Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 5305

1 Friday, 9 November 2001

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

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

6 JUDGE LIU: Call the case, please, Madam Registrar.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. This is the case number

8 IT-98-34-T, the Prosecutor versus Naletilic and Martinovic.

9 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Meek.

10 MR. MEEK: Good morning, Mr. President and Your Honours.


12 [Witness answered through interpreter]

13 Cross-examined by Mr. Meek:

14 Q. Good morning, LL. How are you this morning?

15 A. Thank you very much. Very well, thank you. Although I speak only

16 French and Spanish, I can understand and be understood by the whole world,

17 and I am very happy about that.

18 Q. LL, I wish I were so lucky. I think we left off yesterday -- you

19 were explaining that in your life, you feel that being sincere with a

20 person helps to gain their trust and that you believe people when you

21 speak with them; is that correct?

22 A. That is right.

23 Q. Witness LL, in being sincere with somebody, would that also

24 compass the notion of being honest with that person?

25 A. Yes.

Page 5306

1 Q. Witness LL, do you tape-record the conversations of all your

2 conversations with your friends?

3 A. That's right.

4 Q. And you did tape the conversation of the evening of the dinner

5 party with Ivan Andabak, Mr. Tuta, General Zorzo and the others at

6 Mr. Andabak's house, did you not?

7 A. Yes, I did.

8 Q. And is it your testimony that you tape-record all conversations

9 you have with friends?

10 A. When I am working for the military, then it is regular for me so

11 as to be able to understand better the problems and aspects of the social

12 life of people with whom I am in contact with so as to understand better

13 what could be their problems and how can I -- how can I bring closer the

14 human kind to their problems and to understand better the problems they

15 may have and the -- their manner and the way they live, how they live, how

16 they are as human beings.

17 Q. And tell me, how does tape recording surreptitiously, without the

18 knowledge or consent of a friend, help you in this regard?

19 A. Yes. Just as I tape the lectures when I attend some history

20 classes, for instance, to understand better what was said, just as I take

21 notes openly. Likewise, at a dinner when I cannot take notes because it

22 is impossible for me to eat and take notes at the same time, then it is

23 the customary practice.

24 So I decided, just as I have always done, to record these

25 conversations so as to be able to analyse them subsequently and so that I

Page 5307

1 could understand better what was said. But I do it, then I analyse them

2 subsequently, following the event.

3 Q. Witness LL, is this tape recording that you made at the dinner

4 party available, or has it been, unfortunately, lost like the videotape

5 and the still pictures you testified about yesterday?

6 A. When I learned that I would be called by this Tribunal, I did my

7 best to find this tape, to try to establish -- to try to establish contact

8 with the military superiors to whom the tape was given. And

9 unfortunately, I could not find it. But I've undertaken to find it so as

10 to be able to -- and I hope I will be able to offer it to the Tribunal,

11 and I will continue my efforts.

12 Q. Since you routinely tape-recorded conversations during your term

13 in Bosnia-Herzegovina, can you give me a list of the other military or

14 civilian authorities that you surreptitiously recorded?

15 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Scott.

16 MR. SCOTT: I object to that, Your Honour, as to relevance and

17 beyond the scope of direct examination.

18 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Meek. This question is too broad.

19 MR. MEEK: I'll narrow it down.

20 Q. Was Ivan Andabak -- was this the only occasion during your tenure

21 in Bosnia-Herzegovina that you surreptitiously tape-recorded conversations

22 without the knowledge of the people you were taping?

23 A. No.

24 Q. Did you -- can you give me the name or names of some of the other

25 individuals that you tape-recorded conversations without their knowledge?

Page 5308












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 5309

1 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Mr. President. For sake of the Spanish

2 government which, of course, would control these decisions, not this

3 witness, I have to invoke Rule 70. And any request to that effect would

4 have to be directed to the Spanish government, which I suggest counsel can

5 do. But this witness cannot make any commitments to turn over documents

6 belonging to the Spanish government or to declassify or otherwise make

7 those documents available.

8 MR. MEEK: Mr. President, may I respond.

9 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Meek.

10 MR. MEEK: This witness has testified extensively about his four

11 months or so in Bosnia-Herzegovina and his activities and the people he

12 spoke with. He declined on direct examination to bring forth the evidence

13 that he had surreptitiously tape-recorded the conversation bearing the

14 voice of my client allegedly, and Mr. Andabak. It's -- the Prosecution

15 has opened the door to these questions. I'm not asking them to turn over

16 the information obviously because I don't know if they have it.

17 All I'm asking for is some names of other people that he may have

18 tape-recorded. If he gives me an answer that yes, he did, then Mr. Scott

19 may be correct, there are ways that we can request those -- that

20 information. However, we can go into closed session, if that would be

21 appropriate. But I cannot know -- I'm not a fortune teller. I have no

22 crystal ball. And therefore, I would not know who to ask -- what tapes to

23 ask for if they are even in existence today unless I know who he taped.

24 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Scott.

25 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President, to clarify something on this so the

Page 5310

1 record is clear. It was not the witness, and it should not be blamed on

2 the witness, who omitted to testify about the existence or the alleged

3 taping of this dinner conversation. I didn't ask, and because the tape --

4 the tape is not available, therefore, I didn't inject the issue into the

5 case. I didn't rely on it. I have not sought to rely on it, and that is

6 why it wasn't brought up specifically. In fact, I did not open the door

7 on direct examination because I specifically did not raise any issue about

8 the tape at all. So we continue in our objection, Mr. President.

9 And again, this is beyond the scope. The only question to this

10 witness is about this particular conversation with Mr. Tuta, and it has

11 already been admitted and there has been cross-examination that apparently

12 it was tape-recorded. There is now no dispute that as of this moment, the

13 tape cannot be located. And that's the only thing that's relevant. And

14 whether he tape-recorded a hundred other people during his tour in Bosnia

15 is simply irrelevant to this case.

16 MR. MEEK: May I respond one more time.

17 JUDGE LIU: No, no, no. We have to stop here. We are not

18 debating these very issues at this moment. We are going to make our

19 ruling.

20 Mr. Meek, we believe that your question is of a nature of fishing

21 which is beyond the scope of this case. You may ask a particular question

22 about whether on other occasions, your client's conversation was taped or

23 not. But you could not ask a broad question for all other occasions

24 because this witness is under the protective measures and with the

25 permission of the Spanish government under the conditions of the State

Page 5311

1 confidentiality.

2 I hope you could skip this question, Mr. Meek.

3 MR. MEEK: I will try another way, Your Honour.

4 Q. Witness LL, during your tenure in Bosnia-Hercegovina --

5 JUDGE CLARK: Can I interject?

6 MR. MEEK: Yes, Judge Clark. Please.

7 JUDGE CLARK: I'm just trying to tease out what you're doing.

8 This witness has given specific evidence that at a dinner party, he

9 gathered a lot of information about Mr. Andabak and your client, who he

10 describes as Mr. Tuta. He says that his information came mainly from

11 Mr. Tuta and was confirmed possibly a few days later by other unnamed

12 sources. Just suppose you continued your line of inquiry and you asked

13 this witness does he have a tape recording of the conversation, if that

14 witness was to say, well, as a matter of fact I do, and I can bring it

15 here on Monday. And we sat and listened to the tape recording of Mr. Tuta

16 telling this witness exactly what he says he said, how would that advance

17 your case? I mean, shouldn't you attack this witness in relation to the

18 conversation that day or the interpretation he put on it, rather than ask

19 to hear the tape recording?

20 MR. MEEK: Your Honour, to respond, Your Honour, that's a very

21 astute observation. On the other hand, if, for example, this witness had

22 tape-recorded other conversations that would tend to exculpate my client,

23 that would have people indicating that Mr. Tuta was only a civilian, that

24 he had no place in a military organisation, he had no command authority,

25 then in that event, Your Honour, that's exculpatory evidence that I

Page 5312

1 believe that I would have a right to delve into.

2 And I understand, but one other question or point I would like to

3 make is that in the direct examination, as we know, there's no videotape

4 available. There's no still shots available, but yet this was talked

5 about in direct examination. Just because the Prosecutor failed to bring

6 forth the fact that the surreptitious conversation -- or taping of this

7 conversation does not make it beyond the scope of direct examination. If

8 you understand where I'm coming from, perhaps there is exculpatory

9 information that has been taped from other individuals. Maybe not.

10 JUDGE CLARK: Mr. Meek, do you remember what the President said to

11 you a few minutes ago? He said that he felt that your line of inquiry was

12 a fishing expedition, and I think you've proved that he is correct,

13 because you're asking a series of questions to which you have no idea what

14 the answer is. You don't know of the existence of any tapes that could

15 possibly be exculpatory, and aren't you going into very deep water when

16 you start asking questions to which you don't know the answer?

17 MR. MEEK: Always, but --

18 JUDGE CLARK: Well, that's what I want to say. I think you should

19 address yourself, Mr. Meek, to the qualitative evidence that we know about

20 rather than --

21 MR. MEEK: Thank you, Your Honour.

22 Q. One more question on that issue, and I think it can be answered

23 simply yes or no. Did any of the other people, unnamed, that you may have

24 tape-recorded their conversations, did they ever mention my client,

25 Mr. Tuta, Mr. Naletilic?

Page 5313

1 A. Could you please repeat the question? I didn't understand it.

2 Q. Well, let me try again. I understand that you first learned of

3 the existence of Mr. Tuta at the dinner party at Mr. Andabak's house. Is

4 that correct?

5 A. It is.

6 Q. So prior to that time, you would have not talked to anybody that

7 would have given you information about Mr. Naletilic; correct?

8 A. No specific information, that is true.

9 Q. Subsequent to that time, from your testimony, you spoke with some

10 high-ranking HVO officials who gave you some information regarding

11 Mr. Naletilic. Am I correct?

12 A. It was after the report was prepared, that is, to -- to the report

13 which was done between -- on the 6th or the 7th of April. That is, on the

14 7th of April, this report -- that report was drawn up and made only on the

15 basis of the conversation I had with your client and which he personally

16 gave me.

17 Following the 7th of April and until my departure in July, in the

18 area of -- in the zone of operations, there were constantly contacts with

19 the military and civilians of the HVO and the BHA, and in all these

20 contacts, I was trying to collect more information, not only about

21 Mr. Tuta but also about other people and about other events and

22 developments which could affect the performance of our duties.

23 Q. How many -- how many other profiles, so to speak, did you draft up

24 concerning individuals in Bosnia-Herzegovina aside from Mr. Naletilic?

25 A. It is very interesting to know how the military authorities -- how

Page 5314

1 are we? What kind of people are we who are going to interview to, to see

2 how we can help, how we could contribute to the resolution of their

3 problems or their personal difficulties? In other words, with all the

4 people that I talked with, with all these people, I also developed a

5 certain idea, what they are like, what kind of personality they are. I

6 tried to pursue that in order to understand them better, to understand

7 better the problems and the kind of help that I could offer them.

8 Q. Thank you, Witness LL, but maybe you didn't understand my

9 question. The Exhibit 327 is a profile which you've testified you

10 composed; correct?

11 A. I don't have here the Exhibit 327. Is it the report that I wrote

12 about Mr. Tuta?

13 Q. Yes, it is.

14 A. Then yes, not only his profile but all that was said and done at

15 that dinner. And this is the personal profile, yes, about this person,

16 about Mr. Tuta.

17 Q. Did you make a profile on Ivan Andabak?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. To the best of your knowledge and recollection today,

20 approximately how many people - I don't want their names - did you create

21 profiles on?

22 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, I'm going to object at this point.

23 JUDGE LIU: Yes.

24 MR. SCOTT: I've intentionally given some latitude. I think the

25 question about Mr. Andabak is reasonably within some scope, but now we're

Page 5315

1 going far afield, and I object, and I'm sure the Spanish government would

2 object.

3 JUDGE LIU: I quite agree with you.

4 Mr. Meek --

5 MR. MEEK: Yes, Your Honour. I will --

6 JUDGE LIU: -- concentrate on your client, please.


8 Q. Witness LL, had you read any newspaper articles whatsoever or

9 magazine articles about Mr. Naletilic prior to the dinner party in April

10 1993?

11 A. You are asking me if I read anything, articles that would refer --

12 that would be referring to Mr. Naletilic, is that it?

13 Q. Yes. Yes, sir?

14 A. The truth is that I just don't remember. I'm not sure. I don't

15 think so. I don't think I read anything, but I really cannot say yes or

16 no. I don't remember ever registering having read anything about him

17 prior to that event.

18 Q. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. You mentioned in your

19 testimony that you had perhaps spoken with some HVO personnel to help

20 either in the drafting of this profile or in the confirming of this

21 profile within the two days that it took from the dinner party to the

22 completion of the profile. Could you tell me the names of the HVO

23 personnel that you spoke with?

24 A. No. After the dinner party, I did not talk with any person

25 requesting that he or she confirms the information. It was only

Page 5316

1 subsequently, at a later stage. If any change of my impressions that I

2 gained would have happened, then I would have changed the report. But

3 subsequently, the HVO sources practically confirmed all that I had already

4 learned. Had it changed in any way, the picture that I gained, I would

5 have registered that, but nothing like that happened after the 6th or the

6 7th of April.

7 Q. Please then give me the name or names of the HVO personnel who you

8 spoke with subsequent to the drafting of this profile.

9 A. I think that in view of the professional secret that exists in the

10 military, we cannot disclose the sources which are confidential sources.

11 These are some rules, and therefore, this is the professional secret, and

12 I do not think I really can name anyone else.

13 MR. MEEK: Mr. President, Your Honours, this puts in me in a

14 dilemma. Obviously, I don't see how anything that he has testified about

15 in this Tribunal can be any longer deemed to be a secret or confidential.

16 He has been allowed to speak about and come here and testify before this

17 lofty Tribunal as to what he did in his operations and during his duties

18 in Bosnia-Herzegovina. If he hypothetically tells me, "I spoke with

19 individual A, B, and I spoke with individual C and D," and we can find

20 those individuals, we may be able to discredit this witness in our case,

21 and by disallowing such a question, hampers a defence and denies us the

22 right to a fair trial and denies us the right to confront the witnesses

23 against us, and I don't think it's fair to claim secret when he has been

24 allowed to testify in this Tribunal about what he did during his tenure in

25 Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1993.

Page 5317












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 5318

1 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Meek, you have to understand that this

2 witness comes here --

3 MR. SCOTT: Go ahead, Mr. President. I have a comment, please.

4 JUDGE LIU: -- to give the testimony on the conditions that we

5 should not disclose any State secrets of the confidentiality. And in

6 accordance with the Rule 70(D), this Trial Chamber may not compel the

7 witness to answer any questions related to the information and its origin

8 if the witness declines to answer on the ground of the confidentiality

9 which is quite clearly stipulated in the Rules. No matter if you like it

10 or not, you have to abide by this Rule.

11 MR. MEEK: I will abide by your ruling, Your Honours, and I would

12 take exception, for the record for appeal purposes, that I am not being

13 allowed to question this witness on matters that he spoke about on direct

14 examination. Thank you very much.

15 Q. Mr. Witness --

16 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Scott.

17 MR. SCOTT: As I said, referring to what counsel just said about

18 the record for appeal, let me also make a record. I quite agree with Your

19 Honour, and I was going to say -- and Your Honour is quite correct --

20 under Rule 70, section (C) and (D), the rules are quite clear about this.

21 The Chamber has had occasion to review those just recently, so I'm not

22 going to just simply refer to them again. As I've indicated,

23 Mr. President, you've already noted that. We would note that further.

24 Counsel is not, in our view, substantially prejudiced in

25 cross-examining this witness. He has the document in front of him.

Page 5319

1 There, indeed, has been extensive cross-examination about the preparation

2 of the document. It has been the subject of cross-examination continuing

3 from yesterday. There has been, we submit, no prejudice to this Defence.

4 They can go into every part of this document. Indeed, I suggest to the

5 Chamber that the time has come on this document for the Defence to

6 squarely put the case to this witness.

7 Are they saying this document is fabricated? Put that to the

8 witness. Are they suggesting that the content of this document -- there

9 hasn't been one question to the content of the document. If there's a

10 statement that they suggest is false, put it to the witness. They have

11 not been prejudiced in this cross-examination largely because the

12 cross-examination has not been proper.

13 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Meek, you have full right to make an interlocutory

14 appeal concerning the rulings of this Trial Chamber. And please continue

15 your cross-examination.

16 MR. MEEK: Thank you, Your Honour.

17 Q. Witness LL, during your tenure in Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1993, did

18 you know an individual by the name of Petkovic, General Petkovic?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Did you have occasion to speak with General Petkovic specifically

21 about my client, Mr. Naletilic?

22 A. Yes, I spoke with General Petkovic, and I remember he gave me a

23 card of his own, and he signed it. And he wanted to express his gratitude

24 to me by signing it after a meeting in Medjugorje with Colonel Zorzo. And

25 as regards your client, I had no opportunity of asking General Petkovic

Page 5320

1 anything about him.

2 Q. During your tenure in Bosnia-Herzegovina, did you meet a General

3 Lasic?

4 A. Yes, I did.

5 Q. Did you meet General Bozic?

6 A. Yes, I did.

7 Q. Did you meet General Obradovic?

8 A. Yes, I did.

9 Q. Did you meet General Praljak?

10 A. I don't remember. If I could see a photo of the gentleman, I

11 could perhaps answer. Perhaps I did meet him in an interview between

12 commanders. If I could see a photo, it would be easier for me to identify

13 this person. In other words, I don't think I had a personal relationship

14 with this person, but perhaps I did meet him, perhaps during an interview

15 with General Zorzo because many generals came to the conversations that

16 were held regularly in Medjugorje.

17 Q. Thank you, Witness LL. In regards to the generals that I spoke

18 about, except for General Praljak, did any of the other generals give you

19 any information concerning Mr. Naletilic?

20 A. I do remember that I spoke with Mr. Bozic and Mr. Obradovic about

21 many topics, including a general whose name you have not mentioned whose

22 name is in the statement I made earlier and that you sent me yesterday, a

23 military man from the HVO. And I think that in these conversations, the

24 name of your client always came up because he was a man of great influence

25 within the HVO, and I always tried to contrast the information I received,

Page 5321

1 any data, not in a direct fashion, not by speaking about your client

2 only. But in a conversation that lasted several hours, something always

3 came up. And I would always try to find out about details and see if I

4 could confirm information during these conversations.

5 Q. And in the course of your deployment in Bosnia-Herzegovina, did

6 you have occasion to speak with any military individuals from the ABiH

7 army that might have spoken to you about Mr. Naletilic?

8 A. I have heard -- I heard HVO, and here I'm reading ABiH. Which is

9 it, please?

10 Q. ABiH.

11 A. Yes, yes. In exactly the same way as I spoke to commanders of

12 HVO, I spoke to commanders of ABiH. And I spoke to members -- about

13 members of HVO to those of ABiH and the other way around. These people

14 knew each other perfectly well. They belonged to the same army. They had

15 been working together years earlier, they knew each other. And very

16 often, the conversations, the name of your client and the names of other

17 military men would come up.

18 Q. To go back to the formal statement that you gave, do you still

19 have that in front of you, Witness LL?

20 A. Yes. The document you sent to me yesterday.

21 Q. Yes, LL. That is your formal statement to the Office of the

22 Prosecutor. Could you please turn to page 6. It would be the paragraph

23 below the short paragraph where you stated all the information about Tuta

24 came from Andabak.

25 Could you have your interpreter read that next paragraph to you,

Page 5322

1 please.

2 A. Yes, I have read this paragraph.

3 Q. And Witness LL, is it true that you found it very difficult to

4 place Mr. Naletilic into the organisation of the HVO?

5 A. Yes, you are perfectly right because the first time I saw your

6 client, he was very well dressed, very groomed. He was a civilian. He

7 did not look like a warrior like Hudruk or Ivanov. But it was difficult,

8 therefore, for me to feel that he was a military man, a professional

9 officer, but then I realised that he did belong to that organisation.

10 Q. Witness, this statement that you gave to the OTP in November of

11 2000 was based on all of your knowledge up to the date of giving that

12 statement, was it not?

13 A. No, it's not quite correct. There are many things I couldn't

14 remember at the time I made this statement. And as time has passed, I

15 have recalled to date, from the time that statement was made, many other

16 details. One day I was called to make this statement, and I declared what

17 I remembered. And then afterwards, I saw some documents. I refreshed my

18 memory, and I remembered all these conversations, and these details were

19 confirming all the written paragraphs in this statement.

20 Q. So basically, your memory is getting better as time goes by. Is

21 that your testimony?

22 A. Yes. As we talk about the topic, we are talking about this topic

23 specifically, I remember more and more facts about the experience I lived

24 through because it's the same thing as when you try to remember about

25 something that happened, a specific event, that I hadn't thought about

Page 5323

1 for, let's say, ten years.

2 Q. When you gave your statement in -- a year ago to the Office of the

3 Prosecutor, you said that Tuta did not have any military rank and, in your

4 opinion, did not belong to the HVO organisation at all. Isn't that

5 correct?

6 A. Yes. Possibly he was not part of the HVO. In other words, I mean

7 to say that it was very difficult for me to think that he was part of it.

8 Perhaps it's too categoric a statement to say that he did not belong to

9 it, because thanks to all the conversations I had with Ivan Andabak and

10 with other sources, I heard that he was a member of HVO.

11 Q. About a year ago, it was your opinion he was not; correct?

12 A. No, it is not correct. I --

13 Q. I would ask -- Witness LL, please look at the second sentence in

14 that paragraph. Doesn't that in fact say that, "In my opinion, did he not

15 belong to the HVO organisation at all"?

16 A. It's not exactly what I tried to say. If you're referring to this

17 specific sentence, military rank -- I could not find out about his

18 military rank. You're right. I could never find out exactly which

19 military rank, but I knew that he was there. He appeared, he disappeared,

20 and this is why it's rather confusing or would look a bit confusing. But

21 later on, I realised and I was able to confirm the fact that he did belong

22 to it.

23 Q. Would this be later on, after the statement of November 2000?

24 A. Yes. Yes. In this statement, perhaps I was misunderstood, wasn't

25 understood correctly enough. What I tried to say is that he belonged to

Page 5324

1 it, but I couldn't know exactly what rank he had. Perhaps I was speaking

2 Spanish and I wasn't understood correctly. And this is a translation of

3 my statement into English of my statement in Spanish. And later on at

4 home, I looked through papers, and I remember he himself told me that he

5 did belong to the organisation.

6 Q. Did you ever observe Mr. Naletilic at any military meetings of a

7 high level?

8 A. Yes. He came to a meeting of the commanders in Medjugorje. In

9 one opportunity, he met with Colonel Zorzo and other commanders as well.

10 Q. And you didn't mention that meeting anywhere in your statement you

11 made last year, did you?

12 A. Yes. There are many things I did not say. This statement was

13 drafted. I had so many meetings. It's difficult to give you exact

14 details of every single meeting that -- private meetings with Colonel

15 Morales, Colonel Zorzo. It's difficult for me to give you specific

16 details of the many, many meetings that took place with Mr. Tuta and with

17 other companions of Mr. Tuta, with commanders of the Spanish army. It's

18 difficult in a statement to give you all the details about all meetings.

19 Q. And that's because you were in attendance and present at many,

20 many meetings during your tenure; correct?

21 A. Yes, that is correct.

22 Q. And just as you testified it's difficult to remember exact details

23 because of all the meetings you were at when you gave this statement,

24 isn't it equally as difficult to be able to testify about those today?

25 A. If I speak frankly, it's not quite the same thing, because let's

Page 5325

1 say from last year to date, I've looked at all the INTREPs and INTSUMs,

2 and I have been able to have a clear idea of the whole situation after a

3 period of ten years.

4 Q. Do you recall the occasion that General Zorzo, when he left to go

5 back to his country, that there was a going-away party in Medjugorje?

6 A. I do not remember.

7 Q. You were not there at the going-away party for General Zorzo?

8 A. Yes. I remember that General Zorzo changed his shirt or T-shirt.

9 He gave away some T-shirts of the Tactical Group, and there was an

10 exchange of T-shirts. It was a multifarious meeting indeed.

11 Q. But is it your testimony that you don't recall a private dinner

12 party that was held in honour of General Zorzo when he was about to go

13 back home?

14 A. Yes. Yes, I do remember this dinner party, and I remember the

15 detail, that General Zorzo put on the T-shirt. You know, he took off his

16 military uniform, and he put on this T-shirt that had been given to -- by

17 somebody else from the Tactical Unit. He was a very open-minded man. He

18 liked this type of thing.

19 Q. And you recall that my client, Mr. Naletilic, was present at that

20 going-away party?

21 A. If I'm sincere, I don't really remember. I don't remember,

22 because there were so many people there. Perhaps he was at that party,

23 but if I'm going to speak up frankly, I don't really see your client there

24 in that dinner party because there were so many guests. It is rather

25 difficult to remember whether he was there or even whether Mr. Andabak was

Page 5326












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 5327

1 there too. If you tell me the names of the commanders who were there, I

2 would be unable to answer that question.

3 Q. You say that perhaps he was at that party. And is it true that

4 perhaps this was the incident or meeting which you've referred to when my

5 client, Mr. Naletilic, was in Medjugorje?

6 A. No. I know that before there had been another meeting. Not only

7 in this meeting. I'm not referring to this meeting only. Regarding that

8 meeting, I don't remember. There were other meetings where your client

9 was there in meetings with Colonel Zorzo.

10 Q. Well, it's my understanding that your testimony to date has been

11 that you observed or saw my client at one meeting in Medjugorje.

12 MR. SCOTT: Well, Mr. President, I'm going to object.

13 JUDGE LIU: Yes. Yes, Mr. Scott.

14 MR. SCOTT: If the Defence counsel continually suggests and

15 indicates to this witness that -- invites him to remember other meetings

16 including where his client was, I don't think there's anything improper

17 with the witness either trying to respond and say, "I either remember

18 additional meetings," on being prompted by counsel's own questions, or

19 saying he doesn't remember, what have you. But for counsel to suggest on

20 the one hand, "Weren't you at this meeting? Weren't you at this meeting?"

21 and then come back and say, "But you say there was only one meeting," it

22 strikes me as unfair.

23 If counsel is suggesting that in fact his client had much more

24 extensive dealings with the Spanish Battalion, I'm not sure that helps his

25 client, but if that's what he wants to suggest, we'll accept that.

Page 5328

1 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Meek, if you said that this witness was at certain

2 meetings, show him your evidence about it. If you have a document saying

3 that this witness was present at such meetings, you have to refresh the

4 witness's memory about it. You cannot ask one meeting after another. You

5 have to put an end to this questioning.

6 MR. MEEK: Mr. President, I certainly would like to express my

7 gratitude for my learned colleague, Mr. Scott, and he is very clever. But

8 the problem is that this witness in his written statement never mentioned

9 any meetings with Mr. Tuta in Medjugorje, and now I am learning about

10 more. So I'll ask this question.

11 Q. Witness LL, to the best of your recollection today, how many

12 meetings did you observe Mr. Naletilic attend in Medjugorje at your

13 headquarters?

14 A. As far as I can remember, I can only remember one meeting only. I

15 can't remember any other meetings apart from the one you have mentioned

16 now, this dinner party. I don't remember that he was there, but before, I

17 do remember that Colonel Zorzo had some meeting with him.

18 Q. Thank you.

19 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, excuse me.

20 JUDGE LIU: Yes.

21 MR. SCOTT: The record should reflect that is exactly consistent

22 with what this witness has testified. He has never said anything

23 inconsistent.

24 JUDGE LIU: Yes.

25 MR. MEEK: Let the record reflect what the record reflects. Thank

Page 5329

1 you, Judge.

2 Q. Now, Witness LL, you have described Ivan Andabak as a friend. Am

3 I correct?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And in your testimony yesterday, you described the last time that

6 you saw him in Siroki Brijeg in 1997 at his home, did you not?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Did you tape-record that conversation also?

9 A. That conversation, I don't think I recorded at all. It was a

10 meeting to say goodbye. I didn't really think it was necessary to make

11 any recording. Because it was the day I was leaving; I was in a hurry.

12 And I do remember that I went to say goodbye to his wife Juani and his

13 daughter, who I really liked. And I don't think I made a recording at

14 all.

15 Q. Do you know if Mr. Ivan Andabak had any health problems, since you

16 were his friend?

17 A. I think so, but I cannot tell you exactly what type of problem. I

18 don't know whether he had stomach problems or -- as of now, I know that he

19 looked all right. He looked physically fit. But I don't know. He

20 couldn't smoke. He could not eat spicy food. I don't remember exactly

21 what was wrong.

22 Q. Do you recall if Mr. Ivan Andabak had a drinking problem?

23 A. Oh, no, I can't remember. At least when he had conversations with

24 me, when I saw him at his home, he always looked calm, collected, and

25 happy. He likes to make jokes, he gets on with everybody. And with me,

Page 5330

1 he never showed me that he had that problem. I never saw him getting

2 drunk.

3 Q. Was that the last time you ever had any contact with Mr. Ivan

4 Andabak, either personally, by phone, or by letter?

5 A. No. I saw him. I was able to greet him again when I went back to

6 Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1997.

7 Q. In 1997, when you returned, did you see him on a regular basis, or

8 was it a single encounter?

9 A. Well, I didn't see him as often as I did during my first mission,

10 because my mission was different. I think I saw him twice or three times

11 at most during the whole length of my mission, because I respected him,

12 and I wanted to express to him that I could help him if necessary. He had

13 built a new home for himself, and he lived there with his wife Juani and

14 with the child.

15 Q. And since you left Bosnia-Herzegovina during your second mission,

16 have you had any contact with Ivan Andabak?

17 A. After I left Bosnia-Herzegovina, after it is my second mission

18 after 1997, it was the same thing. I said goodbye to him and his family,

19 went back to Spain. And since then, I did not have any contact with Ivan

20 Andabak.

21 Q. You talked yesterday about the sighting of Ivan Andabak on I

22 believe the 7th of day of May, 1993, near the headquarters in Mostar. Do

23 you recall that testimony?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And you indicated that he was dressed in black. Is that correct?

Page 5331

1 A. It is.

2 Q. And that he indicated that he was going out on some mission that

3 night. Am I correct?

4 A. That's correct.

5 Q. This concerned you, so you went back to your command and informed

6 your commander of this situation. Correct?

7 A. First I went to the BH army headquarters in order to establish the

8 details. And after that, yes, you're quite right.

9 Q. Witness LL, you went to the BH army headquarters to tell them that

10 there may be an attack. Isn't that what you did?

11 A. Well, specifically, I went there to ask them if they knew that

12 something was afoot. And they were the ones who told me that yes,

13 something was going on which their sources had identified, that is, that

14 they were expecting an attack. And then I quickly went to our

15 headquarters.

16 Q. Your own sources did not have any information about any purported

17 attack, did they?

18 A. Well, but there was Ivan himself who told me that. And because I

19 could see what he looked like, that he was in full gear and armed, and

20 since I was the only one who he talked with, then I didn't see any reason

21 to look for other sources.

22 Q. No attack happened that night, did it?

23 A. That is correct. That night, we did not witness any attack.

24 There was no attack in Mostar -- excuse me, not in the city of Mostar

25 which we were patrolling. I do not know what was the situation

Page 5332

1 elsewhere.

2 Q. You never observed Mr. Naletilic, my client, in any battles, did

3 you?

4 A. No, sir, never.

5 Q. You never observed my client issuing any orders to anybody, did

6 you?

7 A. No, never.

8 Q. On the morning of May the 9th, 1993, you were on a hill above

9 Mostar when you encountered one or two buses full of Muslims. Correct?

10 A. No, no, it is not. There were 20 or 25 busfuls of Muslims.

11 Q. In your testimony yesterday, I thought you testified that you

12 spoke to a bus driver and stopped a bus and asked where they were going

13 and asked them to stop what they were doing on a hill above Mostar.

14 A. No, I didn't speak to the driver but to people in a military

15 vehicle which were moving ahead of the whole -- which led the convoy.

16 Q. And LL, were there 20 buses in that convoy, or 2?

17 A. No, no, no. There was a convoy with at least 20 or 25 buses.

18 There was a large number of buses and full, full of civilians. I mean,

19 there were buses which were normally part of the urban transport.

20 Q. My question is, did you recognise or discover that any of these

21 HVO officers were under the command of Mr. Naletilic?

22 A. At the time, it didn't occur to me to ask these things, because

23 the only orders which might come from Mr. Naletilic would come -- this

24 kind of information would come from Mr. Andabak. But it didn't occur to

25 me at the time to ask that.

Page 5333

1 Q. It's very simply put. You have no evidence, do you, that any of

2 these HVO soldiers manning these buses or convoys were in anyway related

3 to Mr. Naletilic, do you?

4 A. The only proof that I have are the HVO sources, but not

5 lieutenant, another source. And, then, yes, I was told that Mr. Naletilic

6 had took part in some battles and that he liked to do that, but nothing,

7 nothing from this lieutenant who was in charge of the convoy which was

8 transporting the prisoners.

9 Q. LL, perhaps it's in the translation, but I was asking about that

10 specific incident that you testified about yesterday with the buses, those

11 specific soldiers.

12 A. I did not ask him.

13 Q. Thank you. Did you -- and you may not know about this at all, but

14 it's come in prior testimony. There had been an UNPROFOR tank located

15 near the Vranica building in West Mostar. Do you have any knowledge of

16 that?

17 A. Impossible. We did not have any tanks in the area. We had APCs,

18 the armoured -- that is, personnel carriers, and they are vehicles using

19 wheels. They do not have any guns. They were not tanks.

20 Q. You testified yesterday about a drive -- the drive from Mostar

21 area to Citluk and on to Medjugorje on the 9th of May, 1993. Do you

22 recall that testimony?

23 A. I do, yes.

24 Q. And you spoke about encountering some soldiers firing a long gun

25 or Bofors towards Mostar. Do you remember that?

Page 5334

1 A. That is right. I was on the road from Mostar to Medjugorje, and

2 there I came across two artillery pieces belonging to the HVO.

3 Q. Do you have any evidence that the soldiers manning those guns were

4 under the command of Tuta?

5 A. I did not ask that.

6 Q. You also indicated these guns were pointed towards the

7 headquarters of the BH army in Mostar; is that correct?

8 A. They were aimed, pointing at Mostar. I do not know. I mean,

9 what? I know the direction, because this is a piece that had a

10 10 kilometre range. So I do not know exactly. I know the direction. I

11 know that they were firing in the direction of Mostar. And what I also

12 can say, that on the hill, at the time when we were on the hill, we could

13 see that these projectiles were falling, were hitting the Muslim

14 neighbourhood, the Muslim side, but all that I can say is that these guns

15 were pointing at Mostar and that they were being fired. From the place

16 where I was on that elevation, if this has to do with those pieces of

17 artillery on the hill which I saw form the hill, then it is possible that

18 they were hitting that part. But I really cannot say whether the

19 projectiles which were hitting the area which I could see from the hill

20 were coming from these pieces, but when I was at the place where those

21 artillery pieces were, I could not see where exactly these -- what these

22 projectiles were hitting.

23 Q. Thank you. Thank you, Witness LL. I think you also testified

24 that these artillery pieces are quite precise. Is that true?

25 A. It is. They have long barrels, and these long-barreled guns tend

Page 5335












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 5336

1 to be very precise.

2 Q. And with any such weapon such as a gun or a Bofors, the precision

3 depends on the individual firing those weapons; is that correct?

4 A. In artillery, it is the ballistic calculations rather than the

5 person. That is, the person who calculates all the target data, that is

6 what matters more than the person who fires the shot himself.

7 Q. And you have no knowledge or information as to how the ballistic

8 calculations were made on the 9th day of May, 1993 with these guns, do

9 you?

10 A. No, I don't.

11 Q. A quick question about these buses with the Muslims. Were the

12 military police there with them?

13 A. I don't remember. I know they were HVO troops because they had

14 the emblem, but I do not remember if they had anything that would identify

15 them as military police. I just don't remember. I remember camouflage

16 uniforms and the HVO insignia, that is, the military insignia.

17 Q. Did I understand your testimony that you actually filmed some of

18 the fighting that day from an outlook overlooking Mostar and some of the

19 shelling of Mostar that morning?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Can you estimate, if you can, approximately how many shells do you

22 believe were launched toward Mostar that day?

23 A. Many. I can't really put any figure to that. That would be known

24 to people who were constantly observing Mostar, who were there in the

25 area. Personally, I cannot tell you really. I did not count them. I was

Page 5337

1 simply trying to observe what was going on, and I was mostly concerned

2 with what was happening at the football stadium.

3 Q. Witness LL, on a separate occasion, and there's an INSUM report

4 concerning this, on one day in Mostar, your unit estimated 7 to 10.000

5 shells fell that day. Is that correct? It may not be.

6 A. I don't know. Yesterday, I saw an INTREP which said 3.000 --

7 well, it looked a bit too high to me. It could be 800. But to avoid

8 this -- that kind of problem, we had a radar using -- for these mortars in

9 order to estimate the number of impacts in the area. But I really could

10 not give you any exact figure. People who were in the area, they were

11 writing down this kind of detail, and possibly then it was rectified. The

12 figure that I saw might sound exaggerated to me, but I did hear, yes, them

13 speak about these things, and I know there were people who counted that.

14 Q. As a military man with your experience, can you give me an idea of

15 approximately how many guns, anti-aircraft, Bofor, et cetera, would have

16 been involved in launching that many shells on that day?

17 A. Well, it could be 12 pieces deployed in the area; and if they kept

18 up fire all day long, then, yes, you could have 800, 1.000 impacts.

19 Q. And did your units determine at any time that the Bosnian Serbs

20 may have been shelling Mostar during your tenure there in

21 Bosnia-Herzegovina?

22 A. Prior to these attacks, yes, there were. I know there were some

23 Serb attacks. When our convoys passed through the Neretva valley, towards

24 Jablanica, and these attacks came from the border area, towards -- east of

25 Mostar where there was the confrontation line. As for Mostar itself, I do

Page 5338

1 not remember any Serb impacts. I'm not saying that none of this took

2 place. I simply do not know. I know that there were these Serb impacts

3 east of Mostar along the confrontation line, along the road in the Neretva

4 Valley many kilometres away from Mostar. And I do not know -- I do not

5 know if there were any Serb attacks on Mostar.

6 Q. Thank you.

7 From a military perspective, and with your experience as a

8 military man, could you give me an estimate, if you can, of the

9 approximate number of soldiers, HVO soldiers, who would have taken part in

10 the attack on Mostar on the 9th of May, 1993?

11 A. It is very difficult to say, because this is not conventional

12 battle. This is an attack -- there is no front line. There is not a

13 regiment or a brigade. It is people fighting. So it is very difficult to

14 assess the strength. There were some military troops, that is, there were

15 HVO forces there. But I really could not say how many troops were

16 involved in the fighting, in the attack that night or at dawn the next

17 day.

18 JUDGE LIU: We want to know the relevance of those questions. And

19 we were reminded by Madam Registrar that you told her that you will spend

20 approximately one hour for the cross-examination today. We have to

21 estimate the time for how long we have to keep a witness here this

22 morning. Could you inform us how long you're going to take for your

23 cross-examination?

24 MR. MEEK: First, Your Honour, the relevance issue. This case has

25 dealt with units called the Convicts Battalion, and there has been some

Page 5339

1 numbers of how many people belonged to it. My question was, if this

2 military man knew, if he knew, how many total soldiers were taking place,

3 to give the Trial Chamber some perspective, number one.

4 But in regards to how long I would take --

5 JUDGE LIU: Are you indicating to us that the Convicts Battalion

6 involved in those shellings?

7 MR. MEEK: No, no, not at all. Absolutely not. Now, as far as

8 the cross-examination goes, Mr. President and Your Honours, I've tried to

9 ask the questions to get a simple answer. This witness is very

10 forthcoming, and he answers in a lengthy way. I believe many of the

11 questions I've tried to ask, if you know, tell me. And after ten lines he

12 says he doesn't know when all he had to say is I don't recall. So I will

13 try to wrap it up, and I will try to be finished before the 11.00 break,

14 Your Honour. It's one of those things.

15 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.

16 JUDGE CLARK: Mr. Meek, are you ever going to come to the point

17 where you actually address this witness on the content of the information

18 which he received from Mr. Andabak on your own client and which was

19 contained in a report? Because that's really essential, isn't it?

20 MR. MEEK: It is, Your Honour.

21 Q. I asked you yesterday, Witness LL, whether or not you would agree

22 with me that Ivan Andabak may not have been completely honest and

23 forthcoming with you, just like you weren't honest and forthcoming with

24 him when you secretly tape-recorded his conversations?

25 A. Mr. Ivan Andabak, I knew many things which he could not tell me.

Page 5340

1 I could not complete my information about your client basing myself only

2 on what I heard from him. I told you that I was also getting some other

3 very precise details from other sources and a personal friend like Ivan

4 Andabak. And Mr. Andabak, who was a close friend of Mr. Tuta, he could

5 not really tell me all these things. But from other sources --

6 Q. Witness LL, I don't mean to cut you off, but the Trial Chamber is

7 impatient with me, and I don't want my head to roll this morning.

8 You've just testified that you drafted this profile of

9 Mr. Naletilic from one dinner party, so you didn't have any corroboration

10 before you wrote that report. Isn't that a fact?

11 A. Indeed.

12 Q. Thank you.

13 A. And before -- and I did not have to change anything to correct it

14 before my departure, which means that it was all accurate.

15 Q. Were you speaking at this party with Mr. Naletilic in Italian? Is

16 this how you communicated with my client?

17 A. Well, as you know, I do not speak Italian, but Italian and Spanish

18 are very close, so it is easy to understand. So that some of what

19 Mr. Tuta was saying in Italian I could understand. But if I may, I'd like

20 to tell an anecdote about Mr. Tuta. This is something that happened to me

21 yesterday.

22 Q. Witness LL, I don't want my head to roll here. I ask a question,

23 and then Mr. Scott can come back and ask any other questions that he wants

24 to on redirect examination.

25 My question was, "Did you speak to him in Italian?" and you

Page 5341

1 answered that question.

2 A. I do not speak Italian, but yesterday Mr. Tuta, at 11.00, before

3 the break, told me a word in Italian, a sentence in Italian which I

4 understood perfectly even though I do not speak that language. That is,

5 we could understand one another. I could understand him, I could listen

6 to him, because there are certain sentences which we can understand.

7 JUDGE LIU: Witness, you told us that yesterday Mr. Tuta said a

8 sentence, a word to you in Italian. Would you please tell this Trial

9 Chamber what he said to you in Italian, please?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. He said, "Non parlare

11 Italiano," with a perfect Italian accent -- or rather, not perfect accent,

12 that is, but I understood it perfectly. And of course, the two -- there

13 are sentences in Spanish and Italian which are perfectly comprehensible to

14 the other side.

15 JUDGE LIU: What does that sentence mean in Italian? What does

16 that mean?

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It means, "He does not speak

18 Italian."

19 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.

20 MR. MEEK:

21 Q. So which language did you speak with my client, Mr. Tuta, at this

22 dinner party in?

23 A. Well, we had an interpreter with us, as I already said, who did it

24 openly. And these interpreters, they were -- and since they were talking

25 and helping Mr. Zorzo, I merely -- I only had to listen what Mr. Tuta was

Page 5342

1 saying. And he was speaking in Croatian and said then some sentences, in

2 order to make us understand, he said some of the things he was saying in

3 Italian.

4 Q. So basically you were not being -- you were not speaking with

5 Mr. Tuta directly. You were eavesdropping on the conversation he was

6 having with General Zorzo. Would that be a fair statement?

7 A. Well, that was the normal flow of conversation. There was also

8 cross-exchanges. You know, a sentence would come from here or there, a

9 question would come from another side and that was that, but that is about

10 it.

11 Q. Was Mr. Tuta drinking that night, alcohol?

12 A. Well, well, well, well, naturally one takes alcohol towards the

13 end of the dinner, and it took some time. But at the dinner itself, I do

14 not remember. I really don't.

15 Q. You spent a lot of time in East Mostar, did you not, LL?

16 A. Well, I tried to devote my time equally to East Mostar as to West

17 Mostar.

18 Q. Did you ever visit the Fourth Elementary School in Mostar?

19 A. I don't remember.

20 Q. Your group, for a while, was in the Konjic area; correct?

21 A. In Konjic, yes.

22 Q. And were you -- was your unit there about 23 of March in Orliste,

23 the town of Orliste?

24 A. I can't tell you. Orliste is a village near Konjic. Is it

25 there? I just don't know.

Page 5343

1 Q. Do you recall being in a village in Trusina?

2 A. Personally, no, I don't -- I wasn't. Perhaps my troops were

3 there. Because we went around all the villages and all the towns I may

4 have passed through it, but right now, I just can't remember that.

5 Q. Going back - and I'm about finish - you -- in your official

6 statement to the Office of the Prosecutor, you indicated that all of the

7 information about Tuta came from Andabak, and now you've explained that

8 other sources later on confirmed some information; correct?

9 A. Yes, it is.

10 Q. Witness LL, would it be a fair statement that approximately 90 per

11 cent of the information about Mr. Tuta came from Ivan Andabak?

12 A. Well, what I can say, that 90 per cent was also cross-checked with

13 other sources.

14 Q. But then you'll agree that about 90 per cent came from Ivan

15 Andabak?

16 A. Well, not exactly. Mr. Tuta was the principal source of

17 information at precisely that dinner party. He's the one who gave me all

18 these details about his business, about his actions, about his plans, and

19 that was the broadest possible information that I obtained at that

20 dinner. And after that, I told you, yes, I tried to have these details

21 corroborated.

22 Q. And before the break, one last question. And with all that

23 information that you claim you got at this dinner party, you still could

24 not give him a military rank, and in your opinion, did he not even belong

25 to the HVO. Isn't that a fact and isn't that what you told the Office of

Page 5344












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 5345

1 the Prosecutor one year ago?

2 A. At this dinner party, no, that was not clear to me. I didn't have

3 a clear picture. And after that dinner, it became quite clear that yes,

4 he did belong to the HVO.

5 Q. But your report was generated within 48 hours of the dinner party;

6 correct?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Thank you, Witness LL.

9 MR. MEEK: Might --

10 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President.

11 JUDGE LIU: Yes.

12 MR. SCOTT: Before anyone rises, and I say this because the

13 observation is important for now, the Chamber may notice -- well, now it's

14 changed. I just want the record to reflect that throughout this

15 testimony, Mr. Naletilic has not been wearing his headphones, has been

16 clearly interacting with this witness in terms of shaking his head,

17 laughing, clearly interacting the way that someone would interact if they

18 understood exactly what this witness was saying in Spanish.

19 He has not been wearing his headphones throughout this time. He's

20 just now picked them up. He has them in his hand now. And he has been

21 clearly interacting with this witness and showed every evidence of knowing

22 exactly what was being said without using to any translation.

23 MR. MEEK: Mr. President, I'm going to have to object to that.

24 Obviously my back has been to my client, and there are cameras all in this

25 courtroom. And I would invite the Trial Chamber to watch the tape. If

Page 5346

1 what Mr. Scott is claiming happened happened, the tape will show it.

2 JUDGE LIU: I have to send a warning to you and to your client

3 that you should be very careful in this courtroom. Any suggestions given

4 by your client to you, his counsel, might be interpreted differently by

5 the other party or by the witness. Sometimes it will be mistakenly, I

6 must say, as a threat to the witness. So you have to be very careful

7 about the behaviour in this courtroom. And you have the obligation to

8 warn your client.

9 First, your communications between you and your client is fully

10 respected, and it should be conducted in entire confidentiality.

11 Secondly, don't make any gestures which could be possibly mistaken as

12 something else. This is just advice to you.

13 MR. MEEK: Mr. President, have I done anything improper? I have

14 not done anything improper, I don't believe. I don't believe --

15 JUDGE LIU: No, it's your obligation to give some advice to your

16 client.

17 MR. MEEK: I will speak with my client, Your Honour. There's no

18 question there.

19 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Scott, do you think we have to have a break?

20 MR. SCOTT: I think we probably should, Your Honour, but in

21 fairness to counsel, Your Honour, I was not suggesting any improper

22 communication between counsel and his client. I was -- I did mean to

23 intend, and I do mean to intend, that his client was clearly giving all

24 evidence of understanding this testimony without the benefit of

25 translation. And since counsel has made a major issue of his language

Page 5347

1 abilities, I think it's quite pertinent. Thank you.

2 JUDGE LIU: Witness, I have to tell you that, as I did to other

3 witnesses, please do not speak to anybody about your evidence during the

4 break and do not let anybody speak to you about it.

5 MR. MEEK: For the record, before we break, it has been too long,

6 Your Honour. But I can tell you that I can put my headphones like this,

7 and I can turn the volume up, and I can hear exactly what's being said

8 without having those earphones on my ear, for the record. Thank you.

9 JUDGE LIU: It is in the record already. We have to break. We'll

10 resume at 11.35.

11 --- Recess taken at 11.07 a.m.

12 --- On resuming at 11.35 a.m.

13 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Meek. I assume that you're finished with

14 this cross-examination within the time frame that you promised us.

15 MR. MEEK: Your Honour, one administrative matter. Back on

16 Wednesday, the 7th of November, there was an objection by Mr. Naletilic

17 and from our Defence for Exhibits 508, 595.1, and 612. I would like to

18 formally now withdraw those objections to the admission of those three

19 documents that were tendered on the 7th of November during Witness JJ's

20 testimony. I'm sorry I didn't tell you this yesterday. It slipped my

21 mind, Your Honours.

22 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much for your cooperation.

23 MR. MEEK: And I only have two questions.

24 JUDGE LIU: Yes, please.

25 MR. MEEK:

Page 5348

1 Q. Witness JJ [sic], it is apparent that during your mission in

2 Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1993, you were talking to a lot of people and asking

3 a lot of questions and gaining a lot of information from many sources, and

4 it was openly known. Would you agree with that?

5 A. This is correct.

6 Q. Will you allow, Witness LL, that during this wartime, during this

7 civil war that was going on in Bosnia-Herzegovina, that the people giving

8 you this information were, in fact, feeding you disinformation to confuse

9 the entire situation and so that you would report back to your superiors

10 with information that was not correct?

11 A. Well, speaking for myself, I do not believe that this is correct.

12 The information, which was open information -- and at that time, it was

13 impossible to find out about all details, and to consider it as just a

14 flow of information. It was rather a normal conversation, and it was a

15 contrast operation taking place afterwards thanks to information from

16 different sources, and then there was a written statement. Now, in the

17 case that there was some mistake, automatically, I changed my written

18 statement to my written reports.

19 But in most instances, after I had conversations or -- with all

20 sources, normally always most of the actions that were mentioned by the

21 sources, whether openly or not, took place.

22 MR. MEEK: I have no further questions, Mr. President, Your

23 Honours.

24 Q. Thank you very much, Witness LL, for your forthcoming in this

25 Tribunal.

Page 5349

1 JUDGE LIU: Thank you. Mr. Seric, cross-examination.

2 MR. SERIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, Mr. Meek has asked

3 almost all the questions relevant to this Defence. I will have only one

4 question to ask of this witness.

5 Cross-examined by Mr. Seric:

6 Q. [Interpretation] Sir, you are an educated man, I believe, a man of

7 authority, militarily speaking. Could you agree with me when I say that

8 in every war, as in every war, in this war there is also a war of

9 disinformation?

10 A. Well, I agree with you. The war of disinformation always take

11 place, and we have to fight this trend, and we have to try and find out

12 what is wrong, because if not, we would not be working professionally as

13 military men, and this is our job.

14 Q. Thank you very much. The answer could have been even much

15 shorter.

16 MR. SERIC: [Interpretation] I do not have any other questions,

17 Mr. President.

18 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. Re-examination, Mr. Scott?

19 MR. SCOTT: Yes, Your Honour. I have a few questions.

20 Re-examined by Mr. Scott:

21 Q. Witness LL, I asked you this in direct examination, but in light

22 of the cross-examination, I will give you the opportunity to respond to it

23 again. Sir, is it correct that it was your specific mission, that is,

24 your professional military assignment during your tour in Bosnia in 1993

25 to gather as much information as you could, and such information might

Page 5350

1 broadly be called -- what people might call intelligence?

2 A. No. It's not exactly intelligence. It's information.

3 Intelligence is something that is carried out by a special team, and what

4 we wanted to get was information. Later on, there was intelligence

5 organised from other quarters, but I was looking for information.

6 Q. Thank you, Witness. I think that indicates there may be a

7 difference between what many non-military people might think of in those

8 terms, the difference between gathering information and gathering

9 intelligence. But clearly, your mention was to gather, indeed, as much

10 information as possible?

11 A. Yes. There were other teams carrying out this gathering of

12 information -- of intelligence, and if they had something interesting they

13 had found out about, they would let us know.

14 Q. Now, Witness, if you have your statement in front of you. I

15 realise it's in English, but perhaps either the interpreter there beside

16 you can assist you, or if you can look at page 7 of the statement, you can

17 at least recognise the names that I will mention to you in the next moment

18 or two.

19 Counsel suggested to you in his questions that the interview that

20 had been conducted of you back in November of 2000 was very specifically

21 focused on Mr. Naletilic. Let me ask then, can you please confirm,

22 looking after your statement, were you also in fact questioned about

23 Mr. Petkovic?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Were you also asked questions and did you also give information

Page 5351

1 about a Muslim named Zuti?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. You were asked questions about a man named Obradovic?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. You were asked questions about the following places which we have

6 not focused on primarily in your testimony here: Dretelj, Gabela; is that

7 right?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. You were asked about Ljubuski?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. You were asked about another camp called Vojno?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. You were asked about this man Praljak?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. You were asked about a man named Prlic?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. About a man named Coric?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And a man named Roso?

20 A. Yes. A number of questions were put to me, and I answered the

21 questions as far as my knowledge would allow me to.

22 Q. Now, there has been extensive questions to you about this man

23 Andabak. Can you tell the Chamber, by every indication, did it appear

24 that Mr. Andabak and Mr. Naletilic were very close friends? Not merely

25 military associates but indeed close personal friends, as far as you could

Page 5352

1 see and what you heard?

2 A. Yes, I was able to assess that they were really very good friends,

3 and they trusted one another.

4 Q. Tell the Chamber this, if you can: Did you have the impression

5 that Mr. Andabak was proud of being such a close friend of this man named

6 Tuta?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Do you think -- did you observe anything that caused you to think

9 that when Mr. Andabak at various moments was giving you information, that

10 he was lying to you and giving you information for the purpose of hurting

11 his very good friend Mr. Naletilic?

12 A. No, on the contrary. At times I knew that he felt proud to tell

13 me, and this I have already stated before, the many meetings that they had

14 had together in some combat areas.

15 Q. Let me ask you, and if I can direct the courtroom's attention,

16 please, to Exhibit P327, the report about Mr. Naletilic, a couple of

17 questions.

18 Now, on cross-examination, the fact that you had tape-recorded

19 this dinner conversation came up. So that having been raised, let me ask

20 you this question: When you prepared your memorandum or report on

21 Mr. Naletilic which has been marked as P327, did you have a tape recording

22 available to you for purposes of preparing your report and, indeed,

23 checking your report for accuracy against that tape recording?

24 A. Yes. I had to do this in order to see which were the key ideas

25 that I had gathered during my trip and at night in my own office and in

Page 5353












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 5354

1 order to confirm in detail all this information here. Because if not, I

2 would not have been able to give so many details.

3 Q. On this document, if you can assist us -- you do not speak any

4 Croatian. Is that correct, sir?

5 A. This is correct.

6 Q. How, for instance, did you come to know -- on the top of the first

7 page up in the upper right portion of the first page, nickname, it says

8 Tuta, which has been translated -- I'm saying the explanation, the

9 parenthetical, says "child speak for chamber pot". How did you find out

10 that this nickname for Tuta meant chamber pot?

11 A. I think I remember that it was something that was told us by

12 Mr. Tuta himself during the dinner party to Colonel Zorzo and myself.

13 Somebody asked him, What does Tuta mean? And he explained.

14 Q. There's also another piece of information. I just point out for

15 whatever assistance it might be to the Chamber. On the top of the page,

16 and probably for these purposes, it's just as well to look at the Spanish

17 version because the translation is not going to be important. I indicate

18 that to the Chamber as well.

19 On the top of the first page of your report, do you see something

20 that we recognise as fax information line?

21 A. Yes, this is correct.

22 Q. This would indicate that this report presumably must have existed

23 at least by the 22nd of April, 1993 at 14.15 hours because it was faxed.

24 Is that correct?

25 A. Yes, this is correct.

Page 5355

1 Q. The attack on Mostar on the 9th of May, counsel asked you about

2 that -- for that matter, as I did. Did you in your observations that

3 day -- and you've told us how you moved around from the hill on Mostar to

4 an area near Citluk and a number of areas. Can you tell the Chamber, did

5 you see a number of components, multiple components, of HVO forces engaged

6 in the attack on Mostar on the 9th of May?

7 A. Is it in the surroundings of the city of Mostar? Is it outside

8 the city? If it is, I know that there was movement of vehicles from the

9 HQ up to Mostar, from Citluk. There was a lot of convoys and military

10 vehicles moving towards the city of Mostar. Now, inside Mostar, I cannot

11 give you any detailed information on the forces involved because I could

12 not enter the city.

13 Q. You correctly understand my question. My question is not limited

14 to inside the, if you will, the core city of Mostar. But including the

15 surrounding region, did you see multiple components of the HVO involved in

16 action that day directed toward Mostar?

17 A. Well, against Mostar -- I know they were moving towards Mostar.

18 There were convoys moving towards the city, but I don't know whether they

19 were going to attack Mostar. They were preparing, militarily speaking,

20 but I did not see any other weapons other than the ones I mentioned in my

21 statement. Perhaps they did, but I personally did not see them.

22 Q. Witness LL, forgive me. I'm sure that I'm not putting the

23 questions to you as well as I should. What you have already told us

24 about, if I can remind you, both on direct and in cross-examination, you

25 made certain observations from the hill overlooking Mostar itself. You

Page 5356

1 saw actions taking place, you saw shells impacting in the city of Mostar.

2 Correct?

3 A. Yes. Yes.

4 Q. You saw the two other large artillery pieces that were firing at

5 some long range in the direction of Mostar.

6 A. What I saw is two artillery pieces. They were anti-aircraft fire

7 weapons with direct shooting towards the HQ too. Now, as far as mortar is

8 concerned, we could see the explosions, but we did not know where the

9 shooting was coming from. I felt that they came from the west area of

10 Mostar. We could hear the guns, but we did not know exactly where the

11 fire originated, and I did not have freedom of movement at that point.

12 But I did note that there were two anti-aircraft machine-guns shooting

13 against the buildings of the HVO [as interpreted] and against the east

14 side of Mostar, against other buildings there too.

15 Q. All right. Well, let's pick up with that then. We have the

16 observations on the hill. We have the anti-aircraft fire. Did you not

17 also tell us about seeing two other larger artillery pieces also firing in

18 the direction of Mostar?

19 A. Yes. The two artillery pieces are the ones I saw on the road from

20 Mostar and Medjugorje, in the Citluk area. These are the two artillery

21 pieces I mentioned earlier, and I saw that they were shooting. As I got

22 closer, I saw they were shooting.

23 Q. My question to you, and I'm sorry it took so long to lay the

24 foundation, but you are a professional military officer. Can you assist

25 the Chamber in telling how much would it take and what would be required

Page 5357

1 to coordinate military action on that scale?

2 A. It needs perfect coordination, because you have artillery pieces

3 shooting. You have to have a command post as well. You have to have

4 observers that are able to correct the fire from the artillery pieces, and

5 you need trucks with ammunition. You need a lot of ammunition in order to

6 serve the different weapons that are shooting.

7 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Mr. President.

8 [Prosecution counsel confer]

9 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President, it's been alerted to me that on page

10 45, line 9, it says that the machine-guns -- "anti-aircraft, machine-guns

11 shooting against the buildings of the HVO," and I think that's a

12 translation or a transcription error. I can ask the witness, Your

13 Honour.

14 Q. Was the fire being directed at the buildings of the HVO or

15 buildings of the ABiH?

16 A. Against the buildings of the Armija, the ABiH and the eastern side

17 of Mostar, the Muslim side of Mostar.

18 Q. Now, directing you to your statement. Do you still have your

19 statement in front of you, sir? And I'm going to direct your attention to

20 page 7, the same paragraph. I'm sorry. My mistake. Page 6. The same

21 paragraph that counsel for Mr. Naletilic took you to, but I want you to

22 read the full paragraph with one omission that I'm going to make.

23 MR. SCOTT and so there is no question about this, Mr. President,

24 I'm going to omit one short sentence because -- as an accommodation to

25 counsel, because I think they might view that as being unduly

Page 5358

1 prejudicial. I will simply omit it.

2 Q. Do you have that in front of you, sir?

3 A. Yes. Yes, I do.

4 Q. Because of the language difference, I'm going to read it to you,

5 and would you please answer me? Is this what you said in your statement

6 further to what counsel asked you:

7 "It is very difficult to place Tuta into the organisation of

8 HVO. He had not any military rank, and in my opinion," as put here, and

9 you've already indicated you have some questions about this, but I'm

10 simply referring you to this statement, "and in my opinion, he did not

11 belong to the HVO organisation at all." The next sentence says: "He was

12 much more."

13 And now I'm going to omit one sentence. If counsel wishes to

14 raise it, I will leave it in their hands.

15 "He told me in Siroki Brijeg, when I first saw him, that he had

16 come from abroad with a lot of money to help Croats. I think that his

17 original mission was not to take part in fighting, but because he liked

18 fighting, he took part in the fighting as well. Andabak told me that

19 sometimes Tuta was addressed as `Force Commander.' He told me that --

20 when I asked him, `Who is your boss?' and Andabak told me that it was

21 Tuta. He told me this on many occasions."

22 Now, sir, is that the full statement of the paragraph that you

23 gave in November 2000?

24 A. That is right.

25 Q. And my final two questions. Going back to Exhibit 327, the report

Page 5359

1 on Mr. Tuta. Directing your attention to that part of your report that

2 says "Current Situation." Was it stated during the dinner conversation

3 that evening that, as you report here: "Tuta receives direct orders from

4 Petkovic and is at the same level of command as Lasic or higher"?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. My last question to you in that document. If you go to page 2,

7 about the middle of the page in the English version, and I'll see if I can

8 find it in the Spanish version as well. There is a section on the -- it

9 will be on the top of the second page of the Spanish document, toward

10 the -- several lines down from the top. Can you find the words -- can you

11 find the words "Gornji Vakuf." Do you see that? The top of the second

12 page of the Spanish translation.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. It says -- and then I'll ask you a question. It says, as he

15 himself says, he took no prisoners during the attack on Gornji Vakuf,

16 killing even women and children.

17 Now, sir, do you think you were being provided disinformation

18 about that?

19 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Meek.

20 MR. MEEK: Your Honour, I don't believe Gornji Vakuf is within the

21 scope of this indictment whatsoever. So there's no relevance to it,

22 there's no probative value. It's only brought in to prejudice

23 Mr. Naletilic. It's not in the indictment. Mr. Scott knows it. I

24 object.

25 JUDGE LIU: Was this matter mentioned during the

Page 5360

1 cross-examination?

2 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President, there was extensive cross-examination

3 by counsel for Naletilic, and even by the one question by Mr. Seric, that

4 do people in wartime engage in disinformation? And presumably the

5 effort-- there's going to be an effort to suggest that much of this is

6 based on disinformation. I simply picked out one part of this report. We

7 could go -- we could pick many others, and the Chamber can pick its own.

8 And my question to the counsel is -- or to the witness is, did he

9 think he was being provided disinformation when, according to this

10 document, Tuta himself said he took no prisoners? Was that disinformation

11 or not?

12 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Meek.

13 MR. MEEK: Your Honours, if that's the point of Mr. Scott's

14 question, I believe this witness has already testified that he didn't

15 believe anybody gave him disinformation. But still, this issue of Gornji

16 Vakuf is outside the scope of this indictment, and it's only being brought

17 forth in the testimony to prejudice my client and has no probative value

18 for what we're here to find.

19 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Scott, we've got this document at our hands. We

20 could read it ourselves.

21 Can you skip this question.

22 MR. SCOTT: Yes, I'll skip that question, Your Honour. And let me

23 ask one final question, then, about that.

24 Q. The information that you collected during the dinner conversation

25 that evening, Witness LL, did you believe at that time that Mr. Naletilic

Page 5361

1 was giving you disinformation?

2 A. Well, in view of that trust which was developing, and since this

3 was the first time that we had met, and because he liked very much the

4 Spanish troops and people who were there, it sounded to me like truthful

5 information. I always tried to crosscheck this kind of information so as

6 not to fall into the trap of disinformation. But I did that after this

7 report was done.

8 MR. SCOTT: Thank you, Witness LL. I have no further questions,

9 Your Honour.

10 JUDGE LIU: Any questions from the Judges?

11 Judge Clark, please.

12 Questioned by the Court:

13 JUDGE CLARK: Witness LL, I just have one question. It may lead

14 to another one, but basically I have one question. In the period of time

15 that you became acquainted with Mr. Ivan Andabak and you were aware of his

16 close relationship with his friend Mr. Tuta, did you ever receive any

17 information in relation to whether either Mr. Andabak or Mr. Tuta were

18 paid by anybody for their services, or did they bring their own funds to

19 the cause?

20 A. Well, I don't remember receiving any information prior to my

21 meeting Tuta. What I do know regarding the funds, as Mr. Tuta himself

22 told me, he had invested all his money in this cause. I do not know if

23 from -- there were some money coming from another country to this country

24 at war. There were very many vehicles for military commanders. And there

25 was a country at war. And I guess that some other country could

Page 5362












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 5363

1 logistically support the HVO. I would say that a country at war does not

2 have very many economic resources.

3 JUDGE CLARK: Are you saying that Mr. Tuta told you that he

4 purchased many of these vehicles for the HVO?

5 A. No, no, no. Absolutely no. Mr. Tuta never said anything like

6 that. What he was saying was that the HVO militaries were getting cars

7 for moving around. He did not say where from. All that Mr. Tuta told me

8 was that he had invested a great deal of money in this fall for that cause

9 because he believed he was defending that cause, the cause that he was

10 fighting for. And I can't really say more about the financing, about the

11 economic aspect.

12 JUDGE CLARK: Did the same situation pertain to Mr. Andabak?

13 A. Yes, precisely. Absolutely the same thing, the same situation.

14 JUDGE CLARK: Thank you.

15 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.

16 Judge Diarra.

17 JUDGE DIARRA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

18 Witness, you were told "We do not like the presence of Muslims".

19 Now, first, under what circumstances were you told that, and who was that

20 who told you that? And did this mean the presence of Muslims in the city

21 of Mostar or throughout Herceg-Bosna?

22 A. Yes. Specifically that night of the dinner party, both Mr. Tuta

23 and Mr. Ivan Andabak said that they were against Muslims in that city.

24 And subsequently, later on when talking to other brigade commanders with

25 whom I had contact, like, for instance, Tomic, who was the commander of a

Page 5364

1 brigade at Ljubuski, I think he was also a partisan of that view, that

2 there should be no Muslims in that area.

3 JUDGE DIARRA: [Interpretation] The city of Mostar and all of the

4 parts of Herceg-Bosna, all over Herceg-Bosna?

5 A. Not only the city of Mostar, because it is very difficult to find

6 a Muslim family in Ljubuski or in the interior. Perhaps there are people

7 like that -- perhaps there still are some people.

8 JUDGE DIARRA: [Interpretation] And my second question: On those

9 rare occasions that you met with Mr. Naletilic, was he wearing civilian or

10 military clothes?

11 A. At the dinner party, he was in civilian. He had a jacket and a

12 tie. On the other occasion, when I saw him in Siroki Brijeg, he was in a

13 military uniform. And on other occasions, I don't remember because that

14 was very sporadic. I do not remember. I remember on those two occasions,

15 specifically on one of them, he was in civilian; and on another one, he

16 was in a military uniform.

17 JUDGE DIARRA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Witness. I do

18 not have any other questions. Thank you very much.

19 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much, Judge Diarra.

20 Any questions out of the Judges' questions?

21 MR. SCOTT: No, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE LIU: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Meek.

23 MR. MEEK: Yes, Your Honour.

24 Further cross-examination by Mr. Meek:

25 Q. Witness LL, you just answered Judge Clark's question about

Page 5365

1 Mr. Tuta taking all of his money and funding in some manner this effort in

2 Bosnia-Herzegovina. Can you tell me what you did to corroborate this

3 supposed statement that Tuta made to you at this dinner party? What did

4 you do?

5 A. Well, I could not ask openly where it came from. I know that he

6 was a very powerful man who fought for the cause, but it was through Ivan

7 Andabak and through -- and other sources also told me not about the amount

8 of money but the effort that this person was investing in supporting the

9 cause.

10 MR. MEEK: That would be the only question I would have from the

11 Judges' questions, Your Honour.

12 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much.

13 Witness, thank you very much for helping us by giving your

14 evidence. I have to apologise to you for having kept you for so long.

15 When the usher pulls down the blinds, he will show you out of the room.

16 At this stage, this Trial Chamber would also like to express our

17 thanks to the Spanish government for allowing you to appear in this case.

18 We also thank the interpreters, both in the courtroom and in the

19 booth, for their valuable assistance.

20 Thank you very much. We wish you good luck.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Mr. President.

22 [The witness withdrew]

23 JUDGE LIU: At this stage, are there any documents to tender?

24 Mr. Meek?

25 MR. MEEK: Your Honour, we would ask that D1/33, which was the

Page 5366

1 former P2 exhibit which this witness marked on, be admitted. And we would

2 also ask that we -- we be given a number for the statement that Witness LL

3 made to the Office of the Prosecutor on 11 of -- excuse me, the November

4 the 3rd of 2000, which this witness testified extensively about and from.

5 And I have more copies than are necessary.

6 JUDGE LIU: Thank you. Any objections?

7 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, as to the interview statement, as you

8 know, we maintain our same position, that it's not -- the statement itself

9 is not evidence; the testimony is evidence.

10 As to -- well, I'll leave it at that. I will address the

11 Prosecution exhibits.

12 JUDGE LIU: How about D1/33, which is about a map that was marked

13 by the witness?

14 MR. SCOTT: Assuming we finally got the correct map, no

15 objection.

16 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much.

17 [Trial Chamber confers]

18 JUDGE LIU: Yes. This D1/33 will be admitted into evidence, as

19 well as the three other documents which were mentioned by Mr. Meek at the

20 beginning of this sitting, that is, P508, P595.1, and P612 will be

21 admitted into evidence. Madam Registrar will give those documents proper

22 numbers.

23 THE REGISTRAR: So they are Exhibit PP508, PP595.1, PP612, and

24 D1/33, and they are exhibits.

25 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. Mr. Scott, any documents to

Page 5367

1 tender at this stage?

2 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, I believe they were all previously

3 tendered through other witnesses, including Mr. Aguirre and Mr. Prlic and

4 others. If the Court would just allow me the possibility of

5 double-checking that one last time, but I believe there was nothing

6 tendered or used with the witness that had not been previously tendered.

7 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Meek.

8 MR. MEEK: Just a number for the statement which I indicated I

9 would like to admit, that this witness extensively testified from and

10 about and was given to the Office of the Prosecutor on November 3, 2000.

11 JUDGE LIU: Well, at this stage, we can only give it an ID

12 number.

13 MR. MEEK: Yes, an ID number.

14 THE REGISTRAR: ID number will be D1/34.

15 MR. MEEK: Madam Registrar, how many copies would you like?

16 THE REGISTRAR: For the Chamber, we need six copies and then for

17 the interpreters -- then all these copies for the interpreters. So six

18 copies, please.

19 MR. MEEK: Thank you very much.

20 JUDGE LIU: Well, shall we have the next witness at this stage?

21 MR. SCOTT: Yes, Your Honour. Mr. Bos would continue. Actually,

22 he doesn't have to do the direct examination, it was concluded, but he

23 will be handling, if you will, for cross-examination purposes the

24 continuation of the prior witness.

25 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. Usher, could you please bring in

Page 5368

1 the next witness? I guess you have to pull the blinds down again.

2 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, the next one is KK, who actually came

3 with the voice distortion. So may I please ask for ten minutes' break.

4 MR. BOS: That is correct. Yes.

5 JUDGE LIU: Well, we'll have a short break. We will resume at

6 12.30.

7 --- Break taken at 12.20 p.m.

8 --- On resuming at 12.32 p.m.

9 JUDGE LIU: Yes, cross-examination, Mr. Par, please.


11 [Witness answered through interpreter]

12 MR. PAR: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

13 Cross-examined by Mr. Par:

14 Q. Witness, I'm lawyer Zelimir Par. I am one of the Defence counsel

15 for Vinko Martinovic, Stela, and I will put to you several questions, not

16 difficult questions, regarding the conditions of your detainment within

17 the unit about which you testified a few days ago.

18 We'll start with September 1993 when soldiers drove you out of

19 your apartment and brought you to what you called Stela's headquarters. I

20 would like to know, have you observed or deduced from the conversations of

21 the soldiers that their intention was to expel you to the other side of

22 the town? Did you hear the soldiers say anything like that?

23 A. No.

24 Q. Would you tell me, please, do you remember, was there shooting

25 around the demarcation line on that day? Was it possible on that day to

Page 5369

1 cross the demarcation line without putting your life in danger? Do you

2 remember?

3 A. I wasn't near the line.

4 Q. But did you hear shooting during that day while you were with

5 those soldiers?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Would you tell me, please, on that day after you were driven out

8 of your apartment, did you have any opportunity at all to go anywhere else

9 considering that you were expelled? And was it possible, for instance, to

10 go to the other side if those soldiers had not been keeping you in

11 detention?

12 A. No.

13 Q. Did Stela ever ask you if you had anywhere else to go to find

14 shelter or accommodation in that western part of the town?

15 A. Yes, he did ask, but we had nowhere to go.

16 Q. Generally speaking, did he know about your entire situation, about

17 your father having been arrested and taken to the camp? Did Stela know

18 your personal life story?

19 A. I don't think he did.

20 Q. Would you tell me, now, while you were at Stela's quarters, were

21 you guarded? Were you constantly under control in terms of movement?

22 A. Nobody was controlling really. We could move around.

23 Q. Did you or your brother have occasion to go to that shop which was

24 nearby to get some groceries for the unit or otherwise?

25 A. There was a shop nearby where we could go buy cigarettes if we had

Page 5370

1 the money.

2 Q. Were you being guarded at the time, or would you just go on your

3 own and come back?

4 A. It was very close by.

5 Q. And where did you get the money to do that shopping?

6 A. Well, it was some money that we had managed to keep, 10 or

7 15 deutschemarks.

8 Q. Could you tell me about those conditions a little. How did they

9 feed you, what kind of meals you had there, how many a day? Were you

10 starving?

11 A. We had two meals, and we were not starving.

12 Q. Did you, perhaps, get any cigarettes there, like the soldiers did?

13 A. Sometimes somebody would give us a pack.

14 Q. Regarding other conditions, did you have enough water? Did you

15 have normal access to the lavatories? Was it possible for you to keep

16 clean?

17 A. We were allowed to go to the lavatory. And sometimes, if we had

18 time, we could even bathe.

19 Q. How did you sleep? What were the conditions in the place where

20 you spent the night? Could you describe that room and the conditions in

21 which you slept.

22 A. There were sponge mattresses and some kind of bunk or bed. We

23 could lie down and cover ourselves.

24 Q. Was it possible for you to be constantly with your younger

25 brother, and were the conditions the same for him?

Page 5371












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 5372

1 A. For the most part, I was with my younger brother.

2 Q. Let us move on to that line where you said you occasionally went

3 to work. To begin with, would you please look again at this map that we

4 used the last time. It is Prosecution's Exhibit 14.5. And if there is no

5 clean copy left, I have this one ready to hand to the witness.

6 Witness, you are familiar with this photograph? At the

7 Prosecutor's request, you drew the lines around that zone where you went

8 to work. Would you kindly do that again on this map, because I have some

9 additional questions to ask.

10 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Par, is that the same photo shown by the

11 Prosecutor? We have to make sure about that. What is the number of that

12 photo?

13 MR. PAR: [Interpretation] That is photograph 14.5, the same

14 photograph that Mr. Bos used in direct examination, in

15 examination-in-chief. Perhaps we could put it on the ELMO so that it is

16 visible to everyone.

17 If you would kindly turn on the ELMO.

18 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Bos.

19 MR. BOS: I'm just wondering why could we not use that same

20 photograph. He already marked the area. I don't see the relevance of

21 having him mark the area again. Maybe we can use the same photograph.

22 JUDGE LIU: We have the same doubts in our mind.

23 MR. PAR: [Interpretation] I didn't want him to mark anything on

24 the Prosecutor's -- on what is already the Prosecutor's exhibit, but if

25 the Prosecutor agrees with additional markings being made on his exhibit,

Page 5373

1 then I have no objection to that.

2 JUDGE LIU: So you are going to ask the witness to make the

3 different marks; right? Thank you. You may use your own photos.

4 MR. BOS: I do not have an objection if the same photograph is

5 used which has already been marked in the examination-in-chief. It seems

6 easier.

7 JUDGE LIU: Well, for the purpose of the filing of the evidence,

8 if the Defence counsel asks the witness to have different markings on that

9 map, we better have a different one.

10 MR. BOS: Very well, Your Honour. As long as he's not been asked

11 again to mark the area where he worked, because that's already been done

12 on our photograph.

13 JUDGE LIU: That's what we understand.

14 MR. PAR: [Interpretation]

15 Q. Sir, Witness, would you please mark again the area to which you

16 went to work?

17 MR. BOS: Sorry, Your Honours, to interrupt again, but I've just

18 been told that I used Exhibit number 14.4, and this is Exhibit 14.5. So

19 it is a different photograph, and I just want to make -- I thought it was

20 the same photograph, but it isn't.

21 JUDGE LIU: Yes. I was just informed by Madam Registrar.

22 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone.

23 MR. PAR: [Interpretation] I apologise. Then let us take this

24 photograph off the ELMO and let us use photograph 14.4, as suggested by

25 Mr. Bos.

Page 5374

1 THE REGISTRAR: Do you have a clean copy with you?

2 MR. PAR: [Interpretation] Since Mr. Bos agreed to additional

3 markings being made on that photograph, we can use the photograph that was

4 marked earlier.

5 THE REGISTRAR: So that was the P14.4/2. That was the ID number

6 of this document.

7 MR. PAR: [Interpretation]

8 Q. Witness, please look at this photograph and have it put on the

9 ELMO so that we can all remember what this photograph is. Perhaps lower

10 it a little.

11 Witness, what you marked in blue is then the zone to which you

12 used to go. Were there sacks with sand put up anywhere in this area?

13 Could you mark the locations if so?

14 A. Yes, there were sacks with sand.

15 Q. Could you show us exactly where and mark it in a different colour,

16 for instance, green? Could you mark the positions of these sacks?

17 A. [Marks]

18 Q. Now I would like to ask you about those sandbags. Did you notice

19 then that above those sandbags, for the purpose of protection from sniper

20 fire, to obstruct visibility, there are additional things like curtains,

21 canvas sheets, et cetera, to obstruct visibility?

22 A. I didn't notice any canvas sheet above the sandbags.

23 Q. And since you were working in this area on this building, could

24 you mark the building, and then I will ask you if you worked in front of

25 that building, behind that building, or inside that building when you were

Page 5375

1 there.

2 A. We worked in this building here and inside here.

3 Q. Could you please put it on the ELMO, show us the photograph, and

4 then tell us whether it was in front, behind, or inside that building when

5 you went on your expeditions. Please show with the pointer. If you don't

6 have the pointer, use the marker.

7 A. We worked in this building and in this one.

8 Q. Did I understand you correctly? Inside the building, not in front

9 of it?

10 A. Inside.

11 Q. While this photograph is still in front of us, could you tell us

12 what units there were outside this area? Do you know of a single unit

13 which was on the border or outside this zone that you marked here? What

14 were their names?

15 A. I don't know those units.

16 Q. Can we agree then that there were other units alongside this

17 area?

18 A. They existed but I don't know them.

19 Q. And they were completely different to the unit where you spent

20 several months?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Just one more question, please. This unit where you spent time

23 with at Stela's, did it go somewhere and was replaced by a different unit

24 or did it spend its -- that entire time there?

25 A. As far as I know, it was there the entire time, the same unit.

Page 5376

1 Q. No further questions.

2 MR. PAR: [Interpretation] I don't know how we will mark this,

3 whether it will be the Prosecutor's exhibit or the joint Prosecutor and

4 Defence Exhibit, or perhaps the Trial Chamber can suggest a solution.

5 JUDGE LIU: I believe this photo should be double numbered. I

6 mean, one photo with two numbers.

7 Any cross-examination, Mr. Meek?

8 MR. MEEK: I'm happy to announce I have none, Your Honours. Thank

9 you.

10 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. Re-examination?

11 MR. BOS: Just a very few questions, Your Honour.

12 Re-examined by Mr. Bos:

13 Q. Witness KK, when you would sleep in Vinko Skrobo -- sorry. When

14 you would stay in Stela's headquarters and stay there overnight, would

15 there be guards in the headquarters?

16 A. Yes, there were guards.

17 Q. And how many?

18 A. Well, about two or three men.

19 Q. Would they be there every night?

20 A. Yes, there were.

21 Q. Okay.

22 MR. BOS: That's it for my questions to the witness. And maybe,

23 in answer to the question Judge Clark raised on the patch, the person --

24 the face on the patch, I don't know if I can answer that question now.

25 JUDGE LIU: Yes, please.

Page 5377

1 MR. BOS: I did inquire and, unfortunately, I did not find out who

2 that person is. But what I could say in general is that patches of ATG

3 units would usually be -- the names of the ATG units would usually be

4 combat soldiers who had died in combat. So an ATG name would be a name of

5 a soldier who had died in combat. And unfortunately, we didn't find out

6 whether this Vinko Skrobo was also the name of a soldier in combat. But

7 if it was, it could be that the face was the person of Vinko Skrobo. But

8 I can't be 100 percent sure about that.

9 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much.

10 Witness, thank you very much for helping us by giving your

11 evidence. When the usher pulls down the blinds, he will take you out of

12 the room.

13 At this stage, are there any more documents to tender into the

14 evidence, Mr. Bos?

15 MR. BOS: Only this exhibit, which I think we'll get two numbers.

16 But I think it would have been 14.4/2, if I remember well. So we would

17 tender that exhibit.

18 JUDGE LIU: Madam Registrar will give a proper number.

19 THE REGISTRAR: It's PP14.4/2. And the ID number for the Defence

20 with the same document will be D2/16.

21 [Witness withdrew]

22 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Par, I suppose you are going to tender that same

23 photograph?

24 MR. PAR: [Interpretation] That is correct. I tender the same

25 thing. And I have no other proposals. So for once, we have a joint

Page 5378

1 suggestion, joint proposal.

2 JUDGE LIU: Thank you. Madam Registrar will give another number

3 for the same photograph.

4 THE REGISTRAR: That would be D2/16.

5 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much.

6 Yes, Mr. Meek.

7 MR. MEEK: The Defence of Mr. Naletilic has no objection to those

8 exhibits, Your Honour, for the record.

9 JUDGE LIU: Thank you. Thank you very much.

10 At this stage the Trial Chamber would like to remind both parties

11 that during the testimony of a witness, that there should be no

12 approach -- no attempt to talk to the witness in any way, no matter in

13 this courtroom or outside this courtroom, by anybody. We do not like to

14 see a witness contaminated during their stay here in The Hague. This

15 warning applies to both parties.

16 Yes, Mr. Scott. What are you going to suggest to this Trial

17 Chamber?

18 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President, we have a moment, and I think it might

19 be a good use of time. We can still hopefully finish before 1.00 even.

20 Two things: We wanted to, again, we were going to provide the full

21 tape -- remember the tape, the Vranica tape that Judge Clark had inquired

22 about. We raised that the other day, and we didn't have time to do it

23 then. But today, we might have sufficient flexibility in our schedule a

24 bit to do that.

25 What we're going to do now is over the lunch hour, we're going to

Page 5379

1 provide that to the Defence, and they can make inquiry. There is an

2 abbreviated transcript -- English transcription of what's on the tape.

3 And they can review that. And if the Chamber wishes to review that -- we

4 weren't sure what the Chamber wishes to do. If you want to play that in

5 the courtroom, we can do that.

6 I need to alert the Chamber that I mentioned there was a brief

7 interview that was in between the two parts of the tape that had been

8 played in the courtroom which was not on the original tape. I alert the

9 Chamber, and particularly Defence counsel, to that. It is an interview

10 which I did not know until a few minutes ago, of -- the interview is of

11 Zeljko Bosnjak. It is a very short item, but that have some significance

12 to Mr. Naletilic, in particular. So I want to alert counsel to that and

13 the Chamber, and that it was not in the original tape. And we can either

14 submit it separately or, for these purposes, it can be removed. But I'll

15 provide the tape again to counsel during the lunch hour.

16 The second item, Your Honour, procedural item, is as the Court

17 will recall, there are approximately ten transcripts that have previously

18 been admitted from other cases. There are also a substantial volume of

19 exhibits that are connected to those transcripts, and we wish to tender

20 those today. They are -- I say "tender"; what I should say is make them

21 of record in the case, perhaps. Because by prior Court orders, they have

22 already been admitted. I am referring to the Court's orders dated the

23 27th of November, 2000, signed by -- when the Chamber was comprised of

24 Judge Rodrigeuz presiding, Judge Riad, and Judge Wald, in which the first

25 seven transcripts were admitted along with exhibits were admitted -- and I

Page 5380












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 5381

1 am using the term "admitted" very specifically, not tendered but

2 admitted.

3 Then there was an additional order on the 9th of July, 2001, in

4 which, because of a rule change, the admission of those seven transcripts

5 and exhibits was once confirmed by the Chamber then comprised -- let me

6 make sure that was exactly the same. I believe it was. Yes, it was still

7 Judge Rodriguez presiding, Judge Riad and Judge Wald. And then finally,

8 an order that was signed on the 11th of October, 2000, by this Chamber, I

9 mean as presently comprised, Judge Liu presiding, and Your Honours Clark

10 and Diarra, adding the three additional transcripts of Mr. -- I believe

11 it's Mr. Donia, Mr. Ribicic, and Paddy Ashdown. And again, the exhibits

12 that go with those transcripts were also admitted.

13 So we are prepared, and I have with me -- and I'm not saying take

14 at the moment, but I will distribute those to the Registry this

15 afternoon. They have been put in two binders. And so the record is

16 clear. And again, to be transparent about this, all the exhibits that go

17 with those two transcripts comprises another substantial part of the

18 17 binders of documents that the Prosecution has tendered before.

19 So we're providing those to the Chamber simply as a matter of

20 record and physical -- the transcripts physically today, or at least we're

21 prepared to do that today. And then we are prepared to start the next

22 witness, Your Honour, at 2.30, depending on the Court's wishes.

23 JUDGE LIU: I just want to ask some questions about those two

24 tapes. Are you going to tender them eventually, or just for the reference

25 for this Chamber?

Page 5382

1 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, we're going to tender the entire tape.

2 And it may be that some additional foundation may be necessary, may not

3 be, for the middle portion. And I'm trying to be as absolutely explicit

4 about that as possible so there's no surprise. Because as I alerted the

5 Chamber the other day, and I'm mentioning it again now, there is this

6 portion in the middle. The original tape was a composite. It had been

7 cut from two -- it'd been comprised from two other tapes and put on to one

8 tape. In any event, Mr. Stringer is correcting me. But it was a

9 collection. It wasn't one continuous tape.

10 When Judge Clark asked for the additional tape to be prepared and

11 we went back to some of the source material - and I didn't do -- I must

12 say I didn't do this myself personally - we found this additional material

13 in the middle. Now, I'm providing that to Defence counsel right now. As

14 soon as we stop, I will hand them the cassette and the transcript that's

15 been provided, which I have in my hand, and they can look at that

16 further.

17 Given that sufficient notice is given, we understand - and we are

18 giving that notice, so there is no surprise - we will seek for that

19 additional middle portion to be considered as evidence.

20 JUDGE LIU: Do they have a number on it or something?

21 MR. SCOTT: It was originally -- I think it was originally 17,

22 Your Honour, and I believe the new version -- pardon me for disappearing.

23 The new version will be -- we propose will be 17.1.

24 JUDGE LIU: Well, I think if you are going to tender any documents

25 or tapes, that the Defence counsel will have the full right to challenge

Page 5383

1 those documents and the tapes.

2 MR. SCOTT: Of course, Your Honour. No question about that.

3 JUDGE LIU: Maybe you could arrange some time to watch those

4 tapes in the courtroom. And the best way is to have a proper witness with

5 this tape.

6 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, the original --

7 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

8 MR. SCOTT: Sorry. Let me ask Mr. Stringer about this for a

9 moment.

10 [Prosecution counsel confer]

11 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President, I don't want to hold the Chamber beyond

12 the time. I'll get further information about that. I believe at least

13 two witnesses have testified about the tapes so far, at least two. So

14 clearly this initial -- this additional middle portion would also have to

15 be looked at. And there's no question. That's why we're raising the

16 question, so that notice has been given, there is no surprise, and that

17 Defence counsel can prepare their position on it.

18 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much.

19 As for this afternoon's sitting, we have already made a ruling

20 yesterday afternoon. We would not like to see any more witnesses under

21 the oath to spend a very long time in The Hague.

22 We also have Mr. Aguirre, who is under oath at this moment. So we

23 hope we could continue the cross-examination Monday morning.

24 So we will adjourn until 9.30 Monday morning.

25 MR. SCOTT: We're not adjourning until 9.30 now, are we?

Page 5384












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 5385

1 JUDGE LIU: Monday morning, 9.30.

2 MR. SCOTT: Oh. I thought we were meeting this afternoon.

3 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

4 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.04 p.m.,

5 to be reconvened on Monday, the 12th day

6 of November, 2001, at 9.30 a.m.