: He said they appeared to be, they might be,
9 he does not know and he put three stickers on them. How
10 is that identification, your Honour?
11 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: He did not put any stickers on them.
12 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Just now, he did.
13 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: After certain explanations by the
14 Prosecutor, but when he was shown the folders he took
15 them to be the ones which he collected.
16 MR. O'SULLIVAN: But he was not sure they are the ones. He
17 says they may be.
18 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: That is why you have to accept them for
19 identification before anybody really might have dealt
20 with them. He should be able to tell.
21 MR. NIEMANN: I have specifically marked them for
22 identification. I thought that was clear, your Honour.
23 Mr. Navrat, during the course of the search that
24 you conducted, did anybody assist you in -- did any of
25 the witnesses that were there assist you in pointing
1 objects out to you?
2 A. The witness Kovanovic at the outset of the search was
3 asked whether there were any items in the INDA-Bau firm
4 that might relate to war crimes in the former
5 Yugoslavia, but he did not know of anything, so the
6 items that were seized were seized on the basis of the
7 decisions by myself and my colleagues.
8 Q. When you were seizing objects and items at the premises,
9 did anyone raise any objection to you seizing any
10 particular material?
11 A. No.
12 Q. When you seized these materials, both the videos and the
13 twelve folders, were they in your possession at all
14 times up until you handed them over to Mr. Panzer?
15 A. Until I handed them over to Mr. Panzer, that is right,
16 they were in my possession until that point in time.
17 Q. Have you seen the materials from the time that you
18 seized -- the materials you seized from the time that
19 you handed them to Mr. Panzer until now when you gave
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. When did you see them?
23 A. On Friday 1st August 1997.
24 Q. That was here in The Hague, was it?
25 A. That is right, yes.
1 MR. NIEMANN: No further questions, your Honour.
2 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Any cross-examination?
3 Cross-examined by MR. O'SULLIVAN
4 Q. Yes, there is, your honours. We will proceed in this
5 order. First counsel for Mr. Delalic, second counsel for
6 Mr. Mucic, third counsel for Mr. Delic and fourth counsel
7 for Mr. Landzo.
8 Good afternoon, your honours. Sir, I have some
9 questions for you regarding this matter. You are a
10 member of Division 1 that reports to the Vienna police
11 department; is that correct?
12 A. That is right, yes.
13 Q. You said you hold the rank of senior detective, you held
14 that position in March 1996?
15 A. That is right.
16 Q. And your colleagues in that division are Mr. Moerbaur,
17 Gschwendt and Panzer; is that right?
18 A. That is right.
19 Q. You know that Mr. Moerbaur and Gschwendt have testified
20 before this Tribunal in connection with this matter?
21 A. Yes, I heard of that.
22 Q. You know that Mr. Panzer is to follow?
23 A. Yes, that is right.
24 Q. I would like to know a little bit about the rank of each
25 one of your colleagues back in March 1996. First
1 Mr. Moerbaur, what rank did he hold?
2 A. He was in the group that reported to Mr. Panzer.
3 Q. What about Mr. Gschwendt?
4 A. He was the leader of that group.
5 Q. And Mr. Panzer?
6 A. He was the group leader.
7 Q. Perhaps you could help me out a little bit here. I am
8 not familiar with the hierarchy. Which of those three
9 men was the superior.
10 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You want to know the team leader?
11 MR. O'SULLIVAN: What I have understood is group leader,
12 leader of the group?
13 A. Mr. Panzer was leader of the group, Mr. Gschwendt is the
14 senior police officer in that group; that is to say that
15 the other officers report to him.
16 Q. So Gschwendt is the highest ranking officer?
17 A. That is right.
18 Q. Moerbaur and Panzer report to him?
19 A. That is right, they reported to him.
20 Q. In March 1996. And Moerbaur and Panzer were at the same
21 level in rank?
22 A. Mr. Moerbaur is subordinate in certain ways to
23 Mr. Panzer. Mr. Panzer is a group leader and Mr. Moerbaur
24 is a case manager, as it were, in that connection.
25 Q. Did you work with these three gentlemen in preparing any
1 of the background in connection with the arrest of
2 Mr. Mucic and the searches and seizures that followed?
3 A. No, actually my only involvement was as part of the
4 search, in carrying out the search. I did not have
5 anything to do with it prior to that or after that.
6 Q. Is it correct to say that you are not familiar with many
7 of the documents on file?
8 A. I certainly could not recognise each and every one of
10 Q. Division 1, I would like to talk about that for a
11 minute. I believe you said that Division 1 is
12 responsible for the protection of the state, of
13 individuals and of property.
14 A. Division 1 is responsible for the protection, as you
15 said, of state, individuals and property.
16 Q. My understanding is that your division deals primarily
17 with offences which are in the Criminal Code which are
18 considered to be political in nature.
19 A. Yes, you could put it that way.
20 Q. For example, that would include offences like a threat
21 to the neutrality of Austria?
22 A. Yes, that would probably fall within the sphere of our
24 Q. As well you provide protection during official visits
25 and also in connection with international organisations,
1 do you not?
2 A. Yes, that is right.
3 Q. So we can consider Division 1 to be an elite unit within
4 the Austrian police force; is that right?
5 A. No, I would not put it that way. It does not relate to
6 Austria as a whole, this concerns just the city of
7 Vienna. I would not necessarily characterise it as an
8 elite group.
9 Q. How long have you been a police officer?
10 A. Could you be more specific in the question? Do you mean
11 detective or police officer? What do you have in mind?
12 Q. In total, for both.
13 A. I joined in August 1979. That is when I went to the
14 police academy and then in 1984 I took a course to
15 become a detective.
16 Q. So since 1979 you have been in the police force --
17 police training and thereafter became a policeman, then
18 a detective?
19 A. That is right.
20 Q. So about 18 years?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Time flies. I am assuming that you have had a number of
23 years of training, both practical and theoretical, as
24 you worked your way up through the ranks.
25 A. That is right.
1 Q. Part of your training must have included the handling of
2 physical evidence; is that right?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And in fact this is part of the training of all police
5 officers in Vienna, is it not?
6 A. As part of their training, yes.
7 Q. And during your many years of experience, you have had
8 occasion to seize evidence pursuant to search warrants,
9 have you not?
10 A. Not all that much, to tell you the truth.
11 Q. But when a search and seizure is carried out pursuant to
12 a search warrant, the procedures that you must follow
13 are governed by Austrian law; is that right?
14 A. That is right.
15 Q. You have been trained in these aspects of Austrian law?
16 A. That is right.
17 Q. Very briefly, could you tell us what this training
19 A. What training are you referring to? As a police officer
20 or as a detective?
21 Q. I am wondering how extensive your training on handling
22 physical evidence, searches and seizures over the
23 years. It is extensive, is it?
24 A. This is something that is taught as part of training,
1 Q. So in this regard, you are familiar with the code of
2 Austrian law which embodies these procedures for search
3 and seizure?
4 A. It is not in the Criminal Code, it is in the code of
5 criminal procedure rather.
6 Q. You are familiar with that code?
7 A. I know those rules and regulations in it, yes.
8 Q. It is on the basis of this code that the alleged search
9 and seizure was conducted at INDA-Bau; is that right?
10 A. That is right.
11 Q. Is this a copy of the code? (indicates)
12 A. Yes, it is.
13 Q. I would like to look at a few sections of the code with
14 you, with the help of the usher.
15 This, your honours, is a copy of the code with the
16 relevant pages photocopied with translations. There is
17 a translation for each one of you.
18 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: What do you intend to do with it?
19 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Just to briefly go over the procedures to
20 better understand what the procedures were pursuant to
21 this code when he performed the alleged search and
22 seizure. I will be brief.
23 MR. NIEMANN: Might the Prosecution be favoured with a copy?
25 THE REGISTRAR: The document is marked as 155/1 -- 55/1.
1 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Perhaps I can refer you first to
2 Article 139. Article 139, paragraph 1, are you familiar
3 with that section? That is the basis for a house
4 search, is it not?
5 A. Yes, that is right.
6 Q. And certain conditions must be fulfilled for the search
7 to be legal under Austrian law; is that correct?
8 A. Yes, that is right.
9 Q. One of those conditions is there must be a well-founded
10 suspicion that the person you are looking for is inside
11 the house.
12 JUDGE JAN: Just a minute. Is it really relevant? This is
13 a search by the police on its own. Here he was carrying
14 out a search in pursuance of a warrant which had been
15 issued. Why do you refer to this section? Come to a
16 more relevant section.
17 MR. O'SULLIVAN: This section is mentioned in the --
18 JUDGE JAN: I know that. Here he was carrying out an order
19 of the investigating judge, carrying out a search. How
20 will this be relevant?
21 MR. O'SULLIVAN: This, your Honour, is the basis for the
22 warrant and it is mentioned in the warrant.
23 JUDGE JAN: He is a police officer. He was charged to
24 execute a particular warrant. That was what he was
25 doing. Perhaps you can refer to the grantees, to the
1 rights of the person whose premises are to be searched,
2 whether those rights were respected or not. That would
3 be more relevant.
4 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Yes, your Honour. Thank you.
5 Let us look at Article 142, paragraph 2. That
6 makes reference to the persons who are present during
7 the search, or should be present during the search; is
8 that right?
9 A. That is right.
10 Q. And there are three possibilities under Article 142,
11 paragraph 2. The first one is the owner of the premises
12 must be asked to be present, correct?
13 A. That is right.
14 Q. And if the owner is not available an adult member of his
15 family must be asked to be present during the search and
17 A. Or someone else -- if someone else is involved, which
18 was the case in the search in question.
19 Q. I am just asking you generally. You would agree with me
20 that if it is not the owner, it is an adult member of
21 the family?
22 A. That is right.
23 Q. The third possibility, if the family member is not
24 available, a fellow lodger or a neighbour must be asked
25 to be present.
1 A. That is right.
2 Q. In the case of this third category, this person must be
3 an adult as well, right?
4 A. That is right.
5 Q. If you look at Article 143, paragraph 1 --
6 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You have not exhausted that.
7 MR. O'SULLIVAN: No, I have not, your Honour.
8 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: A fellow lodger or a neighbour.
9 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Quite correct, your Honour, pardon me. It
10 is a fellow lodger or a neighbour who must be present
11 under paragraph 2, Article 142.
12 A. Yes, it is written here.
13 Q. Before I go to 143, Article 142, paragraph 4, says that
14 there must be a record made of the search; is that
16 A. That is right.
17 Q. That is the record you have been referring to?
18 A. That is the record.
19 Q. Under Article 143, paragraph 1, there must be a list, an
20 inventory of the alleged items that are seized, correct?
21 A. That is right, the items seized have to be listed and
22 that list then is submitted to the relevant court.
23 Q. Right. The seized items must be handed over and
24 protected by the court; is that correct?
25 A. The seized items are listed and the items that appear to
1 be significant to the case are handed over to the court
2 along with a list thereof.
3 Q. For the whole time they are in the care and control of
4 the police, who hand it over to the court?
5 A. That is right.
6 Q. Article 144 relates to items which are seized which are
7 not a part of the warrant, and if that is the case, a
8 special record must be completed; is that correct?
9 A. If the items are not related to this case, but if they
10 do relate perhaps to some other criminal proceedings,
11 then one does have to draw up a separate record.
12 Q. And the Prosecutor must be informed immediately if that
13 is the case?
14 A. Yes, that should be the case.
15 Q. If the Prosecutor decides not to press charges, those
16 items must be given back immediately, that is in 144(2),
17 is it not?
18 A. That is the common practice.
19 Q. I just want to look at one more article with you, then
20 we are finished with the code. Article 145,
21 paragraph 1. It says there:
22 "During a search of documents, one must ensure
23 that their content is not made available to unauthorised
25 Is that correct?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. In paragraph 2 of Article 145, it says:
3 "If the owner does not allow the search of
4 documents, they must be sealed and deposited with a
6 Is that correct?
7 A. If requested to do so, yes.
8 Q. And under paragraph 3 of Article 145, it says:
9 "Documents which cannot be properly recorded must
10 be put in an envelope and sealed with an official seal."
11 Is that correct?
12 A. That is what it says here, yes.
13 Q. Then there are procedures in that paragraph 3 for
14 allowing the owner to perhaps put his seal on the
15 envelope, and then there are procedures for breaking the
16 seal thereafter; is that correct?
17 A. That is right.
18 Q. That is all the questions I have on the code. Could
19 I ask for the witness to be shown the search warrant
20 which was D164, please? (Handed). I just have one
21 question based on the warrant for you. It says:
22 "The search warrant is to be served to those
23 concerned immediately or at least 24 hours after the
25 That is pursuant to Article 140, paragraph 3 of
1 this code we just looked at; is that correct?
2 A. No, it says here that within 24 hours, the person
3 involved is to receive the search warrant.
4 Q. As far as you know, Mr. Delalic was never served with
5 this warrant, was he?
6 A. That was not required either, because this case was
7 against Zdravko Mucic. Subsequent to our search, he was
8 at the police station and he did receive a copy and in
9 fact signed it as indicated.
10 Q. I would like to talk to you a little bit now about the
11 paperwork that accompanies a search and seizure, some of
12 which we have looked at here. I would like to talk a
13 bit about the record, the German word is Niederschrift.
14 Just so we understand each other or use the same
15 language, I will refer to that as the record. When
16 I say record I am referring to Niederschrift, just to
17 make sure we understand each other.
18 My understanding is that the record is prepared on
19 the spot during the search and seizure of property.
20 A. Normally yes, to make things easier we fill in parts of
21 it in advance and in the code of criminal procedure, it
22 does say that a search is to be carried out in such a
23 manner as to cause as little annoyance or trouble to the
24 persons involved as possible.
25 Q. And the record is the only record of the search and
1 seizure which is prepared on the spot, is it not?
2 A. That is the only record that is drawn up on the spot and
3 a copy of that document is handed over to the persons
4 present at the search.
5 Q. It is fair to say that the record is made to show that
6 proper procedures have been followed; is that correct?
7 A. That is possible, yes.
8 Q. Is that not the reason you fill it out, to show that
9 proper procedures are followed?
10 A. No, it is indicated here what the legal basis is and
11 what was seized.
12 Q. So it is to show that the search and seizure are legal
13 then; is that correct?
14 A. That is right, there is a court ordered search warrant
15 that was the basis for this search, and subsequently on
16 this basis the material was confiscated.
17 Q. For now I would like to just talk about the record in
18 general, not this specific one for this case, all
19 right? Just so we all understand what the record is.
20 To show that the search and seizure are legal, the
21 record is preserved, is it not, as evidence?
22 A. Yes, for one, and then secondly the witnesses confirmed
23 that that was the case.
24 Q. That is why the record contains the date of the search,
25 right, so we know when it occurred?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. That is why it indicates the time at which the search
4 A. Yes, but there is also a specific report addressing the
6 Q. For now let us just discuss the record, if you do not
7 mind. So date, time, location of the search is in the
9 A. The date is on there, usually we do not write in the
10 time, that is reported in the report.
11 Q. You are telling me that the time is not normally
12 recorded in the record; is that correct?
13 A. At all events, I did not refer to it here in this
15 Q. Again, sir, I would like to talk generally about the
16 record, not this specific record of this alleged search
17 and seizure. I am asking just general questions about a
18 record. The time should be indicated in the record, is
19 that correct? There is a line for that.
20 A. The end of -- at the end of the search normally a copy
21 is handed over to those present with the time.
22 Q. And the record, generally speaking, makes a note of the
23 location where the search took place?
24 A. That is right.
25 Q. It identifies who conducted the search, does it not?
1 A. That is right.
2 Q. It states the grounds for the search?
3 A. The basis on which the search was conducted, yes, that
4 is indicated.
5 Q. As you have already told us, it will list the objects
6 allegedly seized.
7 A. Provisionally seized objects are indicated, yes.
8 Q. It indicates the persons present, the owner of the
9 property or his representative; is that correct?
10 A. The persons present are indicated, yes.
11 Q. The record is signed on the spot, on the premises, by
12 the police officers who conducted the search and
14 A. The record is signed by the officers as well as by the
15 persons present on the spot.
16 Q. You are talking there aside from the police officers,
17 the property owner or his representative signs it on the
19 A. The persons who were present at the search sign. The
20 person concerned need not sign this -- he may not be
21 there, he may be abroad or somewhere else.
22 Q. Yes, we understand that. The person who signs the
23 record is allowed to look at the record before it is
24 signed; is that correct?
25 A. That is right, the persons signing here, the witnesses
1 as well as possibly the person concerned, they not only
2 have a chance to see it but they also, in fact, get a
3 copy of it.
4 Q. And before they sign it they are allowed to verify the
5 accuracy of the contents of that record, are they not?
6 A. They can read it and check it, yes.
7 Q. They can also check it against the allegedly seized
8 items, can they not?
9 A. Yes, that is right.
10 Q. As you said, the owner or his representatives receives a
11 fully completed and signed copy of the record as proof
12 of the search and seizure, on the premises he receives
14 A. A copy is left on the premises should the person
15 involved or one of his representatives be able to take
16 hold of it at some point in time.
17 Q. Thereafter, this record serves as the basis for other
18 documents prepared by the police relating to that
19 particular search and seizure; is that correct?
20 A. Could you please be a little more specific about that?
21 Q. There are documents other than the record which are
22 prepared following a search and seizure and my question
23 is this: the record serves as the basis in the
24 preparation of the other documents.
25 A. That is right, subsequently, the seized items are
1 analysed and thereafter there is a list drawn up and
2 that list is made available to the court.
3 Q. Another use the record is put to is this: it serves as
4 proof before the courts to show how a particular search
5 was carried out; is that not correct?
6 A. It is proof that the search took place and it indicates
7 what items were seized.
8 Q. As we have seen, sir, the record is a very short concise
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. I am sure you would agree with me that it is fair to say
12 that the most important factors found in the record are
13 the date, the persons present at the search, and the
14 items seized; is that not correct?
15 A. They are in the record, yes.
16 Q. And they are the three most important factors in that
17 record, are they not?
18 A. As said, all persons present, the officers who conducted
19 the search and the objects seized. As I see it, those
20 are the most important entries.
21 Q. Inaccuracies on those points make the record unreliable,
22 do they not?
23 A. I would not necessarily agree with that. It depends on
24 the errors that were made.
25 Q. The preparation of the record, as you have already said
1 and as we have already seen, is required by law, is it
3 A. The record is not laid down by the law, this is drawn up
4 by us. What has to be provided to the court is a list,
5 an inventory of the objects seized.
6 Q. But the law requires you to prepare the record, does it
8 A. The law requires that the objects seized be listed in an
9 inventory, as it were.
10 Q. That is done through the record?
11 A. The inventory that goes to the court is not based on
12 this record, rather it is drawn up subsequently.
13 Q. If you move to this particular case, you will see that
14 the record was used before this court, so it is an
15 important document, would you not agree?
16 MR. NIEMANN: I object to that question, your Honour. It is
17 not fair to put that to this witness. The witness has
18 already said the document was drawn up for the purposes
19 of his own proceedings. If there is some subsequent
20 proceedings somewhere else in the world that takes
21 place, surely this witness cannot be expected to
22 contemplate the possibility that that document is then
23 going to turn up here and then have to give explanations
24 for inaccuracies in whatever may appear in it. I object
25 to that question, your Honour.
1 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Let us try it this way then. You have
2 mentioned that there are documents made subsequently to
3 the record which are required by law.
4 A. The inventory is referred to in the code of criminal
6 Q. When I asked you whether the record served as a basis
7 for the preparation of those documents, you answered
8 yes, did you not?
9 A. That is right.
10 Q. I would like to talk about a second set of documents,
11 the German word is Bericht, but I will be using the word
12 report, if that is all right with you, just so we know
13 we are communicating and for your honours as well.
14 I will be referring to the report when I mean Bericht.
15 Subsequent to the record, one or more reports may
16 be prepared, is that correct, following a search and
18 A. A report is drawn up about the search.
19 Q. There can be more than one report prepared, depending on
20 whether or not items are seized during a search; is that
21 not correct?
22 A. There will be perhaps several reports depending on the
23 outcome of the search and then there is also the
24 inventory which will go to the court. There is more
25 information about the items referred to on the record,
1 that is to say the seized items.
2 Q. Am I correct to say that whether or not items are sized
3 during a search, a record called the house search is
5 A. I only drew up a report about the search, but there
6 would be further reports about the analysis of the items
8 Q. Again, I am trying to speak just generally about
9 reports, but the one you drew up, the one you have just
10 referred to, can we call that the report of the house
12 A. That is right.
13 Q. That type of report, the house search, is drawn up
14 whether or not items are seized during the house search?
15 A. That is right.
16 Q. And this is usually done shortly after the record is
18 A. It is when you get back to the police station that you
19 draw up the report.
20 Q. Okay. This report, the house search, is prepared in
21 part on the basis of the record, is that correct?
22 A. That is right.
23 Q. In preparing the record, the house search, this first --
24 the report -- I will start again.
25 In preparing this report of the house search, are
1 the allegedly confiscated items also examined by the
2 person who prepares this report?
3 A. I just can refer to this case, it depends whether you
4 are going to go on working on the case in question or
5 not. Here that was not the case so all I could do was
6 draw up a report about the search and no further reports
7 about the items seized, that is I had handed the seized
8 items over.
9 Q. Let me be more specific. In preparing this report, does
10 a police officer look both at the record and at the
11 confiscated material, or just the record?
12 A. In this one report, it is not the seized items that are
13 referred to, it indicates how the search went, when it
14 was conducted, who was there, but it does not relate to
15 the objects seized.
16 Q. So when the initial report is made the police officer
17 never looks at the seized items; is that correct?
18 A. As a rule, he does, but in this specific case the
19 situation was somewhat different.
20 Q. In the case, generally speaking, where there is nothing
21 seized during a search and seizure, this first report is
22 the end of the documentation; is that correct?
23 A. No, there would be a report about the search all the
25 Q. In the case where something is seized during a search,
1 there are, as you have already indicated, other reports
2 prepared concerning the items allegedly seized?
3 A. That is right, and this is what is laid down by law.
4 This is the document that is put together that has been
5 referred to as an inventory and that has to go to the
7 Q. I would like to refer to two specific types of reports.
8 You have just mentioned one, a report called an
9 inventory or an evaluation -- sorry, an estimation, and
10 the second one being a report which is an evaluation.
11 You have heard of those two types of reports?
12 A. If something is seized there would be at least two
13 different ones, yes.
14 Q. These are the two that would be prepared?
15 A. Not necessarily. In this instance, it was not me.
16 I drew up the report about the search, and the seized
17 items were handed over to the relevant departments so
18 that the latter could proceed with the appropriate
20 Q. Okay. This report, the inventory, is a relatively short
21 report which lists the allegedly seized items; is that
23 A. The list should contain the seized items along with a
24 bit more elaborate description thereof.
25 Q. It is a little bit more elaborate than the first report
1 which we call the house search, but it is still a
2 relatively short document?
3 A. That is right.
4 Q. And the second report which we are calling the
5 evaluation is a much longer, much more detailed report?
6 A. That could end up being a rather lengthy document, yes.
7 Q. I think you have already said that these two last
8 reports, the inventory and the evaluation, are not
9 necessarily prepared by the police officer who conducted
10 the search and seizure?
11 A. That can be the case, yes.
12 Q. And in fact these two reports may be prepared by a
13 police officer who did not prepare the record or the
14 first report?
15 A. That is right, and that is what happened here.
16 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I think we will rise now and come back
17 at 4.30.
18 (4.00 pm)
19 (A short break)
20 (4.30 pm)
21 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Kindly remind the witness he is still
22 on his oath.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Mr. Navrat, may I remind you you are still
24 under oath.
25 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Yes, Mr. O'Sullivan.
1 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Thank you, your Honour. Before the break,
2 we were talking about some of the documentation that is
3 prepared in connection with a search and seizure. The
4 purpose at this point is to become familiar with some of
5 this paperwork, because most of us in this courtroom are
6 not familiar with Austrian police procedures, so I am
7 not necessarily talking specifically about the matter
8 you are here to testify about, I would like to speak for
9 the next couple of minutes about the documents
11 So far, we have seen that there is a document
12 called the record, and so far we have looked at three
13 types of reports, the house search report we have gone
14 over, the report we have called the inventory, and the
15 report we have called the evaluation. Just before we
16 broke off we were talking about the two last reports,
17 the inventory and the evaluation. I believe my last
18 question was that these last two reports, the inventory
19 and the evaluation, are prepared in part on the basis of
20 the record and of the report called the house search; is
21 that correct?
22 A. That is right.
23 Q. As well in preparing these last two reports, police
24 officers examine the allegedly seized items; is that
1 A. That is right, yes.
2 Q. In regards to all three reports, the property owner or
3 his representative is not present when those reports are
5 A. That is right.
6 Q. So this person does not sign the reports?
7 A. That is right.
8 Q. And he does not receive a copy of the reports?
9 A. That is right, too.
10 Q. Just to confirm what you said earlier, these reports are
11 used as proof before the courts to show how a particular
12 search and seizure was carried out and how seized
13 property was controlled while in police custody?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. In short, it is to see whether the search and seizures
16 are legal, is that fair?
17 A. That can probably already be gleaned from the record
18 because the reference to the legal basis in it.
19 Q. These reports are also prepared to show whether the
20 evidence is reliable; is that not correct?
21 A. Well, the further analysis serves to indicate to the
22 court which objects are relevant to the case and to
23 provide the court with those objects.
24 Q. Aside from being relevant, it shows how reliable the
25 evidence is, whether it came from where we said it came,
1 things like that?
2 A. Could you please be more specific?
3 Q. The paper trail is supposed to start at the premises and
4 end in the courtroom to show that there is some sort of
5 reliability regarding where the evidence came from and
6 how much faith we can put in it?
7 A. Yes, I would take it that is the case.
8 Q. My last question on the Bericht, they, as you said, are
9 all required by law, the preparation of the reports are
10 all required by law?
11 A. No, that is not right. What is provided for in the law
12 is listing the objects seized in the inventory, and also
13 to provide the person concerned with a document about
14 the search.
15 Q. All right. I would like to move on to another set of
16 questions. Aside from the alleged search and seizure at
17 INDA-Bau, you know there was also searches and seizures
18 carried out at Taubergasse 15 in relation to this
20 A. At about this same time there were other searches that
21 were being carried out, but with regard to the specific
22 addresses I am afraid I cannot help you there.
23 Q. You have already indicated, and we have already seen
24 that your signature appears on the record prepared in
25 connection with INDA-Bau.
1 A. I did put a sort of signature on it, yes.
2 Q. And your signature also appears on the report, the house
3 search, which is prepared in connection with INDA-Bau?
4 A. That is right.
5 Q. I believe you said that you were not a part of the
6 planning of this operation; is that correct?
7 A. That is right.
8 Q. But you would agree with me that this was a well manned
9 and well planned operation.
10 A. Well, I cannot really judge that, because I had to go to
11 carry out this search on short notice, and I am not at
12 all aware as to how the search, the operation was
14 Q. But you were well manned?
15 A. For this search I did have staff along, as said,
16 officers from the 16th District of Vienna.
17 Q. So you had enough competent men with you to do this
18 search properly; is that right?
19 A. Yes, that is right.
20 Q. I assume things went smoothly and there was no pressure
21 on you to hurry operations, was there?
22 A. There were no incidents in the course of the search and
23 there were no consequent complaints tendered to the
24 police concerning it.
25 Q. Let us go back to INDA-Bau for a second. I have a few
1 questions about the allegedly seized items. You say
2 that some documents were seized at INDA-Bau, correct?
3 A. A large number of documents were seized that were to be
4 found in these folders.
5 Q. It is clear from what you said on direct that these
6 documents were not marked before being taken away from
7 the premises?
8 A. That is correct.
9 Q. You do not know how many documents there were in total?
10 A. That is right.
11 Q. So you certainly have no idea how many pages there were?
12 A. That is right.
13 Q. I thought I heard you say that allegedly, there were
14 videos seized at INDA-Bau?
15 A. That is right.
16 Q. And the videos were not marked before you left the
18 A. They were not marked either, no.
19 Q. You say these items were brought back to police
21 A. These objects were taken to the office where Mr. Panzer
22 is stationed.
23 Q. You brought these items back in a cardboard box; is that
25 A. The video tapes were in a cardboard box and the folders
1 were in a plastic bag.
2 Q. So there was one bag and one box; is that right?
3 A. That is right.
4 Q. What were the dimensions of that box?
5 A. I am afraid I cannot tell you that at present.
6 Q. You do not recall?
7 JUDGE JAN: That must be a standard cardboard box for the
9 A. It was a standard cardboard box, there is all different
10 kinds of sizes. I am afraid today I can no longer tell
11 you exactly what size it was. At all events, it was big
12 enough for the video tapes to fit in it.
13 MR. O'SULLIVAN: So it was just an average size box.
14 A. Yes, you could put it that way.
15 Q. This cardboard box was not marked before leaving
16 INDA-Bau, was it?
17 A. It was not marked either, no.
18 Q. This cardboard box was not sealed in any way before
19 leaving INDA-Bau, was it?
20 A. It was not sealed, nor was there any insistence that it
21 be sealed.
22 Q. My understanding is that the flaps were intertwined on
23 the box?
24 A. I cannot tell you whether that is the case or not.
25 Q. So the box may have been wide open?
1 A. It could have been open as well, and the plastic bag
2 might have been on top of it with the folders in it.
3 Q. And the plastic bag was not marked in any way, was it?
4 A. It was not marked either, no.
5 Q. And it was not sealed?
6 A. It was not sealed.
7 Q. So nothing prevented anyone from easily opening the bag
8 or the box to have access to the contents; is that
10 A. That is not right.
11 Q. If you have a wide open box or intertwined flaps and a
12 plastic bag that is not sealed, there is not much
13 between the contents and the outside world, is there?
14 A. These objects, the objects that I seized, were in
15 custody from the moment I took them until they were
16 brought and delivered to the police station. They were
17 in my custody.
18 Q. That was not my question. My question was that both the
19 bag and the box could be easily opened. He did not
20 answer that question.
21 MR. NIEMANN: That was not the question, your Honour.
22 JUDGE JAN: That is an inference, it could be opened. What
23 do you want to ask the witness?
24 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Very well. I would like to talk
25 specifically about the trip from INDA-Bau to police
1 headquarters. Did you and your colleagues return to
2 police headquarters?
3 A. That is right.
4 Q. Along with you came the allegedly seized items from
5 INDA-Bau; is that right?
6 A. They were in the vehicle.
7 Q. Who had care and control of these items during this trip
8 from INDA-Bau to police headquarters?
9 A. The objects were under my control.
10 Q. At what time did you arrive at police headquarters?
11 A. I can no longer tell you precisely. At all events, it
12 must have been before 4.45 pm, I would assume.
13 Q. So you would say between 4.30 and 4.45, is that fair?
14 A. I take it, as I can recall, the search was over by 4 pm,
15 so it takes some 15 or 20 minutes to get back to police
17 Q. At what time did you leave police headquarters that day?
18 A. I assume that it would be between 1 and 2 pm that day.
19 Q. So 1 o'clock on the morning of the next day; is that
20 correct? Did I understand you correctly?
21 A. I do not recall the time.
22 Q. There may have been a problem in translation, so I will
23 ask the question to you one more time. You arrived at
24 police headquarters between 4.30 and 4.45.
25 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Let us narrow down the question; 4.30
1 or 4.45 pm, is it? So he will know from where to take
3 MR. O'SULLIVAN: We will say you arrived at 4.45 pm at police
4 headquarters. What time did you leave police
5 headquarters that day?
6 A. I must have reached police headquarters by 4.45 at the
7 latest. As to when I left police headquarters, I am
8 afraid I no longer remember.
9 Q. Was it before midnight?
10 A. I assume so.
11 Q. Were you there for one hour, two hours, four hours?
12 A. I cannot really say, I am afraid. I do not remember.
13 Q. It would be more than a hour?
14 A. I believe so, yes.
15 Q. But it could have been more?
16 A. It could have been more, yes.
17 Q. You say that you brought these items allegedly seized
18 from INDA-Bau to room 326?
19 A. The objects which I seized were brought to the office
20 where Mr. Panzer and his group were stationed.
21 Q. That is the office of Moerbaur, Bycek and Panzer?
22 A. Moerbaur, Bycek and Panzer.
23 Q. At what time did you go to that room?
24 A. As I said, it had to be before 4.45 in the afternoon.
25 Q. So you went immediately to that room?
1 A. Yes, that is right.
2 Q. You handed the objects over to Panzer; is that correct?
3 A. That is right.
4 Q. When Mr. Moerbaur was here testifying he said you gave
5 the objects to him?
6 A. I placed these objects on Mr. Panzer's desk and I told
7 him that I was done with the search and he took over
8 these objects.
9 Q. Mr. Moerbaur says you gave him those objects in room
11 A. I do not know where room 331 is. I brought these
12 objects to the office where Mr. Panzer and his colleagues
13 were housed and I cannot really tell you whether it was
14 326 or 327, but at all events, it is the room where
15 Panzer and his group were lodged.
16 Q. Mr. Moerbaur describes room 331 as the office he shares
17 with his colleagues. Does that sound right?
18 A. If that is the room then it might well be room 331, yes.
19 Q. Is that the room where allegedly seized items from the
20 other locations were brought?
21 A. I assume so.
22 Q. What are the dimensions of that room approximately?
23 A. I take it it is about between
20 to 30 square metres.
24 Q. Is there furniture in that room?
25 A. There are cabinets and a number of desks there.
1 Q. The room into which you brought your allegedly seized
2 items, there were also many other people there that
3 evening, were there not?
4 A. Mr. Bycek and Mr. Moerbaur might already perhaps have been
5 there, but I can no longer tell you that precisely.
6 Q. Did other people arrive in that room that evening?
7 A. I cannot comment on that either, because after I handed
8 over the objects I had seized to Mr. Panzer I went to my
9 office to draw up the report.
10 Q. So you are saying you just dropped off the objects and
11 left the room; is that right?
12 A. You could put it that way, yes.
13 Q. Then you went off to prepare the report.
14 A. That is right.
15 Q. So you have no idea whether they were objects brought in
16 from the other locations in relation to other seizures
17 in this matter; you do not know whether they came that
18 night or not, is that what you are saying?
19 A. I cannot comment on that.
20 Q. You do not know whether the police officers who
21 allegedly performed those other searches and seizures
22 showed up that evening? You never saw them either?
23 A. I can no longer remember.
24 Q. Did you see Mr. Zdravko Mucic that evening?
25 A. I am aware that he was taken to police headquarters, but
1 I did not see Mr. Mucic.
2 Q. How long after -- I will come back to that in a second.
3 Let us talk about the documents specifically that
4 you prepared in connection with the alleged search and
5 seizure at INDA-Bau. Aside from the record you prepared
6 or signed, and the report, the house search, which you
7 prepared and signed, you know that there were two other
8 reports prepared as well. Let me help you. One of them
9 was prepared, the inventory, by Bycek and Panzer on
10 April 22nd 1996, and the other report, the evaluation
11 was prepared by Bycek and Panzer again on April
12 22nd 1996.
13 A. I only know of my record and my report. With regard to
14 the inventory and the analysis report, I cannot tell you
15 anything about it, because I had no further dealings
16 with this case.
17 Q. So you have never seen those documents?
18 A. I saw these documents when looking through things at the
19 company premises. I have never seen these other two
21 Q. You said earlier, I believe, that the alleged search and
22 seizure took place on 18th March; is that correct?
23 A. This search took place on 18th March 1996.
24 Q. With the assistance of the usher, could we have the
25 record, Prosecution Exhibit 165 and 165A, shown to the
1 witness, please? (Handed). I also have copies for the
2 three judges.
3 MR. NIEMANN: I must confess, your Honour, I am confused as
4 to what these documents are. I thought the usher was
5 asked to show the witness the Prosecution exhibit.
6 Unless my friend has copied the Prosecution exhibit,
7 I do not know what he is now showing your honours.
8 MR. O'SULLIVAN: I do not know if we can have it marked as a
9 Delalic exhibit as well.
10 MR. NIEMANN: I certainly have no problem with the witness
11 being shown a Prosecution exhibit, I just do not know
12 what this document is.
13 JUDGE JAN: An exhibit is an exhibit, part of the record.
14 If a document is already part of the record, you can
15 take advantage of it. Why have it twice exhibited, once
16 as a Prosecution exhibit and again as a Defence
18 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: It is already in the list of exhibits.
19 There is no point, except if there is a difference
20 between the two, and you intend to emphasise the
21 difference, that one can understand, but as long as it
22 is the same document.
23 MR. O'SULLIVAN: It is, your honours. You have the record in
24 front of you, sir.
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. I am looking at the first page. I would like to go over
2 this a little bit with you. Up in the top right of the
3 record we see the date, 19th March 1996, typed in; is
4 that correct?
5 A. That is right.
6 Q. If we go to the bottom of that first page on the last
7 line, the blank space over the word "date" is not filled
8 in, is it?
9 A. That is right.
10 Q. So on the face of this document, it shows that the
11 search of INDA-Bau took place on 19th March 1996?
12 A. No, that is not what it means. The search was carried
13 out on 18th March.
14 Q. That is what you told me earlier, but you also told me
15 earlier that this document is prepared on the spot,
16 during the search. So on the face of it, it shows
17 19th March 1996, does it not?
18 A. I already indicated today that this record was handed to
19 me already partly filled out. Apparently, the officers
20 who filled it out expected the search to take place on
21 19th March and so that is how they gave it to me and
22 I did not check this document.
23 Q. But on the bottom line, there is this place for the date
24 which is blank. You could have written in the date,
1 A. That is right.
2 Q. Are you sure it took place on the date that you said it
3 took place, this search and seizure?
4 A. Yes, I am quite sure about that, because I drew up my
5 report about the search and I indicated then what the
6 date was and Mr. Kovanovic, who was present in the
7 premises, was provided with a copy.
8 Q. But all we have is your word against this document, is
9 that correct, on the date when the alleged search and
10 seizure take place?
11 A. The search took place on 18th March 1996.
12 Q. Are you telling me there were two searches; one on the
13 18th, one on the 19th?
14 JUDGE JAN: He has already explained it.
15 A. There was only one search, and it took place on
16 18th March.
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Is there any good reason why you think
18 you need to emphasise the difference in the dates?
19 MR. O'SULLIVAN: On the front page again at the bottom on the
20 last line in the blank space over the word "time", which
21 is right next to the blank space over the word "date".
22 It is not filled in, is it?
23 A. There is nothing written in there either, no, that is
25 Q. Again, on the face of the document, we do not know at
1 what time the alleged search and seizure took place?
2 A. With regard to the time, you can find that in my report
3 about the search, when it started and when it was over.
4 Q. Again on the front page, moving up to the top line, we
5 see three numbers, 1021, 1874 and 1707. That is where
6 the police officers should be identified, correct?
7 A. 1021, 1874 and 1707, those are the service numbers
8 assigned by the Vienna police department to the officers
9 in question and those officers were involved in the
11 Q. But nowhere in this document is there a name linked to
12 these numbers, is there?
13 A. That is right.
14 Q. So again on the face of the document we do not know who
15 conducted the search, do we?
16 A. On the face of the document, no, there is no reference
17 to the names.
18 Q. Turning to the second page of your record, I am looking
19 at where you filled in the allegedly seized items. You
20 see there are 51 unmarked cassettes, video cassettes,
22 A. That is right.
23 Q. And there is a total of 12 unmarked folders or binders;
24 is that correct?
25 A. That is right as well.
1 Q. We have seen so far a number of errors in this record
2 that you signed. Did you read it before you signed it?
3 A. The record was drawn up by me, and filled in in part by
5 Q. So you did read it before you signed it?
6 A. What I added I certainly reread.
7 Q. So you are saying you did not read it in its entirety
8 before you signed it?
9 A. If I had read it in its entirety, then certainly there
10 would be a different date indicated on the front page.
11 I checked to see whether the references were
12 appropriate, to see in connection with whom it was
13 issued and to see for what address it was issued.
14 Q. Let us move along to the second document on which your
15 signature appears, the report, the house search, which
16 is dated 18th March 1996. Where was the report, the
17 house search, prepared?
18 A. The search report was drawn up by me in my office, that
19 is office 322.
20 Q. At what time did you prepare that report?
21 A. That was subsequent to the search, that is to say
22 subsequent to the delivery of the seized items to
23 Mr. Panzer.
24 Q. Do you know what time that was, approximately?
25 A. I assume that it was after 4.30 pm, or towards 4.30,
1 that I began.
2 Q. So soon after you arrived at police headquarters?
3 A. That is right.
4 Q. Did you prepare this report on the basis of the record?
5 A. On the basis of the record, but also on the basis of my
6 own notes.
7 Q. Did you also inspect the allegedly seized items when you
8 prepared this report?
9 A. No, I did not have any further look at them.
10 Q. With the assistance of the usher I would like to show a
11 copy of this report to the witness, marked for
12 identification. (Handed).
13 THE REGISTRAR: It is marked as D56/1.
14 MR. O'SULLIVAN: You are looking at the English translation
15 on the first page, and the last two pages are in the
16 German language. Do you recognise this document?
17 A. The second and third pages, yes, I recognise them.
18 Q. Those are the ones dated March 18th, 1996?
19 A. That is right.
20 Q. That is your signature at the end?
21 A. That is my signature.
22 Q. This is the report, the house search, you prepared in
23 connection with the search and seizure at INDA-Bau?
24 A. That is right.
25 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Your honours, I move to have this document
1 admitted into evidence.
2 MR. NIEMANN: No objection.
3 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: It is admitted.
4 MR. O'SULLIVAN: In this document you claim that the alleged
5 search and seizure of INDA-Bau took place on March 18th,
6 contrary to what is indicated in the record; is that
8 A. That is right.
9 Q. You make reference to video tapes in this report. They
10 had not been marked at this point, had they?
11 A. I take it that at the time this report was drawn up the
12 video tapes had not yet been marked.
13 Q. So you note 51 unmarked videos, the same number as in
14 the record; is that correct?
15 A. That is right.
16 Q. The documents, the folders and files to which you make
17 reference, they had not been marked at this point; is
18 that correct?
19 A. That is right.
20 Q. So there you note a total of 12 unmarked folders, the
21 same number of folders as appears in the record?
22 A. It is the same figure, if you add them up.
23 Q. A moment ago I made reference to the report, the
24 inventory prepared by Panzer and Bycek on April 22nd,
25 1996. That record was prepared in connection with the
1 alleged search of INDA-Bau. With the assistance of the
2 usher, I would like to show that document to the
3 witness, please.
4 THE REGISTRAR: It is marked as D57/1.
5 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Have you ever seen the last two pages of
6 that document, the ones signed by Bycek and Panzer?
7 A. No, I do not recognise these pages.
8 Q. You would agree with me, though, that it is the report
9 prepared by those two gentlemen in connection with the
10 alleged search and seizure at INDA-Bau?
11 A. I take it that Messrs Bycek and Panzer were referring to
12 that search, i.e. the search at INDA-Bau.
13 Q. You notice if you look at it, it is rather short, that
14 this document does not state on what date the alleged
15 search and seizure at INDA-Bau took place; is that
17 A. That is right.
18 Q. I suppose in fairness to your colleagues, based on your
19 documents, they could not be sure of the date, could
21 A. I take it that the colleagues knew when the search
22 occurred because at the same time, they were carrying
23 out a search as well.
24 Q. This report makes reference to items that were allegedly
25 seized from INDA-Bau, does it not?
1 A. That is right.
2 Q. And this report makes reference to 12 files which for
3 the first time in any document associated with INDA-Bau
4 indicates that they have been identified as I/1 to I/12;
5 is that correct?
6 A. I cannot comment on that, because I do not know more
7 about the case.
8 Q. You would agree it is the first document we have seen
9 together today that makes any type of identification of
10 the files; is that correct?
11 A. That is possible, but I cannot judge the matter because
12 I do not know more about the case.
13 Q. This report makes reference to 54 not 51 videos as your
14 previous documents state; is that not correct?
15 A. That is right.
16 Q. Based on documents you and I have looked at, for the
17 first time, those videos are given an identification,
18 I/13 to I/66; is that correct?
19 A. I cannot comment on that because I do not know more
20 about it, but I see that they have been numbered and
21 perhaps also marked.
22 Q. Contrary to what your documentation showed?
23 A. That is right.
24 Q. So let us back up for a second and have a look at what
25 you have said about INDA-Bau. You have told us that the
1 allegedly seized items left the premises unmarked,
3 A. That is right.
4 Q. Certain things were put into a cardboard box that was
5 not marked?
6 A. That is right.
7 Q. The cardboard box was not sealed?
8 A. That is right.
9 Q. The flaps on top of the box may or may not have been
10 shut; is that correct?
11 MR. NIEMANN: Your honours, do we have to go through all of
12 this again?
13 MR. O'SULLIVAN: I am just summarising, your honours. I am
14 almost through.
15 MR. NIEMANN: I am sure such a summary can be left for final
16 addresses or at some time when the documents are sought
17 to be admitted, your honours, but is it necessary to
18 summarise it again through the witness?
19 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: You have about five minutes, any way
20 you wish to present your case.
21 MR. O'SULLIVAN: We have also seen the date on the record
22 does not correspond to the date you say the search at
23 INDA-Bau took place, correct?
24 A. That is right.
25 Q. The time is not indicated in the record?
1 A. The time was not indicated in the record, no.
2 Q. Based on the record, we do not know the identity of the
3 police officers who allegedly did the search and
5 MR. NIEMANN: I object to that, your Honour, because it is
6 not strictly correct. The witness has attested to the
7 fact that the identification numbers of the police
8 officers were put on to the report and has taken us to
9 them. That is a means by which identification can be
10 made of the officers and I object to this question, it
11 is not correctly put to the witness.
12 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: It is a question the witness can answer
13 from his own knowledge.
14 MR. O'SULLIVAN: The question was; based on the record, you
15 had no way of knowing the identity of the police
16 officers who allegedly conducted the search and seizure
17 alter INDA-Bau?
18 A. That is not true, because the service numbers are there
19 in the record and you can see who is behind, as it were,
20 those numbers.
21 Q. In looking at these three documents we have just gone
22 through, the record and the two reports, the allegedly
23 seized items from INDA-Bau may not be the ones that
24 showed up at police headquarters that day; is that
1 A. That is not true.
2 Q. We have gone from 51 to 54 videos, correct?
3 A. That is right.
4 Q. That is a discrepancy of three, correct?
5 A. That is right.
6 Q. One possibility is that three new videos were added to
7 the original 51; you would accept that possibility,
8 would you not?
9 A. Everything is possible, but I have a tough time
10 imagining that.
11 Q. Another possibility is that we are dealing with 54
12 different videos from the ones that came from INDA-Bau.
13 A. That is not right.
14 Q. They were not marked, the container was not marked. It
15 was not sealed. You accept that possibility, do you
17 A. I can rule out that possibility.
18 Q. In fact, the cardboard box which left INDA-Bau may not
19 be the same one that arrived at police headquarters,
20 because it was not marked either?
21 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: He did say it was in his custody until
22 he brought it to police headquarters.
23 MR. O'SULLIVAN: We know for sure that the number of videos
24 inside the box changed, do we not, between the time --
25 A. That is right.
1 Q. Maybe your colleagues were looking through a different
2 cardboard box.
3 A. I have a tough time imagining that.
4 Q. If the video tapes changed, perhaps the documents
5 changed, too, between the time you brought it and the
6 time your colleagues examined it?
7 JUDGE JAN: Why do you not leave that for the argument stage
8 instead of putting it to the witness.
9 MR. O'SULLIVAN: One final question on this point. Earlier
10 we looked at Article 145 of the code together. That
11 article clearly states that items should be sealed
12 before leaving the premises and that was not done here,
13 was it?
14 A. These objects are sealed at the request of the person
15 concerned, but no such request had been made.
16 Q. I am referring to paragraph 3 of Article 145, which says
17 if a proper inventory cannot be done, it should be
18 sealed, correct?
19 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: He did not do that because it was not
20 requested. That is what he just told us.
21 MR. O'SULLIVAN: I have one final question for today, your
22 Honour. You say you saw the folders in front of you
23 that you looked through earlier on 1st August 1997. You
24 saw them on 1st August 1997?
25 A. That is right.
1 Q. Is that when you practiced putting them in the three
2 neat piles?
3 A. No.
4 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Shall we stop there for today, perhaps?
5 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Will you wish to continue tomorrow
6 afternoon your cross-examination?
7 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Yes.
8 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: Thank you very much.
9 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, before we leave I have a request on
10 behalf of my client. As the court is well aware,
11 Mr. Delic has a bad back and he is hurting quite a bit
12 today. Since it does not appear he is going to be
13 directly affected by the continued testimony of this
14 witness and the next witness, he would ask the Trial
15 Chamber's permission to be excused for coming tomorrow
16 and Thursday.
17 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: I think he could be excused, since you
18 are still here representing him.
19 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, on behalf of my client, thank you
20 very much.
21 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I think Mr. Landzo is in the same
22 position other than the back pain. It does not affect
23 him and he has other work he would like to be able to
24 do, if that is all right.
25 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: He can be excused. He is in very good
2 MR. ACKERMAN: Thank you very much.
3 JUDGE KARIBI-WHYTE: The Trial Chamber will now rise until
4 tomorrow at 2.30 pm.
5 (5.30 pm)
6 (Court adjourned until 2.30 pm the following day)