1 Friday, 11 October 2002
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The accused Naletilic not present]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.37 a.m.
6 JUDGE LIU: Call the case, please, Madam Registrar.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case number
8 IT-98-34-T, the Prosecutor versus Naletilic and Martinovic.
9 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much.
10 Could we have the witness, please.
11 JUDGE CLARK: I'm glad to see you back, Mr. Martinovic. I hope
12 you're feeling better.
13 [The witness entered court]
14 JUDGE LIU: Good morning, witness.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
16 JUDGE LIU: Please sit down.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
18 JUDGE LIU: Are you ready to start?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
20 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.
21 Mr. Krsnik, your cross-examination, please.
22 WITNESS: SAFET IDRIZOVIC [Resumed]
23 [Witness answered through interpreter]
24 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Good morning, and thank you, Your
1 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Scott.
2 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President, we would -- consistent with the
3 Chamber's practices, we'd ask to receive copies of all documents that will
4 be used during cross-examination.
5 JUDGE LIU: Are there any documents, Mr. Krsnik?
6 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, as regards the
7 practices of this Court and as regards what has been allowed to the
8 Prosecution, at the moment we are going to be using documents during the
9 cross-examination. We shall be providing them to the Prosecution. And
10 the documents that we have now, we can give them to the -- my learned
11 friend immediately.
12 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much for your cooperation.
13 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Since we have many documents, we are
14 sure that we are going to be using the ones that we have just given the
15 Prosecution. And as for the rest, we shall see during the
17 Your Honours, I would just like to inform you that many of these
18 documents are those that we have received from our learned friend on the
19 4th of October, so a few days ago. So many of them have not been
20 translated, but some of them are very short. And with the assistance of
21 our interpreters, I believe we will be able to present the exhibits to the
22 witness. But at the same time, I would also like to say that there are a
23 number of documents which have been translated.
24 Cross-examined by Mr. Krsnik:
25 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, witness.
1 A. Good morning.
2 Q. Let me introduce myself. I'm counsel Kresimir Krsnik, acting on
3 behalf of Mr. Naletilic as his Defence counsel. I'm going to ask you a
4 few questions. Please bear in mind that we speak the same language, and
5 whatever you and I say is interpreted into two languages. I would like to
6 ask you to speak slowly and make a pause between my question and your
8 A. Yes. I understand.
9 Q. Mr. Idrizovic, before I start asking you about details, can you
10 please clarify something that confused me yesterday. You confused me when
11 you said the Armed Forces of Bosnia and Herzegovina. I never heard that
12 expression before. So can you explain the term "the Armed Forces of
13 Bosnia-Herzegovina." And then can you please clarify your position. That
14 was another thing that you confused me with. First tell me who and what
15 are the Armed Forces of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
16 A. In the decree which was issued in 1992, it says that the Armed
17 Forces of Bosnia and Herzegovina are composed of the Territorial Defence
18 at the very beginning and then the Croatian Defence Council, MUP units, if
19 that was necessary. But in practical terms, at the time the Armed Forces
20 were composed of all those who were prepared to fight for Bosnia and
22 Q. Looking at the transcript -- but if I understand you well, the
23 Armed Forces were the TO and the HVO, the Territorial Defence and the
24 Croatian Defence Council.
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Can you please come closer to the microphone. Thank you.
2 And the HVO as such were the legal armed or military force of the
3 Armed Forces of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
4 A. Yes. The HVO according to that decree was a legitimate force for
5 the defence of Bosnia and Herzegovina, probably until the moment when it
6 started attacking that same Bosnia and Herzegovina.
7 Q. We will come to that. And I hope we will be able to establish who
8 attacked whom and who was it who attacked Bosnia and Herzegovina.
9 When you say "attack Bosnia and Herzegovina," are you referring to
10 conflicts within Bosnia and Herzegovina, or is maybe an attack on Bosnia
11 and Herzegovina the attack of the BH Army on Boksevica, for example.
12 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Scott.
13 MR. SCOTT: Objection. Your Honour. It's beyond the scope of the
14 direct examination and beyond the scope of the rebuttal testimony.
15 JUDGE LIU: Yes. Mr. Krsnik, there's too wide a range of the
16 cross-examination. Try to limit your cross-examination in two aspects:
17 One is the credibility of this witness. The other is the Rados diary.
18 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] I have hardly started, and already my
19 learned friend is objecting. Your Honours, the credibility of a witness
20 is this question. I have not even finished the question. I have not even
21 said what I wanted to say, and already my learned friend objects and
22 already I am being warned.
23 Your Honours, if somebody in this courtroom mentions the Armed
24 Forces, then I want this to be clarified. It goes for the credibility.
25 We know what we have been hearing in this courtroom for a year or so, and
1 now the witness says that the HVO started attacking. I would like to
2 clarify. Who was it who -- that the HVO attacked? Is an attack on Bosnia
3 and Herzegovina, if the BH Army attacks one village and the HVO attacks
4 another village? Does that mean that both attacked Bosnia and
5 Herzegovina? I would like to find out what the witness thinks. An
6 allocation cannot just stay lingering in the air. This is the first time
7 we have heard of the Armed Forces. We are aware of the BH Army. We are
8 aware of the HVO. We are aware of the Republika Srpska Army. But for the
9 first time we hear of the Armed Forces of Bosnia and Herzegovina. That's
10 what I wanted to clarify.
11 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik, I've already said that these things
12 have been in dispute from the very beginning to almost the last day of the
13 trial. I know your position on that issue, and I also know the positions
14 of the Prosecutor. But this matter has nothing to do with the credibility
15 of the witness and there is nothing to do with the Rados diary. This is a
16 cross-examination. I hope you could concentrate your cross-examination on
17 these two main points rather than engaging in some debates.
18 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] I don't want to engage in any
19 debates. Can you please leave me and witness to do our job. I know what
20 the purpose of my cross-examination is. I know it very well. I am well
21 prepared for this cross-examination. We all need to hear what this
22 witness has to say. And when he has something, I have the right to
23 clarify his words. I have hardly started my cross-examination; we have
24 already wasted ten minutes on a debate. Let's move on.
25 Q. You said to the Prosecutor yesterday that the Army of Bosnia and
1 Herzegovina -- when he said the Muslim Army, you corrected him and said,
2 "No, that is the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina." Can you please tell me
3 in addition to Jovan Divjak -- General Divjak and General Stjepan Siber,
4 can you give me the name of one Serb or one Croat who were in the army in
6 A. Gladly. In front of me I have the booklet containing the names of
7 fallen soldiers in Jablanica. Two Croats and one Serb are mentioned. If
8 necessary, the book is here and I will find the pages containing the
9 photos and the personal data of those three soldiers. You cannot imply
10 that all the armies in Bosnia and Herzegovina were ethically pure. The
11 HVO was not ethically pure at the beginning. When the HVO decided to
12 attack the areas which were not under its control, the first thing it did,
13 it ethically cleansed its own units. But since you say that you are well
14 prepared, you know what the HVO did with the Muslims --
15 Q. Please, sir.
16 A. I apologise.
17 Q. It is me who leads this testimony, not you.
18 A. Mr. President, will you allow me --
19 Q. Witness, I am kindly asking you --
20 JUDGE LIU: Now, I think both of you have to calm down.
21 Witness, did you finish your answer?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I didn't, Mr. President. I
23 thought that I would be given the time to say something to Mr. Krsnik.
24 What I wanted to say is that I will gladly answer all of his questions,
25 but once he asks me something, I would like him to give me the time to
1 answer that question as I want.
2 Please, if I may be given the time and if please can the counsel
3 let me answer the question that he puts to me.
4 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I lead the
5 cross-examination here. Everybody knows it. And witness, I am the one
6 who will be asking questions and you will answer my questions.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course, but ...
8 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Scott.
9 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President, I object. The Chamber will recall on
10 many, many occasions the Prosecution was required to listen to long,
11 non-responsive answers from many Defence witnesses. When I objected and
12 when I tried to draw the witness's attention to giving a response of a
13 more responsive question, I was repeatedly told to give -- let the witness
14 answer. So I think the same treatment should be afforded to the
15 Prosecution witnesses as was afforded to the Defence witnesses.
16 JUDGE LIU: Well, witness, try to finish your answer in a very
17 concise and short way so that we can move on. I think if Defence counsel
18 needs more information in this aspect, he will ask you more questions in
19 that direction.
20 Yes. You may finish your answer, witness.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What I wanted to say is when the HVO
22 decided to, the first thing it did, it sent all the Muslims from its units
23 to camps. This is what we didn't do.
24 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
25 Q. We will come to that, witness, very soon and we will have evidence
1 to show you.
2 So we've established that you had two Serbs and one Croat.
3 A. Fallen.
4 Q. What year was that?
5 A. Two in 1993 and one in 1995.
6 Q. All right. Then can you tell me, you come from the village of
7 Dobrigosce; is that correct?
8 A. Correct.
9 Q. Did Serbs in Jablanica have an independent military association in
10 1992 or 1993? Were they organised?
11 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Scott.
12 MR. SCOTT: I object to relevance beyond the scope of direct,
13 beyond the scope of the rebuttal case.
14 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik, I think I've mentioned that you
15 could ask some questions in cross-examination in two areas: One is the
16 credibility of this witness; the other is the Rados diary. This is the
17 main purpose of the cross-examination. We don't have to come from 1992.
18 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, yesterday the year 1992
19 was mentioned on direct, and there was also questions about independent
20 Serbian units. And I have just had confirmation.
21 Q. I'm interested in the native village of Mr. Safet Idrizovic,
22 Dobrigosce. Tell me, in your village, what was the ethnic composition of
23 the population there?
24 A. If that is at all important, there was an equal percentage of
25 Muslims and Serbs.
1 Q. Can you tell me something about the lot of the Serbs. Are there
2 any Serbs in Dobrigosce today? Have there been any since 1993?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Why?
5 A. They abandoned the village in 1994 after the signing of the
6 agreement between Croats and Muslims when the Federation was established.
7 And I believe that their political structures decided that as many people
8 as possible should leave the area of the Federation. At the time they
9 probably thought that they wouldn't be able to live there. That's why
10 they left the village. After the signing of that agreement, I believe
11 that it was the Washington Agreement.
12 Q. What you're saying now you're saying under oath.
13 A. Yes. They left in 1994 because of the political circumstances
14 relative to the establishment of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina
15 because at the time it was called a Muslim Croat Federation and they
16 didn't find themselves there.
17 Q. None of the houses were touched. None of them were burned down.
18 A. No. They all remained. They're all intact.
19 Q. Who lives in those houses?
20 A. Nobody.
21 Q. You personally, did you establish a special unit there?
22 A. No. It's a very small village, and it is on the verge of
23 disappearance. It is a small village very high up in the mountain, and
24 before the war it was one of the most -- least densely populated villages
25 in the area. People normally emigrated into towns. And the total number
1 of military conscripts in the village was less than ten, so there were no
2 conditions in place to establish a military unit, even the smallest one.
3 And I didn't live in that village. I hadn't lived there for a long time
4 before the war.
5 Q. Can you please tell me who killed Duro Manigoda, or maybe I should
6 go on mentioning the names of the villagers of that village.
7 A. It was the criminals.
8 Q. The criminals?
9 A. Yes. Duro Manigoda was a rich man, and he was killed by
10 criminals who wanted to get hold of his money. There was an investigation
11 against these people. And when the law on amnesty was passed in Bosnia,
12 then those people were amnestied, like many other criminals.
13 Q. Criminals in the Army of BH or others?
14 A. All the criminals. A criminal is a criminal.
15 Q. I agree with you. Were you also in Duro Manigoda's house?
16 A. When?
17 Q. Immediately after his murder.
18 A. No.
19 Q. Did his daughter find you in his courtyard?
20 A. No.
21 THE INTERPRETER: Could you please ask the counsel and the witness
22 to slow down.
23 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik, we have a problem of the
24 interpretation. You have to slow down.
25 MR. KRSNIK: Yes, I saw that. [Interpretation] Certainly I
1 apologise to the interpreters.
2 Q. Let's try and clarify one other thing: Your position from 26
3 October, 1992 until the end of 1993, can you please tell us exactly what
4 you were. What was your position in Jablanica?
5 A. I believe I was very precise yesterday when I described my
7 Q. You were the chief of the BH Army staff for Jablanica
8 municipality; is that correct?
9 A. No. I was the commander of the defence staff for the army in
10 Jablanica. I was not the chief.
11 Q. See, we have to clarify. You were the commander of the BH Army
12 for Jablanica municipality; is that correct?
13 A. The official title was the commander of the Armed Forces of
14 Jablanica municipality.
15 Q. See, we need to clarify things. We will very soon be able to
16 communicate very well. We need clarifications. And that is what you did
17 until the end of 1993. I'm interested in 1993. I'm not interested in the
18 period after that. Is that correct?
19 A. Yes. I will repeat what I said yesterday. I was the commander of
20 the staff of the Armed Forces of Jablanica from 28th of October, 1992,
21 until the end of January 1994. That is, the signing of the agreement on
22 the establishment of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, I
23 already said that at the end of 1992 or early 1993 I received an order
24 from my superior commander, Mr. Pasalic, to establish in Jablanica a
25 brigade and to place it under the command which will then be a part of the
1 4th Corps.
2 Q. Okay. Do you remember your first statement that you gave in the
3 year 2000? In the year 2000 you gave a statement - on the 12th of July,
4 it was - do you remember that statement?
5 A. Yes, I do.
6 Q. In that statement you say -- and if you say this is not correct,
7 I'm going to show it to you. But I now want to avoid wasting time.
8 "Around the 26th of October, 1992, the staff of the BH Army in Sarajevo
9 removed Salko Zerim from the position of chief of the staff of the Armed
10 Forces of Bosnia-Herzegovina in Jablanica. General Sefer Halilovic the
11 main commander in the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina appointed me to
12 replace Salko Zerim and that position was the Chief of Staff of the Armed
13 Forces of Bosnia and Herzegovina." This is your statement.
14 A. Slowly. I believe that it was a bad translation. The position of
15 the Chief of Staff was the second position. The first position is the
16 commander. The second position is Chief of Staff. Salko Zerim was not
17 the Chief of Staff. He was the commander, and I replaced him in that
18 position. There must have been a mistake either in typing or in
19 translation, but this is not important. From then onwards I was the main
20 person within that command structure.
21 Q. If I -- my memory serves me well, your first function was the
22 Chief of Staff. That was Sefer Halilovic. He was the Chief of Staff of
23 the BH Army.
24 A. I believe he was the commander. In the army structure, the
25 commander is above the chief.
1 JUDGE LIU: Well --
2 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
3 Q. That is later on.
4 JUDGE LIU: You forget yourself, Mr. Krsnik. Try to slow down so
5 that the interpretation can catch up with you.
6 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
7 Q. I agree with you more or less. We won't enter into a debate,
8 because this happened at a subsequent date, when Rasim Delic appeared.
9 He was the commander, and someone else was the chief. But it doesn't
11 A. It doesn't matter.
12 Q. But you were the main person in the BH Army in Jablanica; isn't
13 that correct?
14 A. Yes, that's correct.
15 Q. And that was the case up until the end of 1993.
16 A. No. You haven't allowed me to answer your question. I said that
17 I was ordered to form a brigade.
18 Q. Tell us when.
19 A. I finished with that task on the 21st of January, 1993. From that
20 date onwards, the brigade entered the corps and it was under the command
21 of Mr. Pasalic. The staff of the Armed Forces remained as a body. I
22 remained at the head of that staff, but my duties did not cover the same
23 area. I had less responsibility, and it involved providing security for
24 important buildings in the area of the municipality.
25 Q. And that was all that you as the chief of the Armed Forces of
1 Bosnia and Herzegovina did in 1993. You only provided security for
2 buildings, as is the case with the civilian protection.
3 A. No. Civilian protection has certain responsibilities. The
4 civilian protection is not an armed force. It has no weapons, and it
5 doesn't provide security for buildings in any countries. I believe that
6 it doesn't do this in Croatia either. The task of the civilian protection
7 is to save people and property, to protect them from bad weather
8 conditions, to protect them in war conditions, and to protect them from
9 other disasters. Buildings -- security for buildings are provided by --
10 is provided by armed people in peacetime and in wartime. And I believe
11 that is the case in Croatia now too. I believe that people with weapons
12 provide security for buildings. I think you would agree with me, that
13 that is the case in Croatia too.
14 Q. I know that you're a professor of national defence and national
15 protection. I know that you're an expert on this matter. However, that
16 is not the case. Perhaps it is the case in the Federation of
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina, but that is not the case in Croatia. Nevertheless,
18 I'm interested in the number of people you had under you as the Chief of
19 Staff of the Armed Forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1993.
20 A. You mean the command?
21 Q. Yes, the command.
22 A. There were about 200 people. And just let me add this: These
23 people were between the age of 50 and 60.
24 Q. Very well. So you are telling us that after January 1993 you were
25 not in a position to issue orders to anyone. You weren't in a position to
1 plan, to provide logistical operations. What did you do then were you
2 only involved in protecting buildings? Could you have arrested someone,
3 for example?
4 A. That's all. That's all we did. We had people who provided
5 security for the command and the hydroelectric powerplants were -- they
6 provided security for hydroelectric powerplants, special purposes
7 industry, the military hospital, the war hospital, important bridges,
8 important railway bridges, the water supply system these are the
9 facilities that they provided security for. Up until the beginning of
10 July -- I don't have the time to explain all this to the Court, to explain
11 the purpose of establishing the brigade and the staff. Perhaps people
12 don't understand what the two of us are talking about.
13 Q. Well, that is a problem in general here at the Tribunal, but we'll
14 come that. We'll make an effort and you will try and help me to clarify
15 certain issues. I asked you whether you as a commander were in a position
16 to arrest and imprison someone, for example.
17 A. Every commander had the possibility of doing that. Naturally in
18 the area -- in the part that was his area of responsibility.
19 Q. And tell me please: Who were you protecting this hydroelectric
20 powerplant from? And so that the Trial Chamber can understand you, since
21 you said that the enemy never entered the territory of Jablanica.
22 A. Well, I could now put your question. But no, I'll answer the
23 question. It's not a problem. I was then in charge of the security at
24 the hydroelectric powerplant. I now have 60 people who provide security
25 and they're armed with pistols. I could now ask you who were they
1 protecting this powerplant from. From criminals? From thieves? I don't
2 know from whom.
3 Q. But what sort of special purposes industry did you have there?
4 A. We had an industry. It's not a secret.
5 Q. Tell me, what did you produce?
6 A. We produced mortar shells, small-calibre mortar shells, 60 and 82
7 millimetre mortar shells. This is no secret.
8 Q. And tell me, who provided the BH Army with logistics support?
9 Wasn't that the task of the staff of the Armed Forces?
10 JUDGE LIU: Yes. Yes, Mr. Scott.
11 MR. SCOTT: Again, Your Honour. I object to relevance. Beyond
12 the scope of direct examination. Completely beyond anything we talked
14 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik, I think you spent a lot of time and
15 questions on credibility of this witness already. And some of the
16 questions are related to that issue. But this one, I didn't see any
18 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] I'm sorry to hear that,
19 Mr. President, but as far as the credibility of the witness is concerned,
20 I haven't even started yet. I haven't even started.
21 JUDGE LIU: So you have to move on. We don't have the whole day
22 for you to cross-examine this witness, Mr. Krsnik.
23 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] I know I don't have the whole day to
24 cross-examine this witness. I know all of that. But I can't forget that
25 I'm in a court, a war crimes tribunal, and we all want this -- the
1 proceedings to be fair and just. You know, there is nothing that I want
2 to conceal here. I need to establish a basis. We have to determine what
3 the witness said yesterday and then what he said in the year 2000. We
4 have to compare these two things. We found out that he wasn't the Chief
5 of Staff in the municipality, which is what was claimed yesterday. So
6 let's determine what his responsibility was, because in the subsequent
7 events that unfolded in 1993 the figure of Mr. Idrizovic is of key
8 importance in Jablanica and the events that took place in Jablanica.
9 JUDGE LIU: But that's --
10 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] That's what they say.
11 JUDGE LIU: But actually, who provided the BH Army with logistics
12 support? I don't think this question is relevant. Mr. Krsnik, you have
13 to move on.
14 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, with all due respect, I
15 can't agree with you. You interrupt me in advance. You know why it's
16 important. Your Honours, it's important because -- the witness will
17 confirm this under oath; that's for sure -- a thousand of soldiers came
18 from outside of Jablanica, and Croats were expelled from their homes so
19 that they could be accommodated. I have a list of their names. And the
20 gentleman here is aware of this, because at the time he was a commander.
21 You know, Mr. President -- can you see what's happening to me in the
22 course of my cross-examination? How am I supposed to conduct it?
23 JUDGE LIU: Well, I know that, you know, this witness was an
24 eyewitness to many, many events that happened in that area, but that is
25 not the scope of the rebuttal proceeding. In the cross-examination the
1 rebuttal proceeding should be strictly limited to two areas: One is the
2 credibility of this witness; two is the Rados diary. That's quite clear,
3 you know. You don't have to ask all the questions.
4 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, perhaps I don't have to
5 ask a single question. I know how I'm conducting this examination. How
6 am I to get to the diary of Alojz Rados if I don't prepare the terrain?
7 Shall I just ask a few questions? Shall we be satisfied with that?
8 JUDGE LIU: Well, in the cross-examination, especially in the
9 rebuttal proceedings, I have already said that you could ask some leading
10 questions, directly lead this witness to the particular question you want
11 to ask.
12 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Mr. Idrizovic, the special detachment for special purposes of the
14 staff of the command of the BH forces, under Zulfikar Alispago -- this was
15 accommodated in a house in Jablanica in Zuka Rogic's house, Mato Krtic,
16 Mato Bilos, Andelko Rogic, Josip Brekalo, Marinko Brekalo, Mile Pjaca and
17 many others -- I was going a bit too fast. I apologise. I'll have to
18 repeat these names, because they haven't entered the transcript. And the
19 first question didn't enter the transcript either, the question I put to
20 you a minute ago. I'll try and repeat it slowly.
21 The units that we will call "Zuka's Units," and their name is the
22 "Special detachment for special purposes in the staff of the Supreme
23 Command of the BH Army." The Zulfikar Alispago, also known as Zuka. His
24 men, his units were billeted in Rogic's house in Donja Jablanica, is
25 that correct? Your answer was?
1 A. Yes. Yes. But no one else in Jablanica had anything to do with
3 Mr. President, the special detachment for special purposes in the
4 staff of the Supreme Command, Mr. Krsnik has to know that it's a
5 detachment that was formed by the staff of the Supreme Command for special
6 purposes and they sent it to Jablanica. Why are you asking me about that
7 detachment? That's a detachment of the staff of the Supreme Command. At
8 the time the army was under the command of Sefer Halilovic. When he comes
9 to this Tribunal and proceedings have been instituted against him, ask
10 Mr. Halilovic who formed and with what purpose this detachment and why it
11 was sent to Jablanica. I don't know the answer. All I do know is that
12 the Croats had problems with the soldiers from that unit, but we did too,
13 to the same extent as the Croats.
14 Q. All I wanted to ask you -- and we have to move on, because we're
15 in a hurry -- is did Sefer Halilovic billet them in Rogic's house in Donja
17 A. I couldn't say. I can't answer that question as to whether Sefer
18 billeted them there.
19 Q. Who provided them with logistics support? Who gave them those
21 A. They were formed by the staff of the Supreme Command.
22 Q. Please, please, who billeted them in Rogic's house? That's the
23 municipality which was under your command. Who gave them those houses,
24 and what happened with the Croats who were in those houses?
25 A. That is my municipality, and I was the commander, but I told you
1 what I was the commander of at that time and those peoples -- the units
2 were such that they didn't need anything. They took what they needed
4 Q. Very well. We should have said that at the beginning. Let's move
5 on now.
6 Tell me please, what units for special purpose, called the Crni
7 Labudovi, "the Black Swans," accommodated in Jablanica?
8 A. No, they were never there.
9 Q. The Hunter Division?
10 A. No.
11 Q. "Silver Fox"?
12 A. "Silver Fox" -- let's just wait for the interpretation to finish.
13 "Silver Fox," well, it consisted of about ten soldiers. Sometimes they
14 would come from Igman, when it was taken by the Serbs.
15 Q. The so-called "Celo's People", were they in Jablanica?
16 A. "Celo's People" weren't in Jablanica. They were in Grabovica.
17 Q. Very well. What about the "Igman Wolves," or the so-called
18 "Cedo's Wolves"? Were they in Jablanica?
19 A. I'm waiting for the interpretation. Yes, but this was a small
20 group of men, about ten people.
21 Q. How many men did the BH Army have in Jablanica in total? How many
22 men did they have at their disposal?
23 A. I can tell you about the units from Jablanica. Don't ask me
24 anything about units from outside of Jablanica. We were afraid -- we were
25 terrified by those people. You probably know why. You know what sort of
1 people they might have been, the sort of people who went all over the
3 Q. I don't know. Please tell the Court.
4 A. No. I won't go into that. I had about 200 people between the age
5 of 50 and 60, and there were up to 2.000 people in our brigade. I'm
6 talking about the 44th Mountain Brigade. And these are the men from
8 Q. So you're telling me that you were not in a position to exert an
9 influence when the people from these units that I have mentioned passed
10 through Jablanica in their armoured vehicles and they shot from their
11 weapons, they looted flats and shops. You were not in a position to do
12 anything about this.
13 A. If we had been armoured vehicles, that would have been good.
14 Unfortunately we didn't have such vehicles. They didn't have such
15 vehicles either. I've told you that all these small units were minor
16 ones. It's not important to mention them. Cedo's Wolves, et cetera,
17 there were about up to 25 men in them. Please. I haven't finished. I'm
18 waiting for the interpretation. I haven't finished.
19 Q. I understand. That is clear.
20 A. Well, you're nervous. I was nervous yesterday. You're nervous
22 All those minor units are of no importance. Zuka's Unit, the one
23 you call Zuka's Unit - that's what we called it too - their name show that
24 is they weren't under the command of the corps. If it's a special
25 detachment of the staff of the Supreme Command, then the staff of the
1 Supreme Command commands them, not the corps command. And you're asking
2 me whether I, who had 200 old men, whether I was a leader there. But
3 there were 400 of Zuka's men there. I really don't know whether you
4 understand these military matters. I don't know whether you know what you
5 want to ask. Did you think that I was in a position to issue orders to
6 Zuka, that Zuka was under my command?
7 Q. No. I know that you didn't command Zuka. But I know that you
8 provided logistics support when he was in the area of your movement you
9 helped him and all the unit that is came to the territory of your
11 But tell me, Mato Krtic, Mato Bilos, Josip Brekalo, Marinko
12 Brekalo, Mile Pjaca, Andelko Rogic -- yes, I won't waste time now. We
13 shall later on deal with the names. I think they'll come to ask me for
14 the names that I have just mentioned. It wasn't all the same to them, the
15 fact that they had been expelled from their houses in order to make room
16 for the units. I could also mention many people from whom their cars had
17 been taken for the purposes of these units so that these units could use
18 them. And you -- are you going to tell this Trial Chamber that you are
19 not aware of this fact or you are aware of this fact? Is it true? Is it
20 not true?
21 A. Was I aware of this or not? Why is this important? Of what
22 pertinence is it for this Trial Chamber?
23 Q. Just tell me, is that true what I said? Is it true to say that
24 these people were expelled from their homes in order to make room for
25 these units?
1 A. During the period that you are referring to, there were between 9
2 and 10 thousand refugees in Jablanica. Jablanica is a small town and has
3 about 3.000 inhabitants. So you can well imagine a situation in Zagreb,
4 which has about a million inhabitants, if another 3 million inhabitants
5 appear, you can imagine that sort of situation in Zagreb, what sort of a
6 Zagreb would that be. What would it look like? It was a beehive, and it
7 was impossible to pass through it. Units from the outside had weapons and
8 they were armed far better than we were, ten times better than we were.
9 We didn't have the responsibility and we didn't have the possibility to
10 control the way in which Zuka's men behaved. Please, if they are guilty -
11 and I do believe that they caused problems - then the relevant Prosecution
12 offices should institute proceedings against those people. It's not a
13 problem at all. Please, just a minute. I respect you, but you will have
14 to respect me too. I've now lost the thread of my thought. I don't know
15 what I wanted to say.
16 We weren't in a position to control Zuka's men and no one was
17 responsible for them. And even if my -- I wouldn't feel sorry for anyone,
18 even if it were my own brother, if that person committed a crime, he
19 should be held responsible for it.
20 Q. That's what I wanted to ask. Did Zuka's men cause problems or did
21 they commit crimes? You've just said what you were thinking, so let's
22 move on now.
23 Tell me, did you have the right to arrest people and put them in
24 the camp that was formed in Jablanica around 15 of April, 1993?
25 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Krsnik, I believe this question is totally
1 irrelevant of the subject matter of the rebuttal proceedings.
2 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I didn't ask any
3 questions about the camp. My question was whether the gentleman here
4 could arrest somebody and send them to that camp. And it goes to the
5 credibility. And I believe that this is relevant. That's why I'm asking
6 the gentleman whether he himself personally had the right to arrest people
7 and send them to the camp. I have statements here given to the
8 Prosecutors of this Court mentioning this gentleman and mentioning such
9 facts. These statements were given to the investigators of this
10 Tribunal. Maybe the gentleman is not aware of that. I'm going to show
11 them this -- the statements, if the Prosecution hasn't done that already.
12 JUDGE LIU: Even if it's mentioned in the statement but it was not
13 mentioned in the direct examination, it has nothing to do with the Rados
14 diary. We have to move fast. I think you have spent a lot of time, over
15 an hour, on the credibility of this witness.
16 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this is all
17 interlinked. On his direct he said that all he did was providing security
18 for the facilities. I believe that this is not the truth. This is a very
19 important witness, and you must allow me to do my job. Please, Your
20 Honours, if he only provided security for the facilities, then who put
21 people into the camp? Not only on the 15th of April. Who placed guards
22 around the camp? Who had control over that camp? And we haven't even
23 started talking about Doljani. And when you hear what happened there,
24 then we will still talk about the credibility and we will find out why
25 Rados's diary is important, when it was fabricated, and why. But you have
1 to bear with me, and it all goes to the credibility. And the questions
2 about Alojz Rados's diary are prepared, but just allow me to ask a few
3 questions that go to the credibility. Please allow me to lead this
5 Q. My question again to you, sir, was: Whether you arrested people
6 on the 15th of April, together with Hasan Hindic? Did you arrest them?
7 Did you put them in the camp? Please answer my question.
8 A. I knew you would ask me this. On the 15th of April, around 12.30,
9 the shelling of Jablanica started. We were confused at first, disbelief,
10 and then we started realising that aggression started. At the time we did
11 not have any lines, defence lines towards the HVO, because on the 15th of
12 April the HVO -- a year before that the HVO encircled us, surrounded us.
13 We were sitting together with Mr. Kovacevic, the brigade commander.
14 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] I cannot control the witness. I
15 asked him a very simple question. The question was whether he arrested
16 people on the 15th of April and send them to prison. I cannot stop him
18 A. I will tell you. Just let me talk.
19 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] This is a cooperative witness. He is
20 answering my question. I cannot interrupt him. I have all the time in
21 the world.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have all the time in the world as
24 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I -- there's something
25 else I wish to say. Is this a courtroom, Your Honour? Is the public area
1 also a courtroom, the area behind the glass partition? If that is the
2 courtroom - and I believe that it is, because people rise when you enter
3 the court - I am not going to tolerate the laughter of this gentleman who
4 is sitting in the public gallery. This is a journalist, and I cannot
5 tolerate his behaviour. Can you please warn him to behave properly in the
6 courtroom or to leave the courtroom. I can -- will not tolerate this
7 behaviour. This is very disturbing, and I'm very confused. Whenever I
8 look in that direction, I can see the gentleman who is behaving improperly
9 in the courtroom, and I believe this is not the way to behave in the
11 JUDGE LIU: Well --
12 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Can you please warn this gentleman.
13 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik, you know that as a principle, that
14 all the trials should be conducted in public hearing, and everybody is
15 entitled to sit in the public gallery. Of course at the same time - at
16 the same time - all those participants in the public gallery should
17 refrain themselves from some extraordinary behaviour. But from my point
18 of view, I didn't see any abnormal behaviour shown in the public gallery.
19 If something happens in the public gallery, I believe the guard in charge
20 of the security of that area could interfere. And in the past cases, they
21 usually interfere in all those matters.
22 Mr. Krsnik.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE LIU: You know, in some domestic jurisdictions, the
25 experienced Defence counsel will face all kinds of problems from the
1 public galleries. There will be shouting, laughing, cursing. I -- I
2 understand that, you know, as a very experienced lawyer, you could cope
3 with all these problems. At the same time, I'll inform the security guard
4 in the public gallery to take care of the order in that area. But you
5 have to concentrate on your cross-examination.
6 As for your questions, Mr. Krsnik, I really don't think it's
7 relevant to this very case. This witness is called only on the very
8 limited scope, that is, the Rados diary. In the direct examination,
9 allowed the Prosecutor to establish this witness. In the
10 cross-examination, we allowed you to ask some questions concerning the
11 credibility of this witness. Anyway, we have to come to the subject
12 matter of these proceedings. He's not an ordinary witness. He's a
13 rebuttal witness. We have to limit the scope of the direct examination,
14 as well as the cross-examination.
15 I understand you have been working very hard recently. And if you
16 feel you have to reorganise your questions, we could have a break here.
17 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour. I am well prepared,
18 and I don't see a problem. On the contrary. I shall then focus on the
19 diary. I have a lot of questions about the diary. But then we will come
20 back to the relevant issues.
21 Q. So let's talk about the diary, sir. But I will come back to all
22 the issues that I've tackled so far. When did you personally -- but just
23 personal knowledge. You are under oath. What did you personally see?
24 When did you personally see the diary for the first time and who was it
25 who gave it the name "Alojz Rados's diary"?
1 A. I already said when I saw it for the first time. I said that
3 Q. I'm not talking about the so-called original.
4 A. I said it yesterday, but I'll repeat. It was on the 30th of July,
5 1993, late in the evening.
6 Q. Who showed it to you? Who brought it to you?
7 A. It was Zajko Sihirlic, the security officer of the 44th Mountain
9 Q. Can you please tell the Chamber what is the role of the security
10 officer in a brigade.
11 A. All the armies in the world have security officers. They have
12 them in Croatia. They have them in America. They have them in the
14 Q. I'm asking about Mr. Sihirlic.
15 A. He performed the duties of the security officer.
16 Q. What duties are those?
17 A. He provided security for the units, for the command, safe keeping
18 documents, safe keeping secret documents. Do you know what security in
19 the army is? Everything that has to do with security is his duty.
20 Q. Isn't that intelligence and counterintelligence, sir?
21 A. I wish we had had such services, but we didn't.
22 Q. You didn't?
23 A. No, we didn't. We were a newly established army. Maybe there was
24 such a thing at a higher level. But at the municipal level, we didn't
25 have that. We had officers for security with commands, and that is all we
1 had as regards security, just officers.
2 Q. I have in front of me something that I'm going to show you later
3 on, and it is your letter to the intelligence organ of the 4th Corps that
4 you just said you didn't have.
5 A. No. I said that they were such things at higher levels. I was
6 not a member of a higher level command. But I also said --
7 Q. Witness, please.
8 A. Can you please let me finish. Do you want my answer?
9 Q. Of course.
10 A. In the command of the Armed Forces -- in the staff of the Armed
11 Forces, there was an intelligence officer for security. But that is what
12 you are implying, isn't that? I know what you're implying. I know what
13 you want to ask me.
14 Q. How do you know that?
15 A. I know it because you mentioned the report on security.
16 Q. Please. Hold on please.
17 A. I wasn't born yesterday, sir.
18 Q. Please be so kind, tell us whether you were ever involved in
19 intelligence or counterintelligence.
20 A. No, no.
21 Q. This is your letter on the 21st of January, 1993. This is what
22 you say in your letter.
23 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Can we please have the usher's
25 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Scott.
1 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] This is D1/416.
2 MR. SCOTT: Which, Mr. President, is not translated, so
3 unfortunately it's not going to be much use to the Chamber or to the
5 MR. KRSNIK: Would you be so kind to take this in for the
7 Q. [Interpretation] This is what you say. I'm interested in the last
8 paragraph only.
9 JUDGE LIU: Could somebody read that last paragraph so that we
10 could get interpretation.
11 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Certainly, Your Honour. I just
12 wanted the gentleman to read it first.
13 JUDGE LIU: But --
14 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] And now I believe --
15 JUDGE LIU: But first, Mr. Krsnik. First you have to ask a
16 question whether this is the letter the witness wrote on a certain date.
17 Then ask the witness to read the last paragraph.
18 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
19 Q. First of all, tell us what the title of this report signed by you
20 is and who was it sent to.
21 A. It was sent to the intelligence organ of the 4th Corps.
22 Q. Can you tell us the title of this report.
23 A. Intelligence report.
24 Q. It was submitted by who?
25 A. It was submitted by the intelligence officer, and I signed it as a
1 commander. I signed all the documents -- Stela is laughing at you. The
2 intelligence order security report are sent every day at a certain hour
3 from a subordinate to a superior. This was the last day I was responsible
4 for that area of responsibility, that is, the 21st of January, if I'm not
6 Q. Yes, that is correct.
7 A. So every day -- every organ of a lower command at a certain time
8 submitted a report to its superior in the superior command. Obviously I
9 checked every document, and I signed it. That was the procedure. I
10 believe such a procedure exists all over the world, that a commander signs
11 the documents that leave his command.
12 Q. Mr. Idrizovic, I'm not attacking you. You don't have to defend
13 yourself. I'm just asking you questions, and all you have to do is tell
14 us the truth.
15 A. I don't feel attacked -- being attacked. I don't have that
17 Q. I'm asking you very nicely. You told us a minute ago that you
18 were not a member of the intelligence, that you didn't have intelligence
19 in Jablanica, and all of a sudden you personally write an intelligence
20 report and sign it.
21 A. I'm going to repeat my answer again. You're wasting everybody's
22 time here, sir. What I told you was that at a lower level in the command
23 there were officers for intelligence matters and officers for security
24 matters. Please don't interrupt me, because you're going to ask me the
25 same question for the fourth time.
1 Q. Does the title say "intelligence reporting" and does it bear your
3 A. I was precise before, and I'm going to repeat my answer. An
4 intelligence organ of a lower command sends a report to his superior
5 command every day. Please, I need to clarify this. I don't want to go
6 over the same grounds ten times. I need to clarify it for you. Nobody
7 can put a stamp on a document which leaves any command if that document
8 hasn't been signed by the commander of that commander or the person
9 authorised by him. I believe you understand that. Those are basics.
10 Q. Tell us, is that your signature?
11 A. Yes, it is.
12 Q. Are these your words: "By the establishment of the command of the
13 4th Corps, this is the first official document --" I'm reading the last
14 sentence -- "regarding the intelligence information. That is why we are
15 kindly asking for your advice and instructions for our further work." Are
16 these your words, sir?
17 A. I believe they are. But at this moment, please give me the time
18 to answer. I haven't finished.
19 Q. --
20 A. I didn't finish.
21 Q. I'm moving on, sir.
22 A. That's not the way we can play this game? I didn't answer your
23 question. I didn't answer your question.
24 Q. You have, sir.
25 A. No, I haven't, sir.
1 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik, let the witness finish his answer.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I believe that I had receive a
3 document from the Corps Command, which probably was of intelligence
5 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
6 Q. That's why I am asking you, because you said it didn't exist
8 A. I apologise. For the fifth time I have to repeat the same thing.
9 Q. Please don't. Let's move on. Zajko Sihirlic was one of those
11 A. Not "Zahilic" but "Sihirlic." And not intelligence but security
13 Q. He was the one who brought you the diary. Who was it you gave it
14 to him? Do you know that?
15 A. Yes. He told me -- and I said it yesterday -- he told me that the
16 military police came by the HVO documents, amongst which was the private
17 diary written by our work colleague by the name of Alojz Rados.
18 Q. Can you please assist us and give the witness the alleged 928C.
19 Witness, can you please tell us, where does it say that? Does it
20 say anywhere that this is a diary?
21 A. Everything in the world has a name. This booklet must have a
23 Q. Who gave it the name?
24 A. I suppose the one who entered things by the dates, in a
25 chronological order, and I believe that in Croatian, in Bosnian, in
1 Serbian a booklet containing entries in a chronological order, describing
2 events that took place in that chronological order, is called a diary.
3 Who was it who invented that name, I really don't know, but a name has to
4 be given to this thing. This paper has its title, and the title is
5 "Intelligence reporting." This booklet also. If you were the one
6 reading it -- let me ask you a question in return: If you came by a
7 booklet like this, and if I was its author, how would you call this
9 Q. What would I call it? That doesn't matter.
10 A. Yes, it does. This is a man's personal diary. It's a diary.
11 It's not a novel. It's not a drama. It's not a --
12 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik, it seems to me that it's a minor
13 issue in this case, whether it's a diary or not is not that important.
14 The most important is its source, authenticity, the contents in it. You
15 don't have to ask the witness to agree with you. Can we move on.
16 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Can you please tell whose handwriting is it. Who wrote it in
18 their hand that this is Alojz Rados's diary?
19 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Can we please have the Exhibit 928,
20 that is, the copy that has been provided to us by Mr. Idrizovic.
21 A. Don't bother. I don't remember who was it who wrote it down. But
22 if it -- if it had been me and if I had been the one who had to give it a
23 title, I would have probably done the same. I believe that you would have
24 done the same thing.
25 Q. That is true. But the allegations so far is somewhat different,
1 so this is something I need to clarify. So this handwritten title "Alojz
2 Rados," this is not his own handwriting?
3 A. No, it isn't.
4 Q. Okay. So that's good. In your statement given in 2000, you said
5 something completely different. You said something like this: Around
6 the 27th of July, 1993, in the evening -- but I cannot remember the date
7 for a fact -- the 44th Brigade of the BH Army liberated the village of
8 Doljani -- liberated. In the HVO staff of Doljani, BH Army members
9 discovered a number of HVO documents and brought it to the BH Army staff
10 in Jablanica. That is to you. This is what you stated on the 12th of
11 July, 2000.
12 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Mr. President.
13 JUDGE LIU: Yes.
14 MR. SCOTT: Could Mr. Krsnik please indicate for purposes of this
15 and in fairness to the witness, could Mr. Krsnik please put to the witness
16 that part of that statement which is inconsistent with what he just said.
17 JUDGE LIU: Yes. Yes, Mr. Krsnik, would you please put that
18 statement to the witness just to be fair to this witness.
19 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Certainly, Your Honour. We are
20 approaching the break, I believe, so I'm going to give this statement to
21 the witness, both in Croatian and in English. And the purpose of this
22 question is to show that Mr. Idrizovic is inconsistent in his statement
23 and -- but we are now coming to the break, so maybe we can stop here and
24 then I can continue after the break.
25 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Scott.
1 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President, to -- to avoid other problems that
2 we've had this week, I'm going to ask that if we're going to go into these
3 statements, that the copies of the statement be provided to the Court.
4 Otherwise, I -- we're going to get into the situation we did the other day
5 and I fear --
6 JUDGE LIU: Yes, of course.
7 Mr. Krsnik, if you don't have extra copies, I think during the
8 break Madam Registrar will have them copied.
9 So we will break now, and we will resume at 11.30.
10 --- Recess taken at 11.00 a.m.
11 --- On resuming at 11.36 a.m.
12 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Scott.
13 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President, I'm sorry to do this now, but it seems
14 that we always -- at the end of the break, we always move out of the
15 courtroom rather quickly and I don't want to forget. I don't expect you
16 to tell me in open court, of course. But I do want to just remind the
17 Chamber that we have not at this time still been advised of who Witness X
18 is. We have no information about this person, or if the person is still
19 coming, or whoever it is. We have no information.
20 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik, concerning Mr. X, I think this Trial
21 Chamber made a decision that -- which requested you to furnish the
22 summaries of that witness to the Prosecution yesterday. Just tell us, you
23 know, whether he's coming or not, or did you fulfil your obligation
24 according to this order.
25 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, could we discuss the
1 matter of this witness later on.
2 JUDGE LIU: Yes, of course.
3 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] I would like to request this.
4 JUDGE LIU: Yes.
5 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Because I have some new information
6 which I wanted to present to you today, but I wouldn't like to do so in
7 open session and at this moment.
8 JUDGE LIU: Yes, of course.
9 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] But I do want to confirm that I
10 didn't comply with your order yesterday, and this is just so as to respond
11 to the Prosecutor. I think that I was supposed to provide certain
12 indications, certain summaries, by yesterday. I didn't do that, and I
13 admit that. This shall be provided today.
14 JUDGE LIU: Well, we'll not discuss this issue, especially when
15 the witness is present.
16 You may continue your cross-examination. And after we finish this
17 witness, you may give us more information on that respect.
18 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Of course, Your Honours.
19 Q. Yes. We were discussing your statement that you gave in the year
21 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Could we provide the witness with a
23 Q. It's on page -- we call the language B/C/S here. We call it the
24 B/C/S version here. It's on page 24. Could you go to page 24, please --
25 25. I apologise. Page 25.
1 You see the first paragraph, the second, the third -- "About the
2 23rd of July," have you found that paragraph?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Here you say, "Around the 27th of July, 1993. I can't remember
5 the exact date. The 44th Brigade of the ABiH liberated the village of
6 Doljani. In the HVO headquarters in Doljani, members of the 44th Brigade
7 of the ABiH discovered a large number of documents belonging to the HVO
8 and they brought them to the ABiH staff in Jablanica." And then you
10 "Before we handed over the HVO documents that we found in the
11 course of the action in Doljani, before we hand them over to the legal
12 authorities of the ABiH, we made copies of the documents that concerned
13 the municipality of Jablanica. I did this in order to be sure that none
14 of the documents would be lost or would disappear. I still have copies of
15 these documents, and I will hand them over to the representatives of the
16 Prosecution at the ICTY."
17 Did you make such a statement?
18 A. Yes, something like this.
19 Q. Can we say that what you said here is not correct?
20 A. To an extent.
21 Q. And now tell me, do you personally know who had the diary in his
22 hands for the first time?
23 A. Zajko Sihirlic.
24 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Scott.
25 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Mr. President. Could counsel indicate
1 which part of the statement just read is inconsistent with what the
2 witness has testified here.
3 JUDGE LIU: Well, I believe that Mr. Krsnik will ask some more
4 questions in that direction.
5 MR. SCOTT: Well, Mr. Krsnik already said at line 12, he said,
6 "Can we say that what you said is not correct." And the answer was, "To
7 an extent." None of us in the courtroom know what it is about those three
8 or four paragraphs that are supposedly inconsistent with what the witness
9 has testified here.
10 JUDGE LIU: Yes. I believe that Mr. Krsnik will pursue on that
12 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] I was going to move on to the diary
13 because I think that it is very clear as to what is inconsistent. What I
14 have read out doesn't correspond to what the witness said at the hearing.
15 A. That's not what I said.
16 Q. That's what I'm saying. Just a minute, please.
17 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] So this is why I wanted to know
18 whether what is said in the statement is correct. Did the witness make
19 this claim.
20 Q. Is it correct? To a certain extent he said it wasn't correct;
21 isn't that right?
22 A. There are some translation errors, I think. I didn't have the
23 opportunity to sign this statement in my own language.
24 Q. In what language did you sign the statement?
25 A. Well, an interpreter read it out to me in English. I can't
1 remember exactly what happened in the year 2000, but I think that that is
2 what happened. When the investigators took the statement -- after they
3 had taken it, the interpreter would read it out. Usually when these
4 documents are read they're interpreted twice, and many things get lost in
5 the translation. So in these four paragraphs there are certain details
6 that are not precise and not correct. If necessary, I shall clarify
8 Q. Let me lead you. You said that they were found by members of the
9 military police. Here you say, "Members of the 44th Brigade of the
10 ABiH." Just a minute, please. You said that the military police first
11 found the documents, and today you said Zajko Sihirlic.
12 A. I said the military police, but I said that Zajko Sihirlic was the
13 first person to have the diary in his hands. He was the first person to
14 read it.
15 Q. And tell me, did you say the military police or the members of the
16 44th Brigade? I can't understand how this can be incorrectly translated.
17 A. In the statement that I gave earlier on I stated in very precise
18 terms that part of Doljani had been liberated by some of the units from
19 the 44th Mountain Brigade. I also said that the military police that had
20 authority at the time were -- the military police were those who entered
21 the command first and they found the documents there. Naturally, it's not
22 their task. It's not the police's task to read documents. Their task is
23 to surrender them, to hand them over to the Security Organ. It took me
24 five days to give this statement. What I said at the time was at the end
25 of the fifth day. And I don't understand what is not clear to you here.
1 Q. Everything is clear to me. But let's try to clarify this for the
2 Trial Chamber. But it's absolutely clear to me. Tell me, has this been
3 incorrectly translated too, when it say that is those documents were taken
4 to the staff of the BH army, whose commander you were. That's not correct
6 A. No, no. Just a minute. You gave me a document which I had signed
7 and which had a header. It was here a minute ago. There is a
8 mistranslation here. There was no BH Army staff in Jablanica. There was
9 a command there, and the 44th Mountain Brigade. There was no BH Army
10 staff there. As an institution, it did not exist. Here there must have
11 been a mistranslation when it says "staff." It was surrendered to the
12 brigade command. It wouldn't be surrendered to me. If one unit found
13 some documents, they're not going to hand documents over to some other
14 command. They'll probably keep these documents for themselves. It
15 doesn't say here that they were surrendered to the staff of the ABiH or to
16 the command of the 44th Mountain Brigade. Sorry. I'm going a bit too
17 fast. It say it was taken to the army staff, headquarters. That doesn't
18 exist though.
19 Q. And tell me, is this incorrectly translated too, the last
20 paragraph? You see before this list where it says that you personally
21 made copies of these documents immediately. Has that been incorrectly
23 A. It's in the plural. Yes, I participated in that. When we handed
24 those documents over -- yes, Zajko Sihirlic and I were there.
25 Q. It says the 27th of July here, and it quite clearly states "I did
1 that in order to be sure --"
2 A. No. It should be the plural. That's not what I said.
3 MR. SCOTT: I object, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE LIU: Well --
5 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Here it's in the singular.
7 A. It can only be in the plural.
8 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Scott.
9 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President, that's exactly the reason why -- one of
10 the reasons why I wanted the Chamber to have the statements. Mr. Krsnik
11 has jumped a paragraph there's an intervening paragraph. "Before we hand
12 over the documents to the legal authorities of ABiH." Now, that's the
13 direct examination that was sometime later. Now counsel is trying to say
14 the copies were made "immediately." The document doesn't say anything
15 about the copies being made immediately. It's a mischaracterisation of
16 the statement and that's why I wanted the Chamber to have it.
17 JUDGE LIU: Yes. We noticed that ourselves.
18 You may proceed, Mr. Krsnik.
19 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I don't know what the
20 English translation is like, but the Croatian version is absolutely
21 clear. It's quite clear. This entire paragraph is quite clear in
22 Croatian. We've -- our questions have been answered. I'm going to move
23 on so as not to waste time. I have a lot of questions I want to ask about
24 the diary.
25 Q. Tell me, after Zajko Sihirlic, who had the so-called diary after
1 Zajko Sihirlic?
2 A. Copies of that diary were made --
3 Q. Please. Will you answer the question. Who had it after --
4 A. I will, but you won't let me answer. The diary was typed out. It
5 was copied. It was given to the television so that they could make it
6 public. We wanted as many people as possible to read it.
7 Q. You don't have to repeat that. You said that yesterday too.
8 A. You've asked me many things that you asked me yesterday.
9 Q. Who was the next person to have the diary? Where was the
10 manuscript located?
11 A. It was in a safe. Sihirlic the security officer had it in his
12 brigade. That's what I said yesterday.
13 Q. When was the AID provided with the diary?
14 A. In 1997.
15 Q. Yesterday you said that they heard about it and then they came to
16 ask you about it.
17 A. Well, that wasn't a secret. The fact that we had it was not a
18 secret. They were aware of the diary's existence, but they could have
19 heard about its existence from anyone and everywhere.
20 Q. The statement that you gave - and we will provide you with it
21 now --
22 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Could the registrar show the witness
23 the second statement that you gave on the 27th and on the 28th of June of
24 this year.
25 Q. So that means you gave it a few months ago.
1 On page 10 you say --
2 JUDGE LIU: What's the number of that document?
3 MR. KRSNIK: Yes, here. [Interpretation] The number is D1/425.
4 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.
5 THE INTERPRETER: Could the interpreters have a copy.
6 MR. KRSNIK: They have, the interpreters.
7 Q. [Interpretation] It's on page 10. Have you found it? It's the
8 third paragraph. Can you see the third paragraph?
9 And here you say -- the sentence starts with the words "In
10 addition to that, the original of that diary was found by the Bosnian Army
11 in Doljani."
12 And now you say: "The Bosnian Army took over Doljani." And you
13 don't say that they liberated it -- "in July 1993." And then you
15 "The diary was handed over to the security services of the
16 Bosnian Army, which kept this diary until the end of the war." And you
17 say that you then, in the year 1997 -- that "Zajko Sihirlic, the security
18 officer from the BH Army and you handed this to the civilian
19 authorities -- to the AID, handed this diary over to the authorities. And
20 it wasn't at their request. You went there and hand the diary over to
21 them." That's what it says in the statement. Is that not correct?
22 A. No. It was at their request.
23 Q. That's not what it says.
24 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me.
25 JUDGE LIU: Well -- well --
1 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President, where does it say anything that
2 suggests that they initiated contact with the AID? The English
3 translation, at least- unless the B/C/S says something different - it
4 says, "I think that it was in 1997 Mr. Sihirlic, a security officer of the
5 BH Army and myself, hand it over to the authorities of BiH, AID." Now, if
6 Mr. Krsnik can tell us what exactly it is that that sentence that's
7 inconsistent with what the witness has said here.
8 JUDGE LIU: We've found this line in this paragraph. Mr. Krsnik.
9 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I don't know what it
10 says in the translation, but it -- the statement speaks for itself. And
11 we've heard what the statement is. We'll draw our own conclusions.
12 Could the Prosecutor not start interpreting this and arriving at
13 conclusions. If it's inconsistent, you'll come to a conclusion. If it's
14 consistent, you'll again come to your own conclusions.
15 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik, would you read in B/C/S the last
16 sentence in this paragraph.
17 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] "I think that it was in 1997 that
18 Zajko Sihirlic, a BH Army security officer, and myself handed it over to
19 the civilian authorities of the BiH, the AID."
20 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. You may move on.
21 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Please tell me, who copied out the diary? Who copied out the
23 diary from the manuscript?
24 A. It must have been the typist or typists.
25 Q. Who checked whether the printed copy of the document was a
1 faithful reproduction of the original?
2 A. No one checked this. They believed the typists. They had faith
3 in the typists.
4 Q. When you have a look at a handwritten document -- at the
5 handwritten document, can you confirm here in front of the Trial Chamber
6 that this document was in chronological order?
7 A. To an extent. But certain periods were skipped. There were
8 periods that were skipped.
9 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Could document -- could Exhibit P928C
10 be provided now, please. 928C.
11 Have a look at page 40, please. Have you found page 40?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. What's the date?
14 A. The 16th of January, 1993.
15 Q. Please have a look at page 51 now. Could you tell us the date,
16 please. Just a minute. For the sake of the transcript. What date is
17 mentioned on page 51 and on page 40? Could you please repeat that for the
18 sake of the transcript. What date can you see on page 40?
19 A. On page 51, this doesn't have anything to do with the diary, with
20 the war diary, with what happened during the war.
21 Q. Just a minute, please. For the sake of the transcript,
22 Mr. Idrizovic, my question and the answer have not been recorded in the
23 transcript. What date can you see on page 40? Could you have a look
24 again. You have to answer this question.
25 A. On page 40, the date is the 16th of November -- sorry, the 16th of
1 January, 1993.
2 Q. The 16th of January, 1993.
3 Now, please, can you just tell me, what date can you see on page
5 A. The date on page 51 is the 8th of November, 1986. But the text
6 that -- it has nothing to do with the diary or with the war.
7 Q. Very well. Very well.
8 A. Your Honours, please --
9 JUDGE LIU: Well --
10 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Well, don't be like that, please.
11 JUDGE LIU: Allow the witness to finish his answer.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Rados was a sportsman. He
13 played handball. If you have a look at page 39, if you go back to page
14 39. Please, we're discussing. We are equal. I --
15 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
16 Q. No, we're not discussing. This is my cross-examination.
17 A. But we're both discussing, so we have -- we're having a
18 conversation here.
19 JUDGE LIU: Well, witness, just finish your answer.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In 1986, earlier on, on several
21 pages in this diary he wrote out the schedules, the timetables for
22 handball matches. He never did this in sequential order. It was not on
23 each page.
24 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
25 Q. How do you know all of this?
1 A. Well, look, I can see this.
2 Q. Did you write that diary?
3 A. Well, I don't know. Maybe you did. How do I know? Have a look
4 at page 37. It says "handball." On page 38, there's nothing. On page
5 39, it says "handball." On page 40, "16th of January, 1993." And then
6 again on page 51, "Handball." It was war. No one had much equipment down
7 there. He had this diary, this notebook -- he probably used this notebook
8 because it was small enough to fit in his pocket. So he must have found
9 some old notebook. This is what I assume, because at the time no one had
10 such materials.
11 Q. Can you please now open the diary on page 54. Have you found it?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. What is the date written here?
14 A. 19 January, 1993.
15 Q. Can you put it on the ELMO, please. Thank you.
16 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Madam Usher, can you please assist
17 the witness.
18 Q. It seems to me that I can see the date 19th of January, 1992.
19 A. No. You do not see it well. Your eyesight seems to be bad here.
20 Q. No. Please open page 54. What is the date here, on 54?
21 JUDGE LIU: Well -- well, Mr. --
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is 1993, very clearly.
23 MR. SCOTT: [Microphone not activated]
24 THE INTERPRETER: Mr. Scott, your microphone is not on.
25 MR. SCOTT: When you look at the document and unfortunately I
1 suppose the Chamber doesn't have it in front of them, the document says
2 what it says. We stipulate -- the Prosecution stipulate that is some of
3 the entries are out of chronological order. Now, how is that an
4 impeachment of this witness? He didn't say he wrote the document. This is
5 how it is. So I don't understand how this is impeachment of the witness.
6 There are parts of the document out of order, no dispute.
7 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, and why is then this
8 witness here if we cannot verify the diary with him? Another thing that
9 we have to establish here: The typed out version does not correspond with
10 the blue-ink version, and we are going to come to that really very
12 Q. Can you please turn to page 55. Have you found it?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. What is the date?
15 A. The 18th.
16 Q. What date?
17 A. Just a moment, please. Just a moment, please. 19 January, 1993,
18 Sunday. And 18 January 1993, it says "Monday." It was war, so the man
19 must have forgotten what the date it was. It says "Sunday" and then
20 "Monday." I didn't write the diary. It was Alojz who made the mistake.
21 Q. Is that your assumption, sir?
22 A. This is what it says here, "Monday."
23 Q. Sir, we have checked it in the computer. The 19th was Tuesday.
24 A. I haven't a clue which day or date it was. How would I know that,
25 for Christ's sake?
1 Q. Can you please put it on the ELMO. The date, can you see it, the
2 18th of January, 1993? And now can we please turn to page 56. Can we
3 have it on the ELMO. Page 56, what date do you see here?
4 A. I can't see it when it's on the ELMO.
5 Q. Look at it like this and then put it back on the ELMO, please.
6 Can you see the date here?
7 A. I can't see the date. He does mention the date of 15th of April,
8 1997 [As interpreted].
9 Q. Can you please put it on the ELMO. Is it 1987 or 1989?
10 A. It is 1987.
11 Q. Yes, it is indeed 1987. What does it say under that entry?
12 A. But the date has something to do with the contents, with the text,
13 but it has nothing to do with the diary. I can't see what it says here.
14 I have to read the whole passage.
15 Q. It says very clearly, "A meeting on the protection at work."
16 That's day one. The second day the text continues, doesn't it?
17 A. Yes. I wasn't paying attention to the text. But that is what I
18 said a little while ago, that he was an athlete, that he played matches.
19 He was also an official in the handball club of Jablanica. But this has
20 nothing whatsoever to do with the text of the diary. This is a similar
21 thing as the results of football -- of handball matches.
22 Q. Can you now please turn to page 60. What dates can you see here?
23 A. 17th and 18th January, 1993.
24 Q. Did we not have these dates on page 54?
25 A. I don't know what Alojz wrote. That's his problem, isn't it?
1 Q. You don't know what he wrote. Okay, then.
2 Look at the page 61, please. What date can you see there?
3 A. Again on the 19th.
4 Q. Did we not have it on page 54?
5 A. Yes, we did.
6 Q. Okay.
7 A. Obviously Alojz got mixed up on his dates.
8 Q. Very well then. Can you please look at page 64 of the blue-ink
9 version. What is the last word on that page? Can you please find the
10 last word on page 64?
11 A. "We are leaving around 4.00."
12 Q. Can you now turn to page 65. What event is transcribed and what
13 date can you see here?
14 A. Again, something about handball, something about sports.
15 Q. And what is the date?
16 A. What has that got to do with anything? It has nothing whatsoever
17 to do with the diary.
18 Q. Can you please give me the date and the town that is mentioned.
19 Does it not say "Treviso"?
20 A. "The 4th Congress," in abbreviation "Yugoslav and Italy in
22 Q. Thank you very much. Let's move on.
23 Can we have the usher showing you the typed-out version, 928D.
24 Please open page 4 of this document. Can you please tell me, on page 4
25 what text follows the indication of 1400 hours? This seems to be a report
1 of some sort.
2 A. I am finding it very hard to read. My eyes get tired very
3 quickly. Can you please tell me -- direct me towards the line.
4 Q. Yes. I will help you. Can you see the word "report." What text
5 follows? How does that part of the text start?
6 A. "Pursuant to order number and in consultation with so and so."
7 Q. Now, please take the so-called original of the diary.
8 A. I haven't got it.
9 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Madam Usher, can you please leave the
10 blue-ink copy with the witness. We will need both.
11 A. But I never said this was typed out correctly. Nobody checked and
12 compared the two. But still I will have a look.
13 Q. Can you please find in the diary 21st of January, 1993. Have you
14 found it?
15 A. Yes. Yes, I have.
16 Q. Now, we have it in the typed-out version and in the blue-ink
17 copy. Can you tell me whether the wording is the same on the 21st of
18 January, 1993.
19 A. A little while ago we said that there was some confusion with the
21 Q. I'm not referring to that. I'm talking about comparing what it
22 reads in the blue-ink copy and in the typed-out copy.
23 A. No. This is not the same. But maybe under the same date the text
24 is the same somewhere else, because there was some confusion with the
25 dates. This same date may be appearing somewhere else, and that text
12 Blank pages inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts. Pages 16355 to 16360.
1 maybe can be found somewhere else. In the original, as you can see, one
2 date appears in several places, so this may be the case here.
3 Q. I will help you. Open the page 142 of the blue-ink version,
4 please. Is the text identical with the text in the typed-out document on
5 page 4?
6 A. Yes. But all this text, all of these dates have nothing
7 whatsoever to do with what we are talking about today.
8 Q. Very well, then. So the date 21st of January, 1993, in the
9 typed-out version has nothing whatsoever to do with the text in the
11 A. I never said that.
12 Q. Can you please then explain.
13 A. I said that January 1993 was when Alojz described their stay on
14 the Ljubinka Mountain near Konjic. And for us this is absolutely
15 irrelevant. It is not important for us from Jablanica.
16 Q. Was it then typed out wrongly?
17 A. I believe that was the case. In the same way Alojz made mistakes
18 when he was writing his original, some mistakes were made when the diary
19 was typed out. There is no way anybody could type out something without
20 making mistakes. However, the typed-out version was only for our
21 entertainment, to entertain us, for us to read and to amuse ourselves.
22 Q. You used it to amuse yourself and the Prosecution used it as their
23 official translation.
24 JUDGE LIU: Well --
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In 1994, we used it for
2 JUDGE LIU: I think both of you are speaking at the same time,
3 which is giving great difficulty to the interpreters.
4 Witness, I understand that you're eager to give your evidence,
5 give your testimony. And if you look at the screen, there will be English
6 typed out on your screen. Whenever the typing is stopped, you may answer
7 the question.
8 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
9 Q. I don't know whether this has been recorded. You said that the
10 typed-out version was for your entertainment. But the Prosecution didn't
11 use it for entertainment. They used it for translation. And I'm very
12 glad that we were able to clarify that. We've seen a lot of things that
13 do not match this in the two documents and we have been able to establish
14 that together.
15 Let's move on. Kindly tell us, please -- look at the page 146 of
16 the blue-ink version.
17 JUDGE CLARK: Sorry, Mr. Krsnik, I may be stupid about this -- and
18 you know, one of you will remind me -- yesterday when Mr. Scott was
19 telling us what each exhibit represented -- and I thought he did it rather
20 well, but obviously I'm confused now -- Exhibit 928 was called the English
21 translation; 928A was the typed B/C/S diary; and then we had 928B, which
22 was a photocopy of the blue-ink diary, if you like; and then C was the
23 actual diary; and D was the copy of the typed B/C/S diary kept by the
25 Now, what I'm trying to find out -- and maybe this was said
1 yesterday but I missed it: Was the translation which we have now -- maybe
2 Mr. Scott would be better qualified -- was that the translation of the
3 typed-up Jablanica version, or is it a translation of the blue-handwritten
5 MR. SCOTT: Judge Clark, Your Honours, as best I can determine,
6 since we did not have in our custody until a few days ago the blue-ink
7 version, the English translation, which is 928, was based upon 928A. It's
8 based on 928A. 928A, as Ms. Bos testified, was the version received by
9 the Office of the Prosecutor on the 16th of March, 1998. And 928B was the
10 copy of the handwritten diary first received by the OTP on the 10th of
11 December, 1998. So it is correct, Your Honours. And what I just in
12 fact -- just this one minute ago made a note to myself, any specific
13 passages, any specific passages that the Prosecutor would seek to
14 introduce into evidence or include in its brief would certainly be -- we
15 will translate those directly from the blue-ink version. Again, we didn't
16 have that until just a few days ago.
17 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we have to clarify
18 things. Your Honour, we have to make sure that things are clear to the
19 very end.
20 Thank you very much for your remark. Now I am confused. Your
21 questions are so up to the point. There are two typed-out versions. One
22 has been made by Mr. Idrizovic, or his colleagues; and the other version,
23 the typed-out version, is one that we received through Ms. Bos. So they
24 are both typed out versions, and the translation was made based on one or
25 the other or both of them. Is that true?
1 MR. SCOTT: I'll say it again. The English translation, which is
2 marked as 928, is, I believe, a translation of 928A, the copy of the typed
3 document -- the typed B/C/S diary received by the Office of the Prosecutor
4 on the 16th of March, 1998. That is where the translation comes from.
5 The copy 928D, which is again, as counsel says, a typed B/C/S
6 diary, is the copy that the witness brought with him to The Hague when he
7 travelled here in connection with his testimony and which the witness
8 testified on direct examination is the typed version that he has had
9 continuously in his possession since 1993.
10 So if the Chamber wants to compare, and if Mr. Krsnik wants to
11 compare text between the typed versions, and if the suggestion is that
12 sometime after AID received the typed version in 1997, that sometime after
13 that the AID fabricated it, I suggest to the Chamber they can compare that
14 against 928D, which is the copy of the typed diary that this witness has
15 had in his possession continuously since 1993.
16 JUDGE CLARK: Well, Mr. Scott, are they in different typewriters,
17 or are they photocopies of the same thing? Are there any material
18 differences in appearance?
19 MR. SCOTT: Judge Clark, to give a -- to be completely, what I
20 would consider, an authoritative answer to that, I would want to sit down
21 and compare it myself. I believe they are documents -- I believe the text
22 version, the typed versions are the same. But I say that -- please allow
23 me to qualify that by not having compared it word for word myself.
24 JUDGE CLARK: [Microphone not activated] I don't mean you to do
25 that, but if we have to -- I don't mean for you to do that right now, but
1 if we had Mr. Idrizovic's photocopy and the photocopy which you received,
2 do they look similar? That's all I'm saying. Does the typeface look as
3 if it's from the same typewriter? This is just a basic question.
4 MR. SCOTT: Yes, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE CLARK: They have that look.
6 MR. SCOTT: [Microphone not activated]
7 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
8 MR. SCOTT: It appears to be in what I would consider an italic
9 font, the same point font, from -- the text -- the typing looks similar.
10 Of course I can't comment on the B/C/S content. But the typing -- the
11 format of the document looks similar.
12 In 928D, which is signed by the witness on the front page, which
13 he's said he's had with him, you will note that there are difference
14 because at various times apparently -- for instance, on page 20, the
15 witness has underlined some material for whatever particular interest to
16 himself. So that's different.
17 JUDGE CLARK: [Microphone not activated] My mike is not working.
18 Thank you. Just as a very simple exercise, could we take page 2
19 of the typed version, which has a record number 00635504 in the book that
20 you gave me.
21 MR. SCOTT: [Microphone not activated]
22 JUDGE LIU: Well --
23 MR. SCOTT: Some of the documents have been -- I have to admit,
24 some of my copies have apparently been taken apart for different purposes
25 and some -- I'm having a bit of trouble. Sorry.
1 JUDGE CLARK: [Microphone not activated] What I was going to say
2 is that that particular page that has that number, Prosecution number,
3 appears to have quite a number of typographical errors. And just as a
4 simple exercise, I picked that at random, could we compare that with the
5 same page that we got from Mr. Idrizovic?
6 MR. SCOTT: Absolutely, Your Honour. It's just a question of
7 having the time to make sure that we have both the same pages. Of
9 JUDGE CLARK: Thank you.
10 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Krsnik, you may continue.
11 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honour Judge Clark, when you
12 look at Mr. Idrizovic's version and the one that we got from the
13 Prosecution, you will immediately see that there is a difference. The
14 dates have been crossed out in the Prosecutor's version, whereas in
15 Mr. Idrizovic's version they can still be seen. The majority of dates
16 have been blackened out in the text on the copy that we received from the
17 Prosecution. And in the typed-out version that we have from
18 Mr. Idrizovic, they are visible. However, Mr. Idrizovic is here. He can
19 assist us. And yesterday he said that several typewriters were used.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was typed in several occasions,
21 probably using several typewriters. But I believe that this particular
22 text was typed on one typewriter, but I have to have a close look.
23 JUDGE LIU: Well --
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We typed it wherever we had the time
25 and the possibility to do it.
1 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Scott.
2 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President, may I suggest in light of the questions
3 that have been raised, and particularly by Judge Clark, which as always
4 are highly pertinent and helpful, could we possibly take a moment's break
5 and make copies of those corresponding pages so everyone will have them in
6 front of them at the same time?
7 JUDGE CLARK: I find and them -- superficially, that's all one can
8 say -- the exact typographical errors appear on both pages. And that's a
9 page I picked at random.
10 MR. SCOTT: I have them too now, Your Honour. So if you're
11 satisfied, perhaps we don't need further copies. But the same appears
12 to me.
13 JUDGE CLARK: I might do another exercise later to see if I can
14 find another random one, just to satisfy myself.
15 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Krsnik, please move on.
16 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
17 Q. We left off with the 24th of January, 1993; is that correct?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Have you found that in the blue-ink version? Can you please read
20 the beginnings of the first eight lines if you can.
21 A. All the eight lines? You want me to read all the eight lines?
22 Q. They're short. If you don't mind.
23 A. I'm just asking whether I should do that.
24 "They are digging themselves in as moles."
25 Q. I apologise. My mistake. Are you reading on the 24th or the
1 23rd? Please read on the 24th January 1993. Have you found it?
2 A. Yes. "Shelling, shooting during the night around the HVO
3 headquarters -- the Ovnovic wedding party." Do you want me to
5 Q. Yes, please.
6 A. "In the hotel, the military police dragged out of their rooms all
7 the Croat drivers from the vicinity of Tuzla and they beat them up in the
8 parking lot in front of the hotel. A. Han--" That is probably Aleksin
9 Han. I can't really read it that well. What it says here, "this has been
10 conveyed to the commander of our military police about the people from
11 Tuzla who have been beaten up."
12 Q. Is that correct?
13 A. Yes, that's correct.
14 Q. Can you please read on.
15 A. "The prevention of an onslaught from Risovac and Doljani. All
16 the hunters' houses are full."
17 Q. Okay, then. Line 6, I believe that you've seen it. It says
18 something -- just for the record, you are reading from the document that
19 we call P928C. In line 6 it says something like "Allah-u-ekber." Have
20 you found it in this document that you're holding in your hand, document
22 A. No. I haven't found it. It says "A. Han," that stands for
23 Aleksin Han, that is the bridge from the municipality in the direction of
24 Mostar. But I can't discern what it says here. I can't read it.
25 Q. Can you put it on the ELMO. Maybe I'll be able to decipher what
1 it says. Turn it around, please.
2 Can you please show me the date, the 24th of January.
3 Line 6, can you see it? It says very clearly "Allah-u-ekber."
4 That is not Aleksin Han. That is "Allah-u-ekber." It reads very well
6 A. No. That is the abbreviation for Aleksin Han and the rest of it I
7 can't read.
8 Q. Okay. Then. In the typed-out version page 5, is there any text
9 after "Livaja"?
10 A. Well, probably even the typist who was typing this out wasn't
11 able to read it, just like I can't.
12 Q. But is there any text further on? Not just "Allah-u-ekber," but
13 is there any text, and sit identical? Can you take a look?
14 A. There is no text after that. What do you want me to say?
15 Q. I'm just drawing a conclusion. I don't want you to say anything.
16 A. It's quite clear. It "A. Han" here and then "in" and then I can't
17 read the following word.
18 Q. We can carry on. But it quite clearly says "ekber," E-K-B-E-R,
19 and this is quite clear, it says "Allah." And you said that you knew his
20 handwriting. How is it that you can't read it now?
21 A. I can't. I know his handwriting. I can read the following 1.000
22 words and I probably won't have to skip a single word. I'll probably have
23 to read them all out. But I can't read -- I can't read this word.
24 Q. Okay. Let's move on. Have a look at page 186, in document
25 P928C the date, 15th of April, 1993?
1 A. 186?
2 Q. Yes, 186. The date is the 15th of April, 1993. Have you found
4 A. Yes, I have.
5 Q. The date is the 15th of April. Have you found the date?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Have a look at page 188 now. What's the date on this page, on
8 page 188?
9 A. That carries the date from the previous page. It has the same
11 Q. Let's have a look at page 189 now.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. What's the date on this page?
14 A. Something between the 16th and the 17th. He probably wrote down
15 the 17th and then corrected it and put down the 16th.
16 Q. So these corrections are clear, the corrections he made to the
18 A. Yes. He made a mistake.
19 Q. So you know he made a mistake.
20 A. Well, that's what it assume. He probably did.
21 Q. Now, have a look at page 191. Has the date been corrected here?
22 A. Yes. It's the same. He probably mixed up the dates and then
23 corrected them later on.
24 Q. He did that or someone else?
25 A. I don't know why someone else would do that.
1 Q. Very well. Could you now have a look at that handwritten
2 version. Close the diary. Have a look at the first page, the first page,
3 where it sort of starts. And in the left-hand corner, is there something
4 handwritten, a name that is handwritten?
5 A. Yes. It says "Rados Alojz."
6 Q. Could you please put it on the ELMO so we can all see it clearly.
7 Is that his signature?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Are you sure?
10 A. Well, it occurs quite often in the documents. Of course.
11 Q. Please, so you're claiming under oath that this is Rados Alojz's
13 A. Well, whose signature would it be?
14 Q. I'm putting the question to you.
15 A. Well, of course it is. You can see this quite clearly.
16 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Madam Registrar, could you please
17 provide the witness with document P68.4.
18 JUDGE DIARRA: [Interpretation] Mr. Krsnik, when you provide the
19 references -- when you provide the references for a document, you aren't
20 close enough to the microphone, and it's difficult for the interpreters to
21 hear you then.
22 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] I apologise. You know, I get a bit
23 carried away.
24 This is the document that was used yesterday. It's the first
25 page. And it's the document that was provided by the Prosecutor.
1 [Previous translation continues] ... both signatures putting together.
2 [Interpretation] So this one that has been circled. And can you put the
3 signature close to the one on the notebook. [In English] Close to this
4 signature. [Interpretation] Can you put the one under the other. [In
5 English] One under another.
6 Q. [Interpretation] So we're all laymen here. We aren't experts.
7 Yesterday you said that the signature that has been encircled -- well, can
8 you tell us now to us laymen, are these signatures identical?
9 A. Well, one was signed in 1987 and the other in 1990. I apologise.
10 This one was in 1986 and this one in is 1990, so that's a four-year
11 difference. Are you sure? Do you know how you signed your name four
12 years ago? But the handwriting is obviously the same, but it was probably
13 signed at a different speed. But in any case, we're not experts. We're
14 not graphologists. There are people who can establish what the case is.
15 Q. But, sir, you claim that this is Alojz Rados's signature. That's
16 what you categorically stated yesterday.
17 A. Well, I've seen Rados Alojz's signature thousands of time, when I
18 worked with him.
19 Q. Yes. You see, this says quite -- absolutely identical. And have
20 a look at the letter "A." You can see how -- you can see that they are
22 A. Well, let's put this into a different perspective.
23 Q. Well, let's move on. We've got another signature in this
24 so-called diary.
25 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Could we have the document P428.1.
1 JUDGE LIU: Well, what's the number of that document? Would you
2 please repeat it.
3 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] P428.1. It's the document that was
4 used yesterday by the Prosecutor.
5 JUDGE LIU: Well, is that 424.1?
6 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] No, 428. 428.1. But maybe we've
7 made a mistake, because my colleague and I, we worked until very late last
8 night. Maybe it is 424. [In English] Yes. Thank you, Your Honour.
9 Thank you.
10 Madam, this signature, put close to these three -- these two.
11 Can we show the -- oh, yes, yes. Thank you.
12 Q. [Interpretation] Now, we're all laymen here, and we're looking at
13 three signatures. Do you still claim that they are all identical?
14 A. Well, you can see for yourself.
15 Q. I can't.
16 A. I'm sorry.
17 Q. Tell me, yes or no?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Very well. Let's move on, then. Let's go back to 928C. Have a
20 look at page 115, Mr. Idrizovic, please. Page 115. Could you put it on
21 the ELMO, please. You can see what it says in black. Do you claim this
22 to be Rados's handwriting? Would you make such a claim under oath?
23 A. Well, this is written in capital letters. I don't know about
25 Q. I am asking you: Is this Alojz Rados's handwriting?
1 A. It doesn't appear to be.
2 Q. Please have a look at page 114. And thank you. It's the same
3 document. It's in the same document, 928C. Is that Alojz Rados's
5 A. Look, this handwriting, it's all in capital letters. Please.
6 Q. I'm asking you, is this Alojz Rados's handwriting?
7 A. Well, I'm not very familiar with his handwriting when the text is
8 written in capital letters.
9 Q. And have a look at document -- at Exhibit 68.6. They are capital
10 letters too -- correction, 68.4. 68.4. And the printed part, is that
11 Alojz Rados's handwriting?
12 A. Yes, that's the diary that he had in the company for years.
13 Q. And you can recognise this handwriting that is in capitals.
14 A. Well, that was his diary. It can only be his handwriting. It
15 couldn't be anyone else's handwriting.
16 Q. That's your conclusion then, isn't it?
17 A. Well, what would you conclude from that?
18 Q. Well, look, half of that document is in capital letters. Let's
19 have a look at page 131.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I haven't been called
21 here as an expert, as a graphologist. My sight is very bad, and I wanted
22 to ask you whether I could rest my eyes for a bit. The gentleman here
23 can't treat me as if it were a graphologist. So please, this should be a
24 task for the experts. I shouldn't be turned into something that I'm not
25 or treated as something that I'm not.
1 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Witness, yesterday you made very categorical claims and you
3 recognised this. That's why I'm putting these questions to you now. Have
4 a look at page 131.
5 A. Well, I've already answered your question. I really can't read
6 the text.
7 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Krsnik, I know your point. And if you draw
8 attention to certain pages, that's enough. There's no need to identify
9 every single place in that diary at all. And I think, you know, we have
10 been going on on this kind of testimony for quite a long time and
11 everybody is tired. We only have less than ten minutes to go for the
12 morning session. Could we break here and continue at 2.30 this afternoon
13 so that everybody will have a rest, especially the witness will rest his
14 eyes. Thank you very much.
15 We'll resume at 2.30 this afternoon.
16 --- Luncheon recess taken at 12.49 p.m.
17 --- On resuming at 2.35 p.m.
18 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik, we have received your motion
19 objecting the admission of the Rados diary, and I think the Bench has been
20 informed about your position concerning with the admission of the Rados
21 diary. So Mr. Krsnik, it is our intention to have this witness go back
22 home today, because this is the last day of this week, and the witness has
23 been in The Hague for over a week.
24 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Yes, of course, Your Honours. But
25 the position to clarify certain issues regarding my positions with the
1 witness. My position may be such and such, but we have to clarify this
2 matter with the witness. And obviously he will go home today. I see no
3 reason for him to stay on.
4 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much for your cooperation. You may
5 proceed, Mr. Krsnik.
6 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Mr. Idrizovic, I'll try and be brief, so please be so kind as to
8 reply very briefly. Do you know why in the copy of the manuscript, you
9 know, the typed copy, do you know why the text is not complete? Do you
10 know that or not?
11 A. No, I don't. But I think that for this Trial Chamber and for the
12 whole case, this typed part, this typed document is not important. I
13 think I made a mistake in providing it.
14 Q. And tell me, please, if you know about this: Who decided what
15 would be copied and what would be omitted in the typed text?
16 A. No one made such decisions. A copy of the diary was given to the
17 typist, for the typist to type out. What the typist managed to read, the
18 typist typed out. And obviously if typist was unable to read certain
19 parts, the typist skipped that.
20 Q. And who decided what should be added to that text? Who decided
21 what should be -- who decided to add things that are not contained in the
23 A. I don't know.
24 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Scott.
25 MR. SCOTT: I've not seen counsel put forward any evidence of
1 thing that is have been added. That's a complete mischaracterisation.
2 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Krsnik, would you please make it clear for us.
3 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Well, I thought that it was clear.
4 And when I hear such objections, start panicking, because after two or
5 three hours of cross-examination it still doesn't seem to be clear what
6 was added and what was omitted. If necessary, however, I will provide
7 another piece of evidence very briefly.
8 [Defence counsel confer]
9 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] It's not been recorded in the
10 transcript correctly. I asked who decided that the text -- that certain
11 sentences would be added to the text that weren't in the original.
12 Q. Do you know the answer to this question? Who decided about this,
13 if you know?
14 MR. SCOTT: My objection is the same, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE LIU: Yes. Mr. Krsnik, you said that you'd show an example
16 to us on this aspect.
17 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Could the witness first answer, and
18 then I will show an example. I asked him whether he had any knowledge of
19 this. What's in dispute here?
20 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, I think that's completely a misleading
21 way to the witness to put that question -- to suggest to the witness, to
22 put a suggestive question to the witness which is not based on evidence in
23 the record and then have the witness try to guess at a response. If
24 there's a specific example, which I submit respectfully there has not been
25 today so far -- if counsel wants to take the witness to something that he
1 sees and says "this is added," so that we all know what he's talking
2 about. Judge Clark does, Judge Diarra does, Mr. President, you do, and I
3 do, then we can look at that and the witness can say whether it's been
4 added or not.
5 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik, so far as I know certain parts were
6 redacted - redacted - concerning the -- concerning with the time maybe in
7 the typed version. Do you mean that?
8 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] No, Your Honours. I was very clear,
9 and I have already shown this. Parts of the text were omitted, parts of
10 the text that were in the so-called original. These parts are not
11 contained in the typed version of the text. I don't know. Perhaps the
12 Prosecutor and I are sitting in two different courtrooms. But I will now
13 show, and I thought I had already shown you this -- but it's easy to check
14 this in the transcript. I'll provide you with another example. There are
15 many such examples. I'll provide you with an example in which text was
16 added. This was something that is not contained anywhere. There are
17 sentences which are added that have been changed and that aren't contained
18 in the original. So I think my question was quite clear. We'll find it
19 out. The page, I think, is the following: [In English] Exhibit P928D and
21 First give it -- give 928C.
22 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, could you please go to page 203. I
23 won't bother you any more.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I understand
25 Mr. Krsnik. He's doing a difficult job, and he's clinging to whatever he
1 can. That's normal. But the typed version has nothing to do with the
2 subject that we are discussing here. It has absolutely nothing to do with
3 it. We have the original here, and there is a photocopy of the original.
4 He's asking me about things that are totally irrelevant and things I know
5 nothing about. If you give something to be typed out -- well, none of us
6 had the time to -- in the course of the war when we were in difficulties,
7 we didn't have the time to read out to see whether something had been
8 typed out correctly or not. That was not important. That's not
9 important. I can answer Mr. Krsnik's questions, but I think that he is
10 wasting time without reason.
11 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Since you said that this original has nothing to do with the typed
13 version, I will not ask you any other questions.
14 A. No, I didn't say that. I said that it was possible that the girls
15 who were typing it out made a mistake. I never compared the two texts,
16 and I don't know whether someone else did that. Are you content with that
17 answer now?
18 JUDGE LIU: Well, witness, we'll decide what is relevant and what
19 is not. Please do as the Defence counsel requests you to do.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's clear. I'm waiting for the
22 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Well, I'm looking at the text. I don't want to tire you too much,
24 you know. Do you have page 203 in front of you, where it says, "Thursday,
25 the 22nd of April, 1993." Could you have a look at that.
1 A. 203? The date -- I can't see a date. I'm sorry, yes, the 22nd of
2 April. I see it.
3 Q. [Microphone not activated]
4 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
5 JUDGE LIU: Your microphone, please. Your microphone, please.
6 MR. KRSNIK: Excuse me, Your Honour.
7 Q. [Interpretation] Could you have a look at the first three
8 sentences. Could you read them out. They're not very long.
9 A. "I slept and even had a bath and shaved at Marinko's. His wife
10 was there and child."
11 Q. Thank you. Thank you. And now, could you please read out on page
12 18 -- could you read out the typed part, under the date the 22nd of April,
13 1993. Page 18. It's under the date the 22nd of April, 1993.
14 A. "I even shaved at Marinko's. His brother and parents were there
16 Q. And then? Can you continue.
17 A. "I felt a little better, relieved. It was a nice day."
18 Q. Thank you. Tell me, who added this? If you know, of course.
19 A. I don't know. I don't know.
20 Q. Well, thanks very much. I have many such examples, as many as you
22 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, should I provide other
23 examples? We have a list of such examples.
24 Q. Have a look at page 143 [As interpreted] -- page 142 in the
25 blue-ink copy.
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. So we are looking at 142.
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Have you found it? How does that page begin? With what words?
5 A. "The list for Ljubina."
6 Q. How many people are listed on this page. Just give us their
7 number. How many of them?
8 A. People may not be following what we are talking about. There are
9 numbers here, but some people have been crossed out from the list.
10 Q. What is their total number, the number of these people?
11 A. Ten -- I'm sorry, nine.
12 Q. Can you please put the page on the ELMO. As far as I can see, the
13 last number is 11, and only one name has been crossed out.
14 A. Yes. Under "6" and under"8" two people have been crossed out or
16 Q. Can you now look at the typed-out version, page 5. "The internal
17 remark," it says here. "Try and secure another communications station
18 with Kolibe." Where does that say under number "1", sir?
19 A. I would have to take time to find it.
20 Q. I'm putting it to you after the list for Ljubina, on that same
21 page, that sentence is missing. And later on where does it say in the
22 diary the commander and then the assistant cook? Where does that say on
23 the blue-ink copy?
24 A. On the following page.
25 Q. No. I'm referring to page 142. Where does it say "the
1 commander --" I'm referring to this list for Ljubina. Where does it say
2 "commander" and where does it say "the assistant cook"?
3 A. No, sir. It doesn't say that.
4 Q. Exactly. And how come that this text on 142 says [B/S/C spoken],
5 and does that exist on page 5?
6 A. You will have to ask Alojz why he didn't write that.
7 Q. Please, don't tell me that. We're comparing the blueprint copy
8 with the typed-out copy. Let's leave Alojz alone. Does that exist in the
9 blue-ink copy?
10 A. It is the list of the same people, but the typist did not want to
11 copy the same list again to avoid repetition.
12 Q. Sir, there is a name and there is a place to it. This is what it
13 doesn't exist in the typed-out version, but it has been added "the
14 Commander and the assistant cook," which is not to be found in the
15 blue-ink copy.
16 A. What has that got to do with anything?
17 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] I would kindly ask the usher's
18 assistance. Can you please give Madam Registrar the document D1/434, and
19 can you please distribute it among the Bench and others in the courtroom.
20 Q. Yesterday you said to my learned friend that you handed documents
21 over to "our people from the AID." Who is it who you consider "our
22 people"? What did you mean by "our people from the AID"?
23 A. I didn't mean anything.
24 Q. Tell me please: What is the AID and what is its function?
25 MR. SCOTT: Objection, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE LIU: Well --
2 MR. SCOTT: It's beyond the scope, and it's not the purpose of
3 this witness to come and testify about AID. It was to come and
4 testify about the diary.
5 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Krsnik. I think the AID issue has come up
6 for many, many times. Let's drop it.
7 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this is a very relevant
8 part of the whole story, because the AID is involved in the entire story.
9 But let me now reply to my learned friend, but may the witness be excused
10 for that.
11 JUDGE LIU: Well, if you have a particular question, so ask your
12 question directly to the witness.
13 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] But of course. That is exactly what
14 I wanted to do.
15 JUDGE LIU: No, no, no, no. That is not. Your question is: What
16 is the AID and what is its function? Which is far away from the subject
17 matter of this rebuttal proceedings.
18 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Yesterday you said that you handed the diary over to the AID in
20 1997; is that correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Can I now put the question to the
23 witness who is or what is AID?
24 A. It is the same thing as the SIS.
25 MR. SCOTT: I have the same objection.
1 JUDGE LIU: Yes. We understand that.
2 Well, Mr. Krsnik, if you claim that AID changed or made that
3 diary, you just put your case to this witness and ask a direct question to
4 this witness to see whether the witness knows.
5 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Mr. Idrizovic, this is what I have been asked to do. Let's make
7 our lives easier and let me put it to you. As in the criminal charges and
8 request for investigation against Bakir Alispahic, the director of the
9 AID, who was -- who performed that duty between 1992 and 1996, if Irfan
10 Ljevakovic, his deputy; and Enver Mujezinovic, his deputy; the
11 AID --
12 JUDGE LIU: Well -- well -- yes, please finish your question.
13 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
14 Q. I'm putting it to you, sir, that as it says here, they were
15 involved in the forgery of identification cards, various activities,
16 political assassinations, cooperation with Iranian secret services and al
17 Qaeda and that this diary has also been used for propaganda purposes and
18 that you participated in that. Just answer yes or no.
19 JUDGE LIU: Well --
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Now you have gone over the top,
22 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Scott.
23 MR. SCOTT: Objection, Your Honour. This is the same thing. It's
24 a speech. It's argument. That's all it is. If he's putting the issue, as
25 you, Mr. President, invited him to you, would be to put -- to put, "I put
1 it to you, sir, that the diary we've been talking about is nothing more
2 than a fabrication." Is that true? That's putting the question, not
3 giving speeches about AID, about talking about a case that none of us know
4 anything else about and is not relevant to this courtroom. He can put the
5 specific relevance question to the witness.
6 JUDGE LIU: Yes. Mr. Krsnik, you may direct our attention to that
7 document. That document 434 and let us see where this document mentioned
8 that Rados diary.
9 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] In this document there's no specific
10 mention of the diary, in this particular document, but what is mentioned
11 is an investigation that is being carried out because these people have
12 forged documents. And if the AID kept the diary since 1997 and only
13 handed it over this year, then I believe that I may put the questions to
14 the witness to go for the credibility of the document and of the whole
15 situation. These people have been in prison for some time.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Unfortunately they have been
17 released from prison.
18 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik, you mean that you based all your
19 allegations on speculation? Well, well, those people forged documents;
20 maybe it's true and maybe it's not. But how do you arrive at the
21 conclusion that this diary is also forged by AID? You may put this
22 question to the witness to see if the witness knows or not.
23 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] I have, Your Honour, but then
24 Mr. Scott intervened. Then the gentleman told me that I am exaggerating.
25 I'm trying to have a conversation with the witness. This diary was in the
1 possession of the AID. It is a fact that has been established. If that
2 fact hasn't been established, I will move on. How come you will not allow
3 me to establish the origin of this diary and his whereabouts for such a
4 long number of years. This is just -- this document that I'm presenting
5 to you now is a fact, a factual document.
6 JUDGE CLARK: Mr. Krsnik, from a very brief glance at this
7 document - and it's not easy to digest - just scanning it for
8 milliseconds, I see that the venue of the alleged offences, if they have
9 anything whatever to do with the Rados diary, I doubt, is in the FBiH.
10 Our case is dealing with Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1993. The Federation came
11 into existence a long time afterwards. Your argument is about as valid as
12 saying, because some policemen have been prosecuted successfully in
13 California for beating up suspects, that any investigation by police in
14 Oregon is invalid. They just -- it's not logical what you're saying. It
15 doesn't follow. What Judge Liu is asking you to do is while we have this
16 witness here, who's a key witness in relation to the diary, to put to him
17 what your case is. And surely you've got something to put to him that's a
18 little better than some bad eggs, possibly, might be prosecuted in
19 Sarajevo for activity which occurred subsequent to the events in this
20 case. Surely you've got something more than that to put to this person,
21 to say what your case is in relation to the diary. We've got this
22 blue-ink diary, as you call it, and you've got that in front of you. Now,
23 what is your case in relation to that diary? Whatever about the errors
24 that were made in the typing in 1993. What is your case? Are you going
25 to say that you are going to call evidence that AID forged this diary, or
1 are you saying because some of them are being prosecuted for illegal
2 activity in 2002, that they therefore must have forged the diary in 1993?
3 That's what it sounds like to us.
4 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honour Judge Clark, again you
5 make me panic. I thought everything was clear. And now what am I to do?
6 Obviously this is exactly what I was going to say. It is absolutely clear
7 that more than one person has been involved, more than one handwriting is
8 visible. There's no visible chronological order. Things relevant to
9 1991, 1993 are mixed up. The signature is dubious. And I believe that my
10 case is clear, and this is what I am trying to prove in my
11 cross-examination. What I'm saying is that people were adding things
12 because they had the time to do that and not abandon this is something
13 that they used for entertainment. People typed out whatever they wanted
14 and however they wanted, and this is something that we have been dealing
15 with for so long here. And it was nothing but entertainment to them.
16 And finally, my learned friend has been telling a story about the
17 AID for over a year. Let us see who this AID is. Its key person was
18 detained in 2002, but he didn't commit the crimes in 2002. He was
19 committing crimes prior to that.
20 JUDGE CLARK: We've gone round and round and round this issue for
21 14 months, and we have said you're not to give evidence, and I think you
22 know that.
23 You have made accusations about AID on dozens of occasions, but
24 you haven't called a single primary source witness to help us on this.
25 You've just made wild accusations. You know the difference between
1 calling a primary source witness and making accusations in court. Now, if
2 you have a specific case about this diary that, it wasn't found in Doljani
3 that, it wasn't -- that it was in the hands of someone else, that there
4 were several diaries going round, then put it to this witness because he's
5 the appropriate person to deal with it, if you're criticising aspects of
6 the diary and saying there's different handwriting, you've done that
7 extremely well and we've taken that point. But you must now instead of
8 making wild accusations put your case. Well, you don't have to, but you
9 fail to do so at your peril.
10 JUDGE LIU: And by the way, Mr. Krsnik, we all agree that this
11 diary was in the possession of the AID for quite a while. There is no
12 dispute about that.
13 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honour Clark, you know very well
14 that we discussed the thing during an ex parte hearing and that we did
15 have a person here, and I told you during that first ex parte session.
16 And at the second ex parte session I explained all the other reasons that
17 I have. But I don't want to belabour upon that now. We can come back to
18 that later maybe.
19 Q. Witness, I'm putting it to you Zajko Sihirlic was your assistant
20 but not in the brigade. The security officer in the brigade myself
21 Mustafa Skampo; is that correct?
22 A. No. You are absolutely misinformed.
23 Q. Is Zajko Sihirlic a secret agent of the AID?
24 A. You will have to ask somebody in the AID that.
25 Q. You adhered to the thesis that it was Zajko Sihirlic who took the
1 diary from the headquarters in Doljani.
2 A. This is not what I said.
3 Q. Who was the first person who put his hands on the diary? Do you
4 know that?
5 A. The military police took all the documents from Doljani and handed
6 them over to Sihirlic as the officer in charge.
7 Q. Did not the entire furniture -- wasn't the entire furniture
8 brought in front of your headquarters and you and Sihirlic were the ones
9 who found the documents in that furniture and you and him were the first
10 to put your hands on those alleged documents?
11 A. I'm sorry that you are so badly informed. I haven't completed my
12 answer, sir. My headquarters was in the administrative building of the
13 hydroelectrical powerplant, and nothing ever entered my premises, the
14 premises where my office was. Nothing the size of a match or bigger,
15 nothing from Doljani or elsewhere. Mr. Krsnik, I am an honest and
16 honourable person, and never ever did I allow anything stolen from anybody
17 to enter either my house or my workplace. And please bear that in mind in
18 the future.
19 Q. Who was it who planned the operation in Doljani? Are you going to
20 tell us that you did not participate in that?
21 A. I absolutely didn't participate in that. The operation was
22 planned by the command of the 44th Mountain Brigade, and I was never a
23 member of that command.
24 Q. Were you their superior?
25 A. No. Are you asking me to go over the same ground again and
1 again? I believe that your time is rather restricted.
2 Q. No, I'm not going to ask you to do that.
3 MR. KRSNIK: [Previous translation continues] ... [In English]
5 Q. [Interpretation] In the version you gave to the investigators, you
6 said that Doljani was liberated by the BH Army. Who was it liberated
7 from? Can you tell us?
8 A. Yes, I can tell you. But first you tell me who was Doljani
9 liberated from by the HVO before that. Can you tell me that? Because
10 that's how things happened.
11 Q. Kindly tell me. I have a report in front of you that was compiled
12 for the purposes of this Office of the Prosecutor in Doljani. There was
13 an atrocious crime which took place on the day when you liberated it. 35
14 civilians were massacred and 250 women and children were taken to the camp
15 in Jablanica. Is that correct, sir?
16 A. If a crime was committed, then criminals should be taken to task.
17 Q. Were 250 Croatian women and children taken to the camp in
18 Jablanica which was under your control?
19 A. The camp in Jablanica was never under my control.
20 Q. And were the women and children taken there?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, this has nothing to
22 do with me. And can you please disallow these questions, because I didn't
23 organise, I didn't plan, I didn't carry out the operation, and I wasn't in
24 charge of any of the camps. And can you please ask the counsel not to
25 remind me of those times and not to tell lies. I explained very clearly
1 what my position was at the time, and I believe that the counsel is
2 wasting time.
3 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik, are these questions related to the
4 Rados diary?
5 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Credibility and the Rados diary. The
6 Rados diary was just something that was supposed to avert our eyes from
7 what really happened on that day. On that day Doljani was liberated, yes,
8 but from the civilians of the Croatian ethnicity. And these were children
9 and women who were taken to the camp where they spent another year. And
10 the witness knows it, and that's why I am putting this question to him.
11 JUDGE LIU: Well -- well, that may be true, Mr. Krsnik, but that
12 is not the subject matter of this proceeding. You have to bear in mind
13 about that.
14 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Yes, I am bearing that in mind.
15 Q. Tell me, sir: Are you aware that an investigation in being
16 carried against you both in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and
17 according to some witnesses, also an investigation is being carried out
18 against you by this Prosecution?
19 A. I'm not aware of that, but I'm not afraid of appearing in front of
20 any court.
21 Q. Have you negotiated with the Prosecutor's Office along these lines
22 or about your testimony here?
23 A. What do you mean, sir?
24 Q. You understand my question.
25 A. I don't understand you at all. I really don't know what you're
1 saying. If Idrizovic should be held responsible for a crime, then
2 everyone in the former Yugoslavia would be a criminal then. Please don't
3 say such things. There's no sense. Don't make me be impolite. Really.
4 Q. I'm not attributing anything to you, sir. But the report against
5 people for whom there is reasonable suspicion of having committed crimes,
6 in this report, you are number 5. Cipo Safet [phoen] is the first one,
7 Maris Muhamed the second, Omer Mirsad, Subara Resic [phoen], Idrizovic
8 Safet, Kovacevic Enis, Sihirlic Zajko, the person we have been speaking
9 about, Zebic Emin, and Kuric Said [phoen].
10 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Scott.
11 MR. SCOTT: I just want to be clear. Is counsel basing all these
12 allegations on Exhibit D1/419? Is that what all this is being based on?
13 JUDGE LIU: Yes. We also want to be guided, Mr. Krsnik.
14 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] I also have Exhibit D1/428. It's a
15 report against the same gentleman submitted by the SIS. That's the
16 Croatian part, the counterpart of the AID. And it's against the same
17 gentleman, and it mentions proceedings, criminal proceedings, that were
18 instituted or that were to be instituted.
19 JUDGE LIU: Are we furnished with this document?
20 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Could we provide the Exhibit D1/428.
21 Unfortunately it hasn't been translated, but I would like to distribute it
22 to you. These are document that is I have received from the Prosecution,
23 and they all bear a Prosecution number.
24 Yes. For the sake of the transcript, it's D1/428.
25 Q. Yesterday you told the Prosecution that you weren't in Grabovica
1 when an atrocious crime was also committed by the BH Army; isn't that
3 A. Well, how would I be there?
4 Q. Well, look, Mr. Sefer Halilovic, your commander, in a letter and
5 in an investigation -- I have a court report. This was provided to me by
6 the Prosecution. He say that is you were at the meeting. I will read out
7 this part and tell you where, and I'll give the document to the Court.
8 It's Exhibit number D1/421?
9 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Could you please distribute it. I
10 have an English version and a B/C/S version too. And D1/422. It's a
11 statement made by Sefer Halilovic to the investigating judge in Sarajevo.
12 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Scott.
13 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, we've now been directed to four or five
14 different documents. Could we possibly do one document and question at a
16 JUDGE LIU: I think we have already finished the document D1/419.
17 Am I right, Mr. Krsnik? Because --
18 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes. And then Exhibit D1/421,
19 the B/C/S version.
20 Q. Have a look at page 5, please. In his statement, Sefer Halilovic,
21 who sent to Alija Izetbegovic, the President, and his -- in his statement
22 which he gave to the investigating judge with regard to the crimes
23 committed by the BH Army in Grabovica, he said, "In order to make
24 preparations for the main axis of attack where Z. Suljevic was also
25 present, V. Kric, Safet Idrizovic, Enis Kovacevic, Safet Indic, he says
1 you've got the green light from the president for the above-mentioned
2 operation in order to help Mostar, and I'm placing various things at your
3 disposal, et cetera." Were you at that meeting in which preparations were
4 being made for an attack against Grabovica, where an atrocious crime was
6 A. Absolutely. An atrocious crime was committed in Grabovica, and
7 that is a disgrace for the BH Army. It was a disgraceful act on the part
8 of the BH Army at that moment.
9 Q. What about Doljani?
10 A. Well, just a minute. I haven't finished. You've put several
11 questions to me. I think that the entire Grabovica case was here in front
12 of the Prosecution. One should know who was responsible for what was done
13 there. I know from the press that this case was referred back to the
14 local authorities, to the local judiciary, and as a man, as a citizen of
15 Bosnia and Herzegovina, I'm very disappointed to see that the prosecution
16 in the judicial system in Bosnia and Herzegovina was not in a position,
17 didn't want to deal with that case, solve that case. As far as I can tell
18 from the press, on the basis of what I have read in the press, this case
19 has been referred back to the Prosecution here.
20 Q. My question was --
21 A. Please. Just a minute. No units from Jablanica - and I know this
22 for a fact - no single man from Jablanica participated in that crime. The
23 identity of the persons who participated in the crime is very well known.
24 And just one other thing: When representatives of the high
25 command go to their subordinates, then obviously a meeting is held. I and
1 no one from Jablanica was with Sefer at a meeting of any kind. We didn't
2 participate in a meeting at which the action in 1993 against Mostar was
3 planned, because our units didn't plan that action and they didn't
4 participate in that action either. And I think it is high time for this
5 noise to do with the army to be taken away from Jablanica, to be removed
6 from Jablanica.
7 As far as Doljani is concerned, an action was undertaken. I think
8 that any military action is a legitimate action if no crimes are
9 committed. If there were crimes in Doljani, the perpetrators should be
10 held accountable. That's no problem at all. And I personally won't feel
11 sorry for anyone if that person committed a crime, that person should be
12 held accountable.
13 Q. You haven't answered my question. Were women and children taken
14 to the camp in Jablanica -- to the museum?
15 A. They were taken to the camp -- they were taken to the museum.
16 They were accommodated in the museum. All civilians, all Muslims from
17 Capljina and Stolac who were expelled were placed in that museum.
18 Q. And what did children of two or three years of age and what did
19 the women do there?
20 A. I don't know what they did there. I never went to that facility.
21 All I know is that my wife took food to the family of a colleague of hers
22 very often, and that family is very grateful to me for that.
23 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Could we go into private session so
24 that I can put a question to this witness. I want to protect someone's
25 identity. I don't want it to be made public.
1 JUDGE LIU: Yes, of course. But Mr. Krsnik, I have to remind you
2 that -- the time. We'll go to the private session, please.
3 [Private session]
25 [Open session]
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as the museum is concerned,
2 the task of the unit which was under my command was only to provide
3 external security for buildings, because it's a big building and the Red
4 Cross had its warehouse in that building. And I haven't finished yet.
5 I've got other things to add.
6 There were exhibits from the museum there. There were many
7 weapons which were there as trophies and there was other equipment. The
8 library was there. Many other things too. The task of the unit that was
9 under my command in that part was to protect that part of the museum. But
10 they were forbidden to have anything to do with the people who were there,
11 whether these were Muslim civilians or Croatian civilians or Croatian
12 soldiers. Their sole task was to provide security for the building, for
13 the part of the building that was not used for the purposes that you have
14 been referring to.
15 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Very well. Do you know Marinko Ljoljo.
17 A. Yes, I know Marinko very well.
18 Q. The statement that he gave to investigators of the Prosecution, in
19 that statement he accuses you that on the 15th of April, 1993, you
20 personally arrested him and sent him to the Jablanica camp. This is
21 Exhibit D1/427.
22 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Could we please have it distributed.
23 It's in English.
24 Q. Did you do that or did you not do that?
25 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me. I'm going to ask that we wait until all of
1 us know what the document says. You can't ask the question and in the
2 meantime be handing out the material, Mr. President. I object to that
4 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik, do you have any more documents?
5 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have a pile of
6 documents, but I'm trying to get through them as quickly as possible in
7 accordance with the promise I made.
8 JUDGE LIU: Well, if you have more documents, would you please
9 furnish us right now.
10 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation]
11 Q. I would also like to show you -- were you authorised by Arif
12 Pasalic to arrest anyone you wanted to -- or rather, to arrest anyone
13 who was suspicious in the territory of the municipality of Jablanica?
14 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Scott.
15 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President. I'm sorry. I know counsel feels
16 rushed. I understand that. I've been rushed before myself. But we can't
17 just put ten exhibits -- we can't simply table ten exhibits and put ten
18 different questions and jump from item to item to item. I would like to
19 be able to follow the question and answers. I would like to be able to
20 follow the parts of the documents which counsel is putting to the witness
21 to see if they're being put correctly. He cannot simply -- it's not fair
22 to the witness, and in respect, it's not fair to me or to the Chamber.
23 One document, one question at a time.
24 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Krsnik, where are we? Are we still at document
25 427, or we've finished it already?
1 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] I've been waiting for an answer. I
2 asked him a question which regarded this document, and it's a document in
3 which this is quite clearly stated, Mr. Marinko Ljoljo.
4 JUDGE LIU: 427?
5 MR. KRSNIK: Yes. Yes. Yes.
6 MR. SCOTT: I ask that the question be re-put, Mr. President. If
7 counsel could direct us to the part of the statement he's referring to,
8 since it's several -- since it's a nine or ten-page statement or
9 something, we -- can we please be shown where this is.
10 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] It's the first page, 00355469.
11 That's the Prosecution number. It's on the first page, the first major
12 paragraph, the last three sentences in the first paragraph. [In English]
13 ... "asked him what was going to happen to us. He answered that we would
14 be handed over to the military police, and that is what happened."
15 MR. SCOTT: The question -- again, Mr. President, the question
16 that was put at line -- that's my point. On page 90, line 4 -- we're
17 about to lose it is -- were you authored by Arif Pasalic to arrest
18 anyone you wanted to? That was the last question put to this witness a
19 few moments ago I have no idea how that relates to the statement we've
20 been directed to.
21 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] That's another document. D1/423.
22 That's the number of the document that the Prosecutor is referring to
23 now. And I'm going to distribute it now. But please can you answer my
24 first question about Marinko Ljoljo.
25 JUDGE LIU: Well, have you finished using the document 427?
1 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] But the witness hasn't answered my
2 question, Your Honours.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I can't get a word in. Can't
4 you see?
5 A. At one time Marinko Ljoljo worked together with me in the
6 school. I know him very well. On the 15th of April, when Jablanica was
7 shelled for the first time, and when we had the first victims in
8 Jablanica -- and I'm going to have to expand on this with a bit.
9 Q. Please don't, then.
10 A. Well, then I won't answer. I have to answer this at length. It's
11 not the former command of the HVO which was left on the 2nd of April of
12 that year was across the road from my command. We were neighbours. And
13 for a certain period of time, when things were good -- please. Please.
14 Now you want to tell me that I arrested Marinko Ljoljo and that I put
15 him in prison. That's not true.
16 Q. Marinko Ljoljo says. That's not me.
17 A. Well, Marinko Ljoljo has the right to say that.
18 MR. SCOTT: I'm sorry. I object to this. I've done it repeatedly
19 now. That is not what the statement says. It does not say that. And I
20 ask again, Mr. President, one statement and one question at a time. And
21 that's why the Chamber should have these statements. It does not say what
22 Mr. Krsnik says it says. I object to this.
23 JUDGE CLARK: I've read it. That's true. It's only after he was
24 arrested on somebody else's orders that he decided that as he knew
25 Mr. Idrizovic, that he'd speak to him.
1 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik, I think you read two sentences of
2 this statement. Just ask a simple question: Is that true in that
4 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Yes. I didn't want to read
5 everything out. If you read it from the beginning to the end, it's
7 Q. But is this correct or not? That's the first question. And which
8 was the army, and under whose command was it? Who threatened them and
9 said that if they didn't surrender they would shoot? Who was in command
10 of that army?
11 A. It's not true to say that he was arrested. I started answering,
12 but I wasn't allowed to finish.
13 Q. So it's not true. Very well.
14 Let's turn to D1/423. I only have the Croatian version. But it's
15 a very short text. It's a question I want to ask you. There's only one
16 sentence. Did you receive authorisation from Arif Pasalic, the
17 commander of the 4th Corps, to bring in all suspicious persons from the
18 territory of those two municipalities? An authorisation was given to your
19 counterpart in Konjic, Catic Mirsad, and to you in Jablanica; is that
21 A. No. I never received such an order.
22 Q. Very well.
23 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Could we distribute D1/423.
24 Q. Tell me, is this Arif Pasalic's signature?
25 A. Yes, this is Arif's -- Arif Pasalic's signature. But this has
1 nothing to do with the relationship between the HVO, the Croatian Defence
2 Council, and the BH Army. This was an internal affair, and it concerned
3 the BH Army.
4 Q. Very well. But did you receive that authorisation to bring people
6 A. Yes. Yes, I did. To bring in the commander of the military
7 police, of our military police. I was authorised to bring him in. But
8 this is -- this was in November 1992, and at the time there was no
9 conflict between the BH Army and the HVO. So please don't refer to this.
10 This has nothing to do with what we are discussing. You are using the
11 wrong documents. I'm sorry.
12 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Scott.
13 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Mr. President. Could we have help from the
14 translation booth so the rest of us can even know what the document is
15 about since counsel has not provided a translation. Could someone just
16 read this document to the rest of us.
17 JUDGE LIU: Yes. Mr. Krsnik, would you please read that document
18 to us.
19 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Could you put it on the ELMO,
20 please -- but I'll read it out.
21 "Republic of BiH, the Army of BiH Republic, 4th Corps Command.
22 Authorisation. I hereby authorise the commander of the OSO Konjic, Mirsad
23 Catic, and of the OSO in Jablanica, Safet Idrizovic, to bring in all
24 suspicious persons from the territory of these two municipalities. And
25 this is in connection with the proceedings which are being conducted in
1 Parsovici. And I ask them to do this through their organs. Commander
2 Arif Pasalic."
3 JUDGE LIU: What's the date on this document?
4 MR. KRSNIK: It doesn't have any date.
5 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, may I ask Mr. Krsnik
8 JUDGE LIU: Well -- well, witness, I think we have passed this
9 section. Let us move on. We really want you to go back home today.
10 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] And the last -- or rather, the
11 penultimate document -- and we will finish very soon now: D1/426. It
12 consists of only one sentence.
13 Q. And it reads as follows: The Herceg Stjepan Brigade, 3rd
14 Battalion, Mijat Tomic, Doljani, Jablanica. To Stipo Polo personally, the
15 commander, handwritten. From Mostar, the 4th of May, 1993, at 2200
16 hours. Release all arrested civilians in Doljani and Sovici. Continue
17 detaining military men who are fit to do their military service. The chief
18 of the HVO main staff, Milivoj Petkovic." Did you provide this document?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And the last document, D1/433. And first of all, here is my
21 question: In Slobodna Bosna in a newspaper in Sarajevo, did you react
22 to an article? Did you send a letter to this newspaper reacting to an
23 article? You have the text in front of you. It's the second column and
24 it's the fourth paragraph. You explain why you react, and you say, "I'm
25 also reacting because you put the text under the heading 'Hark,' which
1 makes the readers think that the people who defended and managed to defend
2 Jablanica from the Ustasha were really for The Hague." A minute ago you
3 said that you thought that all perpetrators of crimes should be
4 prosecuted. But here you're saying that no crimes were committed
5 anywhere. So who are the Ustasha then, in your opinion?
6 A. For a long time the present Bosnia and Herzegovina, both in the
7 predominantly Croatian areas as well as in the predominantly Muslim areas,
8 the press carried the thesis that people in Jablanica were guilty of the
9 crimes in Srebrenica, for the crime in Uzdol, for the crime in Doljani.
10 Q. Trusina.
11 A. Yes and so on and so forth. I'm speaking about Jablanica. I'm
12 not going to talk about the municipality of Konjic. And then in Slobodna
13 Bosna, in the free Bosnia an interview appeared with Mirko Zelenika, who
14 put my name in a very ugly context. So this was my angry reaction to his
15 ugly words.
16 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I have no
17 further questions.
18 Thank you, sir.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
20 JUDGE LIU: Any re-examination, Mr. Scott?
21 MR. SCOTT: Yes, Your Honour. I'll be very brief.
22 If I can have the usher's assistance, please, to hand out four
23 documents which we'll look at very quickly to the Defence counsel and to
24 the Judges, please.
25 I'll come to those momentarily, Mr. President. And I can assure
1 the Chamber -- there's only about one or two lines in each one that I will
2 just simply direct the witness's attention to.
3 Re-examined by Mr. Scott:
4 Q. Sir, directing your attention to some of the units -- the names of
5 some of the units that came to the Jablanica area at different times in
6 1993, is it correct that the so-called "Zuka's Unit" was from Sarajevo?
7 A. Yes. Actually, the first time I saw them was on Igman, which is a
8 mountain above Sarajevo. I don't know if they were in Sarajevo itself,
9 but they were on Mount Igman, very close to Sarajevo.
10 Q. In the interests of time, I'm going to mention three other units
11 to you. The Black Swans, the Silver Fox, the Igman's Wolves. Were those
12 all units from outside the Jablanica area?
13 A. Yes. Only Black Swans were never in Jablanica.
14 Q. Were you, sir, a member -- ever a member of any of those either
15 Zuka's Unit, Black Swans, Silver Fox, or Igman's Wolves? Were you ever a
16 member of those units?
17 A. Yes. They were here very often in 1993.
18 Q. Now, my question, sir, was: Were you a member of those units, any
19 of those units?
20 A. Of course not.
21 Q. Did you ever have any command responsibility concerning either --
22 or any of those four units?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Sir, I'm going to ask you to look at documents -- just so you'll
25 know what I'm referring torque I'll have to ask the translators to assist,
1 since these documents have only become relevant since lunchtime today.
2 611, you have that, sir. And if I could ask the -- direct the courtroom's
3 attention to the second page, toward the bottom of the page, item A. Sir,
4 I'm simply going to read a line to you. I'll ask for translation to
5 assist us. And then if you -- then I'll ask you a question if that's
7 Sir, this is a report from ECMM for the 27th of September, 1993.
8 Now, on the second page of that report, it says: "There were 640 Croats
9 in Jablanica which included 200 from Doljani who were living in the museum
10 in the town. They were not being treated badly by the Muslims but
11 conditions were very bad in the museum." Is that correct?
12 A. Yes, that is correct. However, let me tell you that the
13 conditions of life in Jablanica, generally speaking, were rather bad. My
14 family, as well as all the other families, spent the entire year in the
16 Q. Let me direct your attention, sir -- we're trying to move very
17 quickly. Forgive me. Direct your attention, please, to Exhibit 640.2.
18 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President, to page 3 of that report, item D.
19 Q. "Team M-1 Jablanica visited a refugee camp located in the museum
20 of the town. It houses some 400 Muslims and 300 Croats. Some of the
21 latter from Konjic was apparently promised transport to Medjugorje but
22 have since been interned. The conditions in the camp are extremely poor.
23 So were the conditions of the camp extremely poor for both for the 300
24 Croats and the 400 Muslims?
25 A. Yes. I have already said that.
1 MR. SCOTT: Exhibit 664.01, an ECMM report for the 5th of
2 November, 1993. The top of the second page, item 5, "Humanitarian."
3 Q. "Muhamed Maric, deputy president of the Jablanica War Presidency
4 said the majority of the refugees in the museum come from Doljani and
5 included Muslims and Croats. There are 20 prisoners of war, total number
6 not known, but all have free access to the town." Did both the Croat and
7 Muslim refugees living in the museum have free access to the town of
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And finally, Exhibit 664.5, an ECMM report for the 6th of
11 November, 1993 -- excuse me, 8th of November. "M-1 visited the refugee
12 and prisoner of war camp in the Jablanica museum where conditions were
13 described as appalling. Over 600 refugees, Muslim and Croat, are
14 accommodated in the building in addition to 41 Croat prisoners in five
15 cells. There is an urgent need for supplies, in particular clothing."
16 Sir, who was keeping humanitarian aid from coming to Jablanica at
17 that time?
18 A. The humanitarian aid would come through the territory of
19 Herceg-Bosna. So all the obstructions that were put in its way was put by
20 people from Herceg-Bosna. I believe that you have the report on that.
21 Q. And is it correct, sir, as you just told us, that your own family
22 lived in the Jablanica museum in 1993?
23 A. No, I didn't say that they lived in the museum but that they lived
24 in the basement of our building.
25 Q. Forgive me. And why were they living in the basement of the
1 building at that time?
2 A. In my building which has 40 apartments -- so my building was hit
3 by six artillery shells. And unfortunately the holes are still there.
4 Nobody has repaired them. The things are as they were then.
5 Q. Who --
6 A. With the holes.
7 Q. And who was shelling Jablanica at that time?
8 A. It was the HVO who shelled Jablanica.
9 MR. SCOTT: No further questions, Mr. President.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 Questioned by the Court:
12 JUDGE CLARK: Mr. Idrizovic, I just have one question -- well, if
13 we had time, I have many, but we don't. And you've been here a long
14 time. I'm still not entirely clear about the diary. And forgive me for
15 not being quick off the mark. Was the first document you saw the
16 photocopy of the typed version, or was it the actual handwritten journal
17 itself, or did you see both together?
18 A. I saw both.
19 JUDGE CLARK: And that brings me to, I think, a question that
20 would logically follow: Are you aware or did you yourself photocopy the
21 original handwritten journal at the time or close to the time that you
22 first saw it?
23 A. Mr. Sihirlic, whom I've already mentioned, brought the photocopied
24 blue-ink version, and obviously we first read that version, the original.
25 Alojz was our colleague from work, and we were interested to see what he
1 had written. That's why Zajko showed it to me immediately after he had
2 made the first photocopy of it.
3 JUDGE CLARK: And in spite of my promises, a third follow-up
4 question: So did you keep a photocopy of the handwritten journal as well
5 as a photocopy of the typed version with you before any documents were
6 handed to AID?
7 A. Yes.
8 JUDGE CLARK: And did you give your photocopy of the handwritten
9 journal to the OTP at any stage, or did you bring it with you?
10 A. I gave it to the OTP.
11 JUDGE CLARK: Thank you very much, Mr. Idrizovic. I have a lot of
12 questions to ask you, but I'm just going to have to read the documents and
13 digest the evidence over the last two days. Thank you.
14 JUDGE LIU: Well, thank you, witness, for coming here to give your
15 evidence. I'm sorry for keeping you here for almost a week. Now you are
16 free to go. The usher will show you out of the room. We all wish you a
17 pleasant journey back home.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
19 [The witness withdrew]
20 JUDGE LIU: Well, since we are at a very late stage, if both
21 parties have any documents to tender through this witness, I hope you
22 could submit the written submissions. We will consider it at a later
24 Yes, Mr. Scott.
25 MR. SCOTT: Sorry, Mr. President. It's Friday at 4.00. We'll
1 next be in court on Monday morning presumably. We don't know who Witness
2 X is and have received no summary, and we will not be prepared and we'll
3 object to proceeding with cross-examination until we've had adequate time
4 to have that information.
5 JUDGE LIU: Well, Mr. Krsnik has promised us to furnish us with
6 some information about the latest development of Witness X.
7 [Defence counsel confer]
8 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my learned friend will
9 have the complete information by the end of this day. We just didn't have
10 the time to do it yesterday. I don't want to keep you any longer. We are
11 all tired. I will act on your order today, and the rest of the
12 information I will submit in the written form to both you and the
13 Prosecutor today. I don't want to keep you any longer, and I don't want
14 to give you any more information today.
15 JUDGE LIU: Well, one moment.
16 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] And in order to satisfy my learned
17 friend, that X cannot appear on Monday. My learned friend knows who is
18 the witness on Monday. It cannot be X. I will inform you at a later
19 stage about my Witness X. I don't want to tackle this issue in an open
20 session, but I will send the information today, both through to my learned
21 friend in the Prosecution and to you, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Seric, are you on this subject or you are going to
23 change to another subject?
24 MR. SERIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I was going to talk
25 about the subject that has to do with your decision to carry out an
1 expertise by an expert witness. Since I am planning to travel to Zagreb,
2 I still don't have your decision, whether the rifle will be subject to an
3 expert opinion. So what is your decision? I have to prepare that for my
4 part of the rebuttal. I'm very short on time.
5 JUDGE LIU: We'll deal with it at a later stage.
6 Yes, Mr. Scott.
7 MR. SCOTT: Sorry, Mr. President. I wasn't finished --
8 JUDGE LIU: Your microphone, please.
9 MR. SCOTT: Sorry, Mr. President. I really wasn't finished with
10 the last issue. We can certainly go into private session for the name of
11 the witness. But in any event, I'm concerned then, and I will ask counsel
12 to please provide that information directly to the Office of the
13 Prosecutor, because with all respect to the bureaucracy, when things are
14 filed with the Registry, we sometimes don't get them for a day or two. If
15 it reaches the Registry today, we probably won't get it until Tuesday.
16 JUDGE LIU: Yes.
17 MR. SCOTT: So I'd ask Mr. Krsnik, please.
18 And Mr. President, I must also advise the Chamber, and I'm sure
19 it's an unpleasant topic because of the hour. But before we rest our
20 rebuttal case, we will need to advise you on some additional topics and
21 Mr. Prelec. I'm not suggesting we do that now, but I am just alerting you
22 that we have to cover that.
23 JUDGE LIU: Well, I think we have made a decision allowing
24 Mr. Prelec to give testimony in the rebuttal proceedings within a limited
1 MR. SCOTT: And that's what I had to ask you -- to address the
2 Chamber about.
3 JUDGE LIU: Yes, you may do that Monday.
4 Yes, Mr. Meek.
5 MR. MEEK: I only have one short question: Will Mr. Prelec be
6 testifying Monday morning?
7 JUDGE LIU: Yes.
8 Mr. Seric, I think this Chamber has already made a decision
9 concerning the expert opinions of the wooden rifle already. If this Trial
10 Chamber believes there's a need to call an expert witness, this Trial
11 Chamber will do it proprio motu on that very issue. Is that clear?
12 MR. SERIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Thank you for the
13 information. However, in order for -- to be able to prepare for this
14 expert witness, I'm planning to go to Zagreb on Tuesday, and I don't know
15 whether this expert witness is going to appear or not. I'm not an
16 expert. I am just a lawyer from a small country, and I have to consult
17 with other experts. I have to prepare myself for the possible testimony
18 by that expert. And if you refuse our proposal, then my effort will be
19 wasted. That's why I would like respectfully to be advised in due
20 course. I don't insist that it should be today, but if that could be on
21 Monday, I would be most grateful. Thank you very much.
22 JUDGE LIU: Well, I think this Trial Chamber has made a decision
23 that if we need the expert opinions, we'll call a witness proprio motu but
24 not from your side. I think that's very clear. So there's no need for
25 you to call any expert witness in this aspect.
1 So having said that, we'll resume next Monday.
2 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned
3 at 4.05 p.m., to be reconvened on Monday,
4 the 14th day of October, 2002, at 9.30 a.m.