Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 7647

1 Tuesday, 26 April 2005

2 [Open session]

3 --- Upon commencing at 2.25 p.m.

4 [The accused entered court]

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, good afternoon everybody. I apologise for the

6 delay, but I had an urgent meeting with one of the Judges of the Trial

7 Chamber, which unfortunately went beyond the time that I had expected. So

8 it's not a problem. We will probably finish early today in any case.

9 So, Madam Registrar, could you call the case, please.

10 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is Case Number

11 IT-03-68-T, the Prosecutor versus Naser Oric.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, and good afternoon to you.

13 Mr. Oric, can you follow the proceedings in your own language?

14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours, I can

15 follow the proceedings in my own language.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, and good afternoon to you. You may sit

17 down.

18 Appearances for the Prosecution.

19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

20 MR. WUBBEN: Good afternoon, Your Honours, and good afternoon to

21 the Defence. My name is Jan Wubben, lead counsel for the Prosecution.

22 I'm here together with co-counsel, Ms. Patricia Sellers, and Ms. Joanne

23 Richardson, as well as our case manager, Ms. Donnica Henry-Frijlink.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, and good afternoon to you and your team.

25 Appearances for Naser Oric.

Page 7648

1 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours, I'm

2 Vasvija Vidovic, together with Mr. John Jones, I represent Mr. Naser Oric.

3 Together with us are our legal assistant, Ms. Adisa Mehic, and our case

4 manager, Mr. Geoff Roberts, and good afternoon to our learned friends from

5 the Office of the Prosecutor.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Ms. Vidovic.

7 Are there any preliminaries? I see none.

8 MR. WUBBEN: No, Your Honour.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's bring the witness in, please and finish with

10 his testimony.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: While I was having the meeting with the other Judge

12 from Trial Chamber II, word reached me that you will be seeking protective

13 measures for tomorrow's witness, Mr. Wubben?

14 MR. WUBBEN: Yes, Your Honour, indeed. We are seeking for

15 protective measures in the same way as her colleague priorly had been

16 granted. That's for the witness for tomorrow, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: What do you mean as her colleague had been granted?

18 MR. WUBBEN: Well -- Your Honour, there might be a

19 misunderstanding. Do you --

20 JUDGE AGIUS: I'm reading from the transcript. There could well

21 be a misunderstanding.

22 MR. WUBBEN: Yeah. Your Honour, I will get back to this issue

23 before -- prior to the break if you allow me.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: Now, let's deal with it immediately after we finish

25 with this witness, at the end of this witness. In anticipation of the

Page 7649

1 motion I will expect from you in any case, written motion.

2 MR. WUBBEN: Yes --

3 JUDGE AGIUS: But do give us some anticipation so that we'll try

4 and economise on time as much as we can for tomorrow's sitting.

5 MR. WUBBEN: I will, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Thank you. I know, I'm sure you will.

7 Thanks.

8 Madam Usher, please.

9 [The witness entered court]

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Headphones. Mr. Becirovic, good afternoon, we are

11 proceeding with the cross-examination and hopefully finish with your

12 testimony today. You are still testifying under oath and pursuant to the

13 solemn declaration you gave when you started your testimony. And once

14 more, if you have any problems at any time with interpretation and with

15 receiving interpretation in any case, do draw our attention straight away.

16 Okay. Please take a seat, and Ms. Vidovic will proceed.


18 [Witness answered through interpreter]

19 Cross-examined by Ms. Vidovic: [Continued]

20 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Becirovic.

21 A. Good afternoon.

22 Q. I'll move on to my second group of questions straight away.

23 From the month of July 1992, you were a member of the service for

24 communications and information which was established on the 1st of July,

25 1992, when the War Presidency was established. Is that correct?

Page 7650

1 A. That is correct, although I learned that only in August 1992.

2 Q. Very well then. Thank you. From then on this service acted as a

3 part of the War Presidency. Isn't that correct?

4 A. Yes, it is.

5 Q. I'm going to show you a document.

6 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Can I please have the usher's

7 assistance in showing the witness a document issued by the War Presidency

8 of the municipality of Srebrenica. The number is 121/92 and the date is

9 12 November 1992. It was signed by the president of the War Presidency of

10 the municipality of Srebrenica, Mr. Hajrudin Avdic.

11 Q. Witness, can you please take a look at the document. The date

12 again is the 12th of November, 1992. I'm going to quote the decision

13 because the decision is very short.

14 "The War Presidency of the municipality of Srebrenica at its

15 session held on the 9th of November, 1992, adopted the following decision

16 on the establishment of a commission: A commission is to be established

17 consisting of the following: Nijad Masic, chairman; Avda Hasinovic

18 [phoen], a member, and Avdo Husic, member. The commission is duty-bound

19 to check the work of the communications and information service from the

20 moment of its establishment up to now and to submit a report to the War

21 Presidency. The decision will come into effect on the date of its issue."

22 It was signed by the president of the War Presidency, Mr. Hajrudin Avdic.

23 In connection with this, Mr. Becirovic, I would like to ask you as

24 follows: You remember, don't you, that in November 1992 this commission

25 was established to check the work of the communications and information

Page 7651

1 service and that this was done by the War Presidency. Do you remember

2 that?

3 A. Yes, I do.

4 Q. Hamed Alic submitted to the War Presidency a report on its work

5 [as interpreted], didn't he? Do you remember that?

6 A. Yes, he did.

7 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would like to tender

8 this exhibit into evidence.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: So this will be Defence Exhibit D2...


11 JUDGE AGIUS: 263.

12 One question to the witness following your question, Ms. Vidovic.

13 Your question was as a follow-up to showing this document to the witness:

14 "Hamed Alic submitted to the War Presidency a report on its work, didn't

15 he? Do you remember that?"

16 And the witness said: "Yes."

17 Hamed Alic is not one of the members of this commission. Why

18 would he submit a report or were you going to ask the question? I don't

19 know. If you were going to ask the question, you ask it; if not, I'll ask

20 it.

21 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it is possible that

22 this has been misinterpreted. My question was as following: Hamed Alic

23 submitted a report to the commission on his work, the commission of the

24 War Presidency, on his work.

25 Q. Is that how you understood me?

Page 7652

1 A. Yes. That's how I understood you.

2 JUDGE AGIUS: So it wasn't a report on behalf of this commission?

3 What Hamed Alic -- what Hamed Alic sent or submitted to the War Presidency

4 was not a report of this commission that was appointed by decision of the

5 9th November, was it -- or did he?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Hamed Alic submitted a

7 report on the work of the service to the commission that was established.

8 And pursuant to that, the commission submitted their report on the work.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay --

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of the service.

11 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honour,

12 for the clarification.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.

14 Yes, Ms. Vidovic.

15 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. In other words, Mr. Becirovic, the War Presidency checked the work

17 of the communications and information service, did it not?

18 A. Yes, it did.

19 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, has this exhibit been

20 given an exhibit number?

21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, it has, Ms. Vidovic, D263.

22 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Now I would kindly ask the usher to

23 show the witness another document. This is D242. D242.

24 Q. Witness, can you please take a look at the document. This is a

25 document issued by the War Presidency of the municipality of Srebrenica.

Page 7653

1 The number is 77/92 and the date is 21 September 1992. This report was

2 submitted to the Presidency of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina to

3 the armed forces Main Staff and to the general public. Can you please

4 take a look at the document. In connection with this document I'm going

5 to ask you some questions.

6 From Srebrenica information was sent to the Presidency of Bosnia

7 and Herzegovina, to the Main Staff of the armed forces, and to the general

8 public via the service of communications and information of the

9 municipality of Srebrenica. That is via your service. Is that correct?

10 A. Yes, it is.

11 Q. This is reflected in this document, and in your testimony so far

12 you have confirmed this on several occasions?

13 A. Yes, that is correct.

14 Q. This information was commonly sent by the War Presidency?

15 A. You are right.

16 Q. In your testimony you have also told us that in Sarajevo Murat

17 Efendic, a member of the War Presidency of Srebrenica, stayed in Sarajevo

18 for a while. Are you -- am I right in saying that?

19 A. Yes, you are.

20 Q. As a matter of fact, Murat Efendic was the contact person between

21 the War Presidency of Srebrenica and the Presidency and the government in

22 Sarajevo. Am I right?

23 A. Yes, you're right. And I have already said that on several

24 occasions during the course of my testimony.

25 Q. Regular contact with Murat Efendic were maintained by the War

Page 7654

1 Presidency of Srebrenica. Is that correct?

2 A. Yes, it is.

3 Q. These contacts between the War Presidency of Srebrenica and Murat

4 Efendic were carried out only technically with your help. Is that

5 correct?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. As a matter of fact, you were the person who just conveyed the

8 information by the War Presidency to Murat Efendic in Sarajevo. Isn't

9 that correct?

10 A. Yes, it is.

11 Q. These were not reports issued by the Territorial Defence Staff of

12 Srebrenica or by Naser Oric. Am I right?

13 A. I am not aware that either the staff or Naser Oric sent

14 information. I know that information was sent by the War Presidency of

15 the municipality of Srebrenica.

16 Q. So it would be absolutely wrong to say that Naser Oric had regular

17 contacts with Murat Efendic via the radio station that you manned. Am I

18 right in saying that?

19 A. You are right.

20 Q. As far as I understood your testimony, you yourself collected a

21 lot of information and you sent this information to Sarajevo or to the

22 general public. You collected this information talking to people who had

23 arrived in Srebrenica. Is that correct?

24 A. Yes, that is correct. For the most part, it was in my contacts

25 with the wounded and their escorts.

Page 7655

1 Q. This information that was forwarded and convoyed by way of the

2 radio station, you did not receive it from any of the commands or

3 commanders. Am I right in saying that?

4 A. Yes, you're right. While Hamed Alic was in Srebrenica, he

5 received that kind of information and he collected it in a certain way.

6 And I only conveyed this information. When he left for Tuzla, I myself

7 collected this information.

8 Q. You are not aware that Hamed Alic received this information from

9 the commands or their commanders?

10 A. You're right.

11 Q. You mentioned that you sent some reports to Sarajevo or Tuzla that

12 were relative to the events in certain villages and relative to some

13 attacks. In the way you described these events, you received information

14 about the events in Fakovici. Is that correct?

15 A. Yes, it is. I would sooner say that this was not reports but just

16 information. This is how I perceived that, and I still perceive that.

17 Q. As for the events in Bjelovac, you received information from the

18 wounded who had arrived from that area?

19 A. Yes, you're right.

20 Q. You did not receive this information from any military command or

21 the so-called military command?

22 A. No. I never received any information from any military command,

23 because at that time I knew that the military organisation was so

24 inadequate, so poor, that I did not even believe that they would be able

25 to provide me with any information.

Page 7656

1 Q. As for Kravica, you also received information about Kravica from

2 the wounded that had arrived in Srebrenica?

3 A. Yes, that is correct.

4 Q. The accuracy of the information that you relayed depended largely

5 on the reliability of the information that you received from other people,

6 from the wounded, for example?

7 A. You're absolutely right.

8 Q. And now let me ask you something else.

9 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I would kindly ask the usher to show

10 the witness a document issued by the War Presidency of Srebrenica

11 municipality. The number is 100/92 and the date is 31 October 1992. This

12 is a report issued by the service for communications and information and

13 sent to the Main Staff of the armed forces of Bosnia and Herzegovina and

14 the general public.

15 Q. Let me quote the document: "The aggressor has again used the air

16 force in the Srebrenica free territory. Today at around 10.30 an

17 agricultural plain from the Serbian Chetnik armada took off from an

18 improvised heliport of Bratunac and dropped its deadly cargo over the

19 villages of Budak and Pale it also machine-gunned the defender's positions

20 on the Budak-Pale line. Fortunately no one was killed or wounded. This

21 was followed by a fierce artillery attack in which the industrial zone in

22 Potocari was most affected. They fired at these positions as well as the

23 areas of Konjevic Polje and Cerska from their strongholds in the vicinity

24 of Bratunac and Rogac hill. The enemies devastating artillery fire was

25 also directed at the areas of Osmace and Kragljivoda from their well-known

Page 7657

1 positions on Tara mountain and the plateau of the Bajina Basta

2 hydroelectric power plant. As well as Jezero and the occupied territory.

3 Several civilians were wounded and this -- in this shelling, and a

4 5-year-old girl succumbed to her wounds. Nonetheless the defenders of

5 Srebrenica Konjevic Polje and Cerska are firmly holding their positions."

6 Mr. Becirovic, this is one of the reports that were sent via the

7 service for communications and information to Sarajevo, to the Main Staff

8 of the armed forces of Bosnia-Herzegovina, amongst others. Do you agree

9 with me that this is indeed where it went?

10 A. Yes. One of the addressees is the Main Staff of the armed forces

11 of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

12 Q. This document was received by the Ministry of Defence of Bosnia

13 and Herzegovina because it bears its stamp?

14 A. Yes, that is correct.

15 Q. It was sent by the War Presidency of Srebrenica municipality,

16 wasn't it?

17 A. Yes, it was.

18 Q. Neither the service nor you personally were duty-bound by the

19 Territorial Defence staff to send reports to the Main Staff of the armed

20 forces. Am I right?

21 A. Yes, you are.

22 Q. Thank you very much.

23 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this document

24 into evidence, if it could be given an exhibit number, please.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. This will be Exhibit Number D264.

Page 7658

1 One question, Witness: Your department, though I may call it like

2 that, the communications and reporting service of Srebrenica municipality,

3 would send this message via radio to an amateur radio -- to a ham operator

4 or -- who would -- would he receive instructions to draw it up in writing?

5 Would he receive it in writing or would he receive it --

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour --

7 JUDGE AGIUS: How would he receive it? Because he would hear the

8 words, no?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You are right. I've already said

10 that this operator would either handwrite it or tape it by means of a tape

11 recorder. And then, if possible, he would type it and the document would

12 receive the form you have in front of you. In Sarajevo, Murat Efendic was

13 duty-bound to take the information to the addressees indicated on the

14 document. There was no other way to send information from Srebrenica.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: So let's take -- let me take you through the whole

16 process.

17 Who would come to your office with this message to be relayed to

18 Sarajevo? Who would it be, for example, in this case who would it be?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In this particular case, it would be

20 Hamed Alic. At that time, Hamed was the head of the service for

21 communications and information. He would bring the information to me. He

22 would bring me a piece of paper, and with ham radio operators in Sarajevo

23 I had the so-called skads, or slots, when we would communicate. One slot

24 was in the morning and one slot was in the afternoon. And during those

25 slots when we talked, I would forward this information if I could because

Page 7659

1 it very often happened that the information that was sent from Srebrenica

2 was disrupted by the Serbian forces. That's why I was very often forced

3 to send one piece of information in several piecemeals over a number of

4 hours. I had to change frequencies in order to complete the job, in order

5 to send the entire information.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: And in drawing in message to be relayed, in drawing

7 it up, this message to be relayed to Sarajevo, Hamed Alic would receive

8 the information from whom?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] For the most part, he collected

10 information the same way I did once he left. I don't know whether he

11 contacted the War Presidency every time he drafted a piece of information.

12 However, he did it more often than I did it later on, once he left, in

13 agreement with the president of the War Presidency, in other words.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: But his job was to receive information and then

15 relay it over to Sarajevo, wasn't it?

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Right.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: So on military matters, who would give him

18 information? Where would he get the information from?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In most cases in the same way I did

20 when he left, in the hospital, from the wounded who had arrived, or from

21 their escorts, those people who arrived together with the wounded.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: So you would then relay this message in whole or in

23 pieces, I can understand you why, to a contact, ham radio contact, that

24 you would have, that you would establish. I take it from what you are

25 telling me that in spite of the difficulties that there obviously were,

Page 7660

1 this was pretty much well-organised in that I see here that you relayed it

2 on the 1st of November. And on the same day, it was received by the

3 Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. So whoever

4 received your radio communication, in whole or in piece, transcribed it,

5 reduced it into writing, and handed it over to the Ministry of Defence on

6 the same day. So do I take it that the system was pretty well-organised,

7 or am I wrong in my assumption?

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. If you think that

9 this is good organisation, then yes, we were well-organised. However, it

10 very often happened that the radio operator who was sitting in Sarajevo

11 could not receive or forward information on the same day. Sometimes he

12 would do it on the following day. However, the goal was always achieved.

13 The goal was for the information to arrive at the addressee's address, and

14 it eventually did.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. And let's take it -- in this case, the

16 person who received the message on the other end and he had his own code

17 or signal 4, N4SGS. He would be known at the ministry in Sarajevo,

18 wouldn't he, because otherwise anyone could walk in with a typed message

19 and say, I have received this from Srebrenica municipality today. So it

20 had to be someone known and someone trusted?

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Probably. I don't know where this

22 person worked, but it seems to me that this information was faxed through.

23 If I am not mistaken, there is a telephone number in the upper left

24 corner, the number of the telephone from which this information was sent

25 to the Main Staff of the armed forces.

Page 7661

1 JUDGE AGIUS: What I mean to say, because earlier on in your

2 testimony some days -- a few days back you told us that you were the one

3 who managed to establish contact with some ham radio operators.

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. So you selected these persons?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't understand. What do you

7 mean? I established contact with anybody who -- who answered me in

8 Sarajevo. I didn't know people in Sarajevo. I don't know who -- I didn't

9 know who was on the other end. I did not have any alternative.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: But if you were going to transmit to and through

11 that person confidential and top-secret messages for the Ministry of

12 Defence, wouldn't you take the burden or anyone else take the burden of

13 checking who the person was at the other end was and whether he was

14 trustworthy or not, whether he would be trusted or not. It could be a

15 Serb for all that matter with ham radio address in Sarajevo. You wouldn't

16 be able to know whether he was a Serb or a Muslim. Would you trust

17 sending him a message like this, not knowing whether he was a Serb or a

18 Muslim and whether he would relay this to where you wanted it to get?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, it could happen. However,

20 Murat Efendic was in Sarajevo. In most cases he was the one who received

21 this information and took it personally to the addressees; and if not

22 personally, then he would fax it through.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, was Murat Efendic informed as to who your

24 contacts were so that he could check on them, whether they were

25 trustworthy or not?

Page 7662












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

13 English transcripts.













Page 7663

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course. He was sitting next to

2 the ham radio operator while the message was being transmitted.

3 JUDGE AGIUS: So the way it operated, you would inform the ham

4 radio operator that you would be transmitting a message and he would call

5 Murat Efendic to be present. And then you would know exactly what time

6 you would relay the message and that would be the time when Murat Efendic

7 will be there present next to the ham radio operator?

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is correct. I've already said

9 that we had two allocated slots. One was in the morning and the other one

10 was in the afternoon. During those slots, Murat Efendic would go to the

11 place where the ham radio was, irrespective of the fact whether there was

12 something transmitted or not. And we talked about the situation in town

13 because he had relatives over there still.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. I think that's clear enough.

15 Judge Eser.

16 Sorry, Madam Vidovic, we've taken over, but I think this needed to

17 be cleared up.

18 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. Thank you

19 for bringing these matters up.

20 JUDGE ESER: I still have some problems to understand the

21 proceeding. Now, if you take D264, am I correct in assuming that the

22 original of this report was produced in Sarajevo? It was written in

23 Sarajevo? Is that correct?

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.

25 JUDGE ESER: Now, when you collected -- and it was on the 31st of

Page 7664

1 October, at that time I think the other person was still in Srebrenica.

2 Now, this is a rather long report. Was it given to you in writing or did

3 Alic tell you what you should transmit by radio to Sarajevo? Was there

4 something existing in writing which you transmitted?

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I received all the reports in

6 writing, whether typewritten or handwritten. These written reports would

7 then be placed in a file in Srebrenica. That's what I would do.

8 Maybe you noticed that I always put the date and time on all of my

9 reports as well as the call signal of the addressee. Here you don't have

10 anything like that because the whole thing was drawn up in Sarajevo. I

11 may have sent it one day previously, but the day it was actually received

12 by the operator, Murat Efendic, in Sarajevo, they then prepared this to be

13 faxed through.

14 JUDGE ESER: And if we compare it, let's say, to Prosecution

15 Exhibit P310 where you had your signature there. This was faxed, so do I

16 understand it correctly that in this case you received the report already

17 written and then you faxed it to Sarajevo? Is that correct?

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. I would radio information.

19 Information of documents containing information on my signature were found

20 in Srebrenica and were brought over from Srebrenica. Information such as

21 a specific copy is something that was found in Sarajevo in the archives,

22 but the substance is the same, except that this specific document was not

23 in Srebrenica, one in which I entered my own information on the date and

24 time that it was forwarded. I was in no position to fax information from

25 Srebrenica for the simple reason that the phone lines were down at the

Page 7665

1 time. As I've explained, I would read reports into a microphone, and then

2 the Sarajevo-based operator would transcribe this information or tape it

3 first and transcribe it later.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: I think there may have been a slight

5 misunderstanding.

6 You would report that during the examination-in-chief

7 you were shown some documents which at the top right corner showed some

8 words plus your signature plus a date and on the top left corner showed a

9 telephone number which you yourself said that that should indicate that

10 that document was faxed. There were a number of documents that you faxed

11 from Srebrenica to Sarajevo, weren't there, until it was possible to fax?

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: And then after certain moment, you couldn't fax

14 anymore?

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. As long as documents were

16 being sent by fax, you didn't have my signature or the time and date. The

17 moment we could no longer fax things through, when we started radioing

18 messages, that's when I started writing these things down. You couldn't

19 find a -- another document with all this information that I've now spoken

20 about or my signature.

21 JUDGE ESER: But what did you write down? Did you write down the

22 report or only that you have done something with the report, which you

23 received from somebody else?

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Information usually found on such

25 documents as I have been shown, if I produced the documents, I wrote them

Page 7666

1 like that. And I said that they were in fact information. And the fact

2 that a report says "information," that for me was the most natural name to

3 give this sort of report or any information, indeed, to be forwarded.

4 JUDGE ESER: So it may be the case that some of the documents,

5 exhibits, have been drafted by you and then transmitted by radio -- via

6 radio to Sarajevo. Is that correct?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

8 JUDGE ESER: And as long as Alic still was in Srebrenica, you

9 would take reports written by him to you and you transmitted them to

10 Sarajevo. Is that correct?

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: I think that's clear enough. Now it has cleared

13 much of what seemed to be unclear until a few minutes ago.

14 Sorry again to you, Madam Vidovic, but I think it was necessary.

15 Let's proceed.

16 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

17 Q. Mr. Becirovic, at any rate, this person who was receiving

18 information over in Sarajevo could not on their own write down the sender.

19 They would always be given accurate information on who the sender was and

20 what the substance was of what you were sending? In other words, this

21 person would never make things up or added things. Would I be right in

22 saying this?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. During your testimony on Friday, you were shown several documents

25 by the Prosecutor, and a minute ago you were asked about these documents

Page 7667

1 by the Chamber. These documents said "municipal staff of the armed forces

2 of Srebrenica," in the heading, communications and information service,

3 and the subject of these documents were these reports or information on

4 the situation in Srebrenica. It is in relation to this that I would like

5 to ask you a number of questions. I would also like to show you some of

6 these documents as well as some other documents.

7 First and foremost, Mr. Becirovic, 12 years later you no longer

8 remember the specific headings that these documents had, the documents,

9 call them appeals or whatever else you like, that you were sending from

10 Srebrenica to Sarajevo. Would that be a fair statement?

11 A. Even back then in 1992 and 1993, this didn't strike me as

12 essential. The important thing was to send information out of Srebrenica.

13 To the extent that I can now remember, all information went through the

14 communications and information service in the War Presidency of Srebrenica

15 municipality.

16 Q. You testified about things that you were asked by the OTP, and you

17 said that you never received from the Territorial Defence Staff any sort

18 of documents. That's correct, isn't it?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. It is your conclusion that the reports that say "staff" in the

21 heading and that you were shown by the Prosecutor were sent by you to

22 Sarajevo, based on the memory and what the substance was of those

23 documents. Would that be a fair statement?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. It is also your conclusion now that you sent those documents based

Page 7668

1 on what you believed, that those documents have something that resemble

2 your signature or an abbreviated form of your signature as well as other

3 details that you claim might have been written by you. Mr. Becirovic,

4 would you agree with me when I say that after the fall of Srebrenica, many

5 documents were left behind that bore your signature or samples of your

6 handwriting or your initials. Wouldn't that be a fair statement?

7 A. Yes, indeed. If I may just clarify, I would like to say there was

8 a document I was shown here and I noticed certain information in it that I

9 was not want to write down.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, one moment.

11 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, if I may.


13 MS. RICHARDSON: It's apparent that we may be going down a line of

14 questioning regarding documents without any exhibit number or having the

15 witness look at the particular document with any reference, so it's

16 beginning to be a little bit ambiguous using the word document and having

17 the witness testify about, you know, anything with respect to that

18 document, be it his signature or information. I think it would be best

19 for these proceedings if we begin to be more specific.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, you're 100 per cent right, Ms. Richardson, but

21 that's how they will be treated. If they remain ambiguous, that's how

22 they will be treated. So coming from an adversarial system like I do, you

23 know that I will not interfere. Thank you for your observation. At the

24 end of the day, you have opened Ms. Vidovic's eyes.

25 MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you, Your Honour.

Page 7669

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Madam Vidovic.

2 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I will be using

3 specific documents very soon. Right now I'm talking about all the

4 documents of a military or political nature that were left behind in

5 Srebrenica.

6 Q. Witness, these documents that remained in Srebrenica that bore

7 your signature, samples of your handwriting, or initials, whatever they

8 were, you are aware that they fell into the hands of the Serb forces and

9 the Serb intelligence services after the fall of Srebrenica. Wouldn't

10 that be right?

11 A. Yes.

12 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Can I have the usher's assistance

13 now to show the witness --

14 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, Madam Vidovic and Mr. Becirovic. For

15 example, you said "yes" before she hadn't even finished her question.

16 Please allow an interval of time between question and answer because we

17 need to follow, we need to have what you're saying translated to us, and

18 we can't -- and you're also creating difficulties for the interpreters.

19 So please allow Madam Vidovic to finish her question, allow a short

20 interval of time, then you give your answer, and then after a short

21 interval of time you proceed to the next question, Madam Vidovic.

22 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, can I have the usher's

23 assistance. I would like to show the witness document 1081621.

24 I would like to say that we obtained these documents at the last

25 minute, and we were in no position to secure an English translation. But

Page 7670

1 we will have these two in due course. They will be submitted to the

2 Chamber as soon as tomorrow, therefore can we have these documents placed

3 on the ELMO, please. I will be quoting so that the interpreters can

4 follow what I am saying.

5 Can the usher please show the witness document --

6 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. I can't follow you. I can't follow

7 you, Ms. Vidovic. You said, at least from what I have on the transcript

8 here, document 1081621. Which one is that? Because the -- it's

9 definitely not the first two pages. No, no, the second two -- the second

10 batch is 01801622.

11 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, my apologies, Your Honour.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: And then 1623, and it's not 1080, it's 0180. So

13 let's clear this up so we can follow.

14 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] 018, yes. Thank you, Your Honours.

15 This is 01801621.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.

17 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] This is a document of the Republic

18 of Bosnia and Herzegovina, War Presidency of Srebrenica municipality. The

19 number is 80/92, and the date is 25th of September, 1992.

20 The subject is: Report. The document was signed by the

21 communications and information service of Srebrenica municipality.

22 Your Honours, and this goes to the witness, too, we have added the

23 following number, P134 to the document, and the ERN is 01787841.

24 This document bears the following heading: Staff of the armed

25 forces of Srebrenica, communications and information service, 80/92, the

Page 7671

1 date is 25th of September, 1992. It was signed also by the communications

2 and informations service of Srebrenica municipality.

3 Q. Witness, if you could look at this carefully, both these documents

4 carefully, and please if you could just read -- if you could please read

5 the following document first, 01787841, which is OTP number bearing the

6 following heading: Srebrenica municipal staff. Please, Witness, can you

7 have a look at this document.

8 Witness, can you now please have a look at the other document if

9 you've finished looking at this one.

10 Witness, can you please now look at the other document 01801621.

11 The heading is: War Presidency of Srebrenica municipality. The number is

12 the same, 80/92, and the date is also the same, the 25th of September,

13 1992.

14 I will ask you a number of questions in relation to this. First

15 of all, do you agree -- please look at the protocol numbers and the date.

16 Do you agree that both these documents have the same protocol number and

17 the same date and that they were both signed by the same service, the

18 information -- the communications and information service of Srebrenica

19 municipality. Would I be right in stating that?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Can you please go through the other document too. I'm putting it

22 to you that the substance of this other document is identical to the

23 previous one. Can you have a look, please. This is of great consequence

24 to us. Can you please compare the two documents in terms of substance.

25 Witness, do you agree that in terms of substance these two

Page 7672

1 documents are identical?

2 A. Your Honours, I read halfway through the first and halfway through

3 the second document. I haven't finished reading either. What I read

4 appears to be entirely identical. It's the same information. It's the

5 same events. It's the same report. But there is a difference in the

6 heading. The sender is different.

7 Q. I'm about to ask you something about that, Witness. The only

8 difference between these two consists in the fact that one document has

9 the War Presidency in the heading and the other document has the municipal

10 staff -- the municipal TO -- the municipal staff of the TO in the heading.

11 But if you could please now look at 01801621, if you could please look at

12 the upper right corner.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: [Previous translation continues]... we are -- this

14 is getting all very much confused. Let's clear this up first of all.

15 Let's agree that the text of the message is the same. Do you

16 agree Defence, Prosecution, and Witness?

17 MS. RICHARDSON: Well, Your Honour, at this time we don't have the

18 English. We're trying to see if it --

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah, but even if you look --

20 MS. RICHARDSON: At 134.

21 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't have the English either of the first one,

22 but if I look at the B/C/S text, I can easily see that it is exactly the

23 same.

24 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, in fact maybe I can be of some

25 assistance. We located P134 and this is the English and it appears to be

Page 7673

1 the English of what the Defence exhibit is using at the moment, which is

2 01787841. And in fact, as I read the English, it is -- we can agree to

3 the fact that there is a difference in the sender, one is --

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah. But for the time being, the text I'm saying.

5 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, we can agree on the text, certainly.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: Do we agree that the sender is different? In the

7 first one, which has 01787841, it seems to be Republic of Bosnia and

8 Herzegovina and the "opstina ratno predsjednistvo" which is the

9 territorial staff of the Srebrenica municipality, while the other one is

10 the ratno -- the War Presidency of the -- of Srebrenica. Do you agree on

11 this?

12 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I agree. I have, as I said, the

13 English, and I do agree with what Your Honour has just stated.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Do you agree that the protocol number 80/92

15 appears to be the same on both documents?

16 MS. RICHARDSON: Indeed, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you agree also that the date of this document

18 seems to be or purports to be the 25th of September of 1992 in both cases?

19 MS. RICHARDSON: That's agreed, Your Honour.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Do you agree that the subject matter is

21 report in both instances?

22 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, Your Honour.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you agree that the addressees, who should have

24 received these two messages, are different, Your Honour?

25 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, Your Honour.

Page 7674

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. And let's go through those. Let's start with

2 the first of these documents, 01787841. The first addressee is GS

3 Sarajevo, which means, if anyone can translate to me and to others. G --

4 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] General Staff, Main Staff.

5 MS. RICHARDSON: [Previous translations continues]... can I be of

6 assistance to the Bench by handing up -- excuse me -- as I said before, we

7 have the English translation. Maybe the registrar can hand the Bench

8 of --

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Of P143 --

10 MS. RICHARDSON: 134, yes.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: So while this first document purports to have this

12 report transmitted to these three persons, GS Oruzanih Snaga in Sarajevo,

13 the Main Staff in Sarajevo, and then OKS Oruzanih Snaga in Tuzla, the Main

14 Staff in Tuzla. And then thirdly, publicity. The other document is meant

15 to be transmitted to the Presidency of BiH, the Main Staff of the armed

16 forces of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and publicity. Do you

17 agree on that?

18 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] [No interpretation].

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. So now we have cleared that up.

20 Let me clear a few other things. Do you agree that the second of

21 these documents, the one which has the ERN number 01801621 at the top

22 right left-hand corner shows that -- or indicates that it was faxed and

23 that it was faxed successfully; in other words, that it -- the machine

24 from which it was faxed showed that it had been transmitted -- that it

25 went through, in other words. Do you --

Page 7675

1 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, Your Honour.

2 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you agree with that, Defence?

3 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you agree that on the second document -- on the

5 first document 841, 7841, there is no indication that this document was

6 faxed?

7 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: But there is indication on the top right-hand corner

9 that it was relayed by radio to -- at 16 hours to Ilijas, who happens to

10 be the same guy we saw earlier, with this call signal. I don't need to

11 repeat it. You have it there. Through Nada as well with the call signal.

12 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, Your Honour, the Prosecution agrees.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: So now your question, Madam Vidovic.

14 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

15 Q. Mr. Becirovic, we used this document with the War Presidency in

16 the heading, the Srebrenica War Presidency. Could you now please look at

17 the upper right corner. Would you agree that this document bears the

18 incoming stamp of the Bosnia and Herzegovina armed forces, and that it was

19 received on the 26th of September, 1992?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Can you now please turn the page and look at the lower left

22 corner. It says "received by ham radio 4M4SGS, Sarajevo received by

23 Ilijas Omerovic."

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. The document also bears the stamp of the town secretariat for

Page 7676

1 national defence, the OID service, and the control sector?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Is it possible that Mr. Omerovic worked with the town's

4 secretariat for national defence?

5 A. Yes. Judging by the stamp, it strikes me as possible.

6 Q. Is it possible that it was from the secretariat that he faxed this

7 stamp to the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina. If you go back to page 1, it

8 says: "From GSNO, Sarajevo." GSNO stands for the town secretariat for

9 national defence. Is that correct, Mr. Becirovic?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Mr. Becirovic, would I be right to state that this in fact was the

12 document which made it to Sarajevo, the one bearing the War Presidency of

13 Srebrenica in its heading? Doesn't the incoming stamp of the army appear

14 to confirm that as well as the incoming stamp of the town's secretariat

15 for national defence, as well as Ilijas Omerovic's signature?

16 A. Yes, you're quite right.

17 Q. Thank you. So --

18 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, because this needs some clarification.

19 Look at the first one of these documents, the ones which have ERN

20 number 01787841, which at the top right-hand corner shows in handwriting

21 the time and date when it's supposed to have been transmitted. If I were

22 to ask you: Where do you think the Prosecution recovered this document,

23 would it be from Sarajevo or would it be from Srebrenica? What would you

24 answer?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In Srebrenica.

Page 7677

1 JUDGE AGIUS: And that's what I thought you would answer. And if

2 you look at the second document, the one with the stamp of the army, where

3 would you say that the Prosecution recovered this document, from

4 Srebrenica or from Sarajevo?

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sarajevo.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, let's proceed.

7 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

8 Q. Mr. Becirovic, as a matter of fact, the ham radio station that

9 Ilijas Omerovic operated, please look at its indication at the end of the

10 document that the Judge has just shown to you and of which you have said

11 that it was located in Sarajevo. Can you look at the second page of the

12 document where it says received through the ham radio station. Please

13 look at that. The ham radio station which was manned by Ilijas Omerovic

14 had the marking 4N4SGS, and this is reflected in this document?

15 A. You're right.

16 Q. Can you please look at the second document, the one that you said

17 that it was probably located in Srebrenica; in its heading is the armed

18 forces staff. Please, it says here "at 1600 hours the radio station 4SGS

19 Ilijas," and in this connection I'm going to ask you as follows. You were

20 working in Srebrenica and you knew exactly which one was Mr. Ilija

21 Omerovic's radio station, and you would not have made a mistake in noting

22 the designating mark of that station. Am I right?

23 A. Yes. I knew the name and the code of that station.

24 Q. Do you agree with me that this number here in document bearing

25 number 01787841 is wrong? It is not the sign of the station that Ilija

Page 7678












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

13 English transcripts.













Page 7679

1 Omerovic manned?

2 A. I have to explain. I don't remember whether I put the entire name

3 or the entire sign of the ham radio station at all times. I did on most

4 occasions. On some occasions, I didn't. So I can't be sure of that as I

5 sit here. It is possible, though, that somebody, not knowing what the

6 sign was, put a wrong sign on this document.

7 Q. You certainly were familiar with the signs of all the radio

8 stations, otherwise you would not have been able to get in touch with all

9 those radio stations. You would not have put a wrong code for any of the

10 radio stations. Is that correct?

11 A. It is.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: One question, pardon me, Madam Vidovic.

13 Now, in your country, I don't know how it operated in your

14 country, but I suspect that it operates pretty much the same worldwide.

15 Ham radio operator licensed, in other words, registered ham radio operator

16 in Sarajevo, would he have a call sign which is indicative of Sarajevo,

17 while, for example, another ham radio operator from Belgrade would have a

18 call signal that could identify with Belgrade or a call signal that would

19 identify with him a particular location? Would SGS, for example, mean

20 anything to you in a call sign?

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not much, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: So there is no reason why someone who wouldn't know

23 the call sign of this Ilija Omerovic would put an SGS at the end of the

24 call signal?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Those who are aware of the entire

Page 7680

1 code -- let me explain. There is an association of ham radio stations in

2 Bosnia and Herzegovina that operated in 1992 and 1993 and later on.

3 Before the war, if you wanted to call a radio station in the former

4 Yugoslavia, you had to put YU before the radio station's number. And all

5 the ham radio operators from other states, when they heard "YU," they knew

6 that the radio club was located somewhere in the territory of the former

7 Yugoslavia.

8 From the beginning of the war, the association of ham radio

9 operators of Bosnia-Herzegovina decided that the call sign for

10 Bosnia-Herzegovina would be 4N. The rest of the sign belonged to every

11 particular radio club or radio station. It was the common practice by all

12 the ham radio operators to introduce themselves during the first contact

13 and say the entire code, irrespective of whether the contact was

14 established within the state or with somebody outside of the state.

15 In further communication, they avoided to say the sign for the

16 state in order to be as brief as possible in their communication. It was

17 a common practice, though, to use the entire code signal minus the two

18 letters or numbers designating the country.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: So basically if you look at this document, what's

20 missing is the first two letters or two digits, 4N, which would be common

21 to all ham operators over there?

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In Bosnia and Herzegovina, yes.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: And the rest -- in other words, this is not as has

24 been suggested someone who didn't know the call signal of Ilijas and tried

25 to guess? This is someone who knew exactly that the call signal of Ilijas

Page 7681

1 was 4N4SGS and left out the first two digits, 4N, as was the practice and

2 still is the practice in many countries?

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, you're right.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: I think we've cleared that up as well. I'm sorry to

5 intervene like this, but I think I need to intervene to keep --

6 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: [Previous translation continues]... because these

8 are technical matters that we know very little about and anyone who is

9 following knows probably less. So --

10 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. It helps us

11 indeed.

12 Q. Witness, this report or both reports that you saw were drafted by

13 the same author because the contents of the two are the same in any case.

14 Wouldn't you agree with that?

15 A. Yes, I would. You're right.

16 Q. Thank you very much.

17 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would like to tender

18 this document into evidence -- actually, I would like to tender both

19 documents in evidence under one number, despite the fact that one already

20 bears a P number.

21 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. We don't have a problem with that.

22 One last question before we do that. I don't know -- and I'm

23 asking this question because I honestly cannot remember. Looking at the

24 one document which ends with ERN number 7841, at the top right-hand

25 corner, fourth handwritten line next to the date, to the right-hand side

Page 7682

1 of the date, there seems to be a signature. Do you know whose signature

2 is that? Can you recognise that signature?

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it was my custom to put

4 my shortened signature on the documents, and this resembles my shortened

5 signature.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.

7 So this will be Defence Exhibit D265, no?

8 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: I need a clip because I was playing with it.

10 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

11 Q. Mr. Becirovic --

12 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Just one more question before the

13 break, Your Honour.

14 Q. Mr. Becirovic, you told us that this resembles your signature, but

15 you're not sure that this indeed is your signature. Isn't that correct?

16 A. In this particular case I'm not sure.

17 Q. Thank you.

18 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I will be showing the

19 witness two more documents, and I believe that this is a good time for a

20 break because I am not able to do it within the three minutes.

21 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. We'll have a 25-minute break starting

22 from now. Thank you.

23 --- Recess taken at 3.42 p.m.

24 --- On resuming at 4.18 p.m.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Wubben.

Page 7683

1 MR. WUBBEN: Your Honour, if you allow me, it's just a short

2 procedural matter. We just filed before 4.00 a motion for protective

3 measures and we have here a courtesy copy.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you. I appreciate that.

5 MR. WUBBEN: We already handed over the courtesy copy to the

6 Defence and the Defence already expressed a positive response, a very

7 positive response towards to me, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. If that is the case, perhaps we can

9 decide it here and now orally.

10 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we have considered the

11 Prosecutor's motion, and our position is that we will not object to the

12 protective measures due to the very specific job that the witness is

13 engaged in and that mean that he might be exposed to some unpleasant

14 situations. That's why we don't object.

15 [Trial Chamber confers]

16 JUDGE AGIUS: So the Trial Chamber seized with a confidential

17 motion -- let's go into private session, please. The witness, I think,

18 needs to leave the courtroom for a while. It will only be one minute, the

19 time to go out and come in again.

20 [The witness stands down]

21 [Private session]

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 7684

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 [Open session]

15 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in the absence of the

16 witness, just for the record --

17 [The witness entered court]

18 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] -- we have been able to provide the

19 English version of document 01787841, and we have handed it over to Madam

20 Registrar. That's the document that we have just discussed.

21 JUDGE AGIUS: For which the previous document forms part of it,

22 okay? In the previous document Madam Vidovic said the two documents be

23 put together and be given one number. This will form part of that

24 document. Thank you.

25 Yes. Your next question, Madam Vidovic. Thank you,

Page 7685

1 Madam Vidovic.

2 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would like the usher

3 to provide the witness with the Prosecutor's document P307.

4 Q. Mr. Becirovic, the Prosecutor has shown you this document already.

5 It is true, isn't it, that this document contains in the upper right

6 corner the indication, communications officer. This is something that you

7 yourself never used in communication?

8 A. You are right. I have already said that in the course of my

9 testimony.

10 Q. Will you agree with me that you can't be sure that the rest of the

11 document is credible, and I'm primarily referring to your signature. Are

12 you in agreement with me when I say that you cannot be sure that the

13 signature on the document is yours?

14 A. Yes, I agree with you.

15 Q. Thank you very much.

16 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] And now I would kindly ask the usher

17 to show the witness another document, P79.


19 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. Please take a look at the document once you receive it. This is

21 allegedly a document sent by the armed forces of Srebrenica. The number

22 is 15/92, and the date is 19th September 1992.

23 Mr. Becirovic, could you please look at the part after the

24 word "subject," the title of the document. Do you agree with me it says

25 here: "Draft decision regarding the setup of departments and appointing

Page 7686

1 chiefs of these departments in the operations staff of the armed forces of

2 Srebrenica"?

3 A. This is what I says here.

4 Q. This document therefore is a proposal to the War Presidency to

5 issue a decision. Do you agree that this is exactly what the title of the

6 document indicates?

7 A. Yes, I do.

8 Q. The Prosecutor has shown you this document and you have answered

9 that during the year of 1999 [as interpreted] there was no communications

10 department in the staff, and Muhamed Alic [as interpreted] did not work in

11 the staff but in the centre for communications and information in the

12 municipality of Srebrenica. In other words, this proposal regarding Hamed

13 Alic has never taken off the ground. Am I right?

14 A. As far as I know you're right.

15 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] We no longer need this document.

16 And now can the witness be shown another document. The number is

17 01787798.

18 Q. Witness, can you please take a look at the document. This is a

19 document issued by the War Presidency of municipality of Srebrenica. The

20 number is 47/92, and the date is 16 August 1992. It was signed by

21 Mr. Hajrudin Avdic on behalf of the War Presidency. It is a short

22 document. I am going to read it to you.

23 It says here order: The employees Evrim Vrankovina [phoen] and

24 Sabahudin Gluhij to go to Suceska local commune on the 17th of August,

25 1992 in order to make a video recording of the war damage and general

Page 7687

1 situation in the local commune of Suceska."

2 In your testimony you have told us that the two persons who were

3 recording were members of the service for communications and information,

4 and that they were charged with recording of damaged factories and houses,

5 and they were Sabahudin Gluhij and Evrim Vrankovina. Isn't that correct?

6 A. Yes, it is.

7 Q. Do you remember that together with them throughout the year 1992

8 and 1993, in addition to Nijaz Masic, there was also Mustafa Sacirovic who

9 worked with them. Do you remember Mustafa Sacirovic?

10 A. I remember him. He was --

11 Q. Do you remember that he worked there?

12 A. Yes, I remember that he worked there. As far as I know, he did

13 not start at the very beginning. He was there maybe in October and

14 November, and in addition to them there was another person, a girl

15 Elmedina Jamakovic.

16 Q. So all these people you have just referred to were gathering

17 information for the War Presidency, weren't they?

18 A. Yes, you're quite right.

19 Q. They would be given orders to make video recordings and to gather

20 information on war crimes, and these orders were issued by the War

21 Presidency. Isn't that the case?

22 A. Yes.

23 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I move for this

24 document to be admitted into evidence.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: So this document is being received and marked as

Page 7688

1 document -- Defence Document D266.

2 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Can I have Madam Usher's assistance

3 again. I would like to show the witness an OTP exhibit, and the number

4 is P160. The document bears the following number: 01239547. The

5 document purports to be a document of the armed forces of the subregion.

6 The number is 194/92, and the date is 27 December 1992. The signature is

7 communications and informations service of the subregion.

8 Q. First and foremost, Mr. Becirovic, do you agree with me that you

9 think that you sent this document based on your familiarity with the

10 substance of this document and based on your belief that in the upper

11 right corner we can find your signature. Would I be right in saying that?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. It's true, isn't it, that the communications and information

14 service of the subregion never existed in Srebrenica. There was no such

15 thing there?

16 A. Yes, you're right.

17 Q. Furthermore, you never put a stamp on any of the documents that

18 you sent. Is that correct?

19 A. Yes, that's correct.

20 Q. Thank you.

21 Witness, another question related to this document. Are you

22 certain -- is there any way for you to be certain that the initial that

23 this document bears belongs to you? Can you be positive about this?

24 A. No, I can't be positive.

25 Q. Thank you.

Page 7689

1 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] The document is no longer required.

2 If I can have the usher's assistance, please, to show the witness

3 yet another document.

4 Q. This is a document by the Srebrenica municipality subregion

5 Bratunac/Vlasenica. The number is 118/9, the 18th of November, 1992.

6 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, subregion of Bratunac, Ministry of

7 Defence, BH army, armed forces headquarters, and the public. I'm just

8 quoting a portion of the document to save time. "Faced with the same

9 problems and endangered by the same enemy, armed forces of Srebrenica,

10 Bratunac, Vlasenica, and Zvornik gathered and put themselves under a

11 single command, because these areas had been endangered by both Serbia and

12 the extremist faction of the SDS for seven months already, and they have

13 been completely surrounded. Recently the aggressor has piled up their

14 armoured mechanised units along the Drina River and especially in Skelani

15 and on the bridge on the Drina near Bratunac."

16 Mr. Becirovic, let us leave aside for the time being the question

17 whether this subregion, as a form of organisation, ever really got off the

18 ground. There is something else that I want to ask you about this

19 document. This document was sent to Sarajevo using a ham radio. Isn't

20 that a fact? Is this something you can tell just by looking at the

21 document?

22 A. Yes, you're quite right.

23 Q. Since November 1992 and onwards, you were in touch with Mr. Hamed

24 Salihovic, weren't you?

25 A. Yes, you're right.

Page 7690

1 Q. He sent several reports like this to Sarajevo using your services

2 in his capacity as the president of the War Presidency of the Srebrenica

3 subregion. Isn't that a fact?

4 A. There were just several reports, not many though.

5 Q. It is safe to say that there was several such reports, isn't it?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. There was never any other service that was sending these reports

8 with the exception of the information service, of which you were an

9 employee. There was no other subregional service of that kind. Am I

10 right?

11 A. Yes, you're right. There was no other service like that.

12 Q. His reports about the disastrous situation of the free areas of

13 the Podravanje region were mostly produced in February and March of 1993.

14 Would I be right in saying that? Do you remember that?

15 A. I'm afraid I can't be very specific about the time frame. The

16 fact is, this was at least the way I remember, after the beginning of

17 1993, it was in 1993.

18 Q. These were actually appeals launched to both the domestic public

19 and the world, and he signed these in his capacity as president of the

20 Presidency of the subregion. Am I right?

21 A. Yes.

22 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I move that this

23 document be assigned a number.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: So this document, Madam Vidovic, with its English --

25 corresponding English translation into English will be marked as Defence

Page 7691

1 Exhibit 267 and 267E respectively.

2 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

3 Q. Mr. Becirovic, along the same lines I have another question. It's

4 true, isn't it, that Mr. Salihovic at some point early in November 1992

5 used your radio to send a report to the Presidency of Bosnia and

6 Herzegovina and the general public, saying that he had been elected

7 president of the subregion's War Presidency. Would I be right in stating

8 that?

9 A. Yes, you're quite right.

10 Q. Now for something different. You testified that the ham radio

11 communication lines were open and entirely unprotected in terms of

12 confidential information. Is that correct?

13 A. Yes. I believe I said that a number of times.

14 Q. Thank you. You have described listening in to the Serb forces

15 using radios to talk about attacks. Isn't that right?

16 A. Yes. That was in late May 1992.

17 Q. Therefore, you heard your enemy and their communications. You

18 recorded this and passed it on to someone. Isn't that right?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Any confidential reports sent in this way could always be

21 intercepted by the enemy. That's a fair statement, isn't it, as long as

22 they were radioed?

23 A. Yes, that's a fair statement.

24 Q. Mr. Oric never used this line for military communications because

25 you had pointed out to him the danger of being overheard or intercepted by

Page 7692

1 the enemy. Isn't that correct?

2 A. Yes. You're quite correct there.

3 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, if I may. At this point with

4 respect to this question, I think it needs to be clear that Mr. -- if the

5 question is that Naser Oric never used military communication, I think it

6 should be with respect to -- in this witness's presence, I think if you go

7 global, then this witness is just speculating at this point.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: It's obviously as far as his being made available

9 for such communication is concerned. He is not speaking --

10 You don't know whether actually Mr. Oric communicated with anyone

11 else on military matters not involving you? You can't say that, can you?

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] But he didn't.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: How do you know --

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It wasn't possible for him to

15 communicate.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: We saw him yesterday -- or at least the Prosecution

17 showed videos purporting to show him, you identified him as being Naser

18 Oric, with a hand-held radio in his hands. What was he doing with it,

19 playing with it? We also saw a dish antenna nearby. What was that for?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I did ID Naser Oric yesterday,

21 and the device he was using is a short-range device. And in addition to

22 seeing Naser Oric carrying this kind of equipment, I also saw Ibrahim

23 Mandzic. He may have been somewhere nearby.

24 Talking about the satellite dish, it was not part of the equipment

25 that was ever used by Naser Oric. I suppose this was something used by

Page 7693

1 the blue helmets or blue berets, if I can call them that. I can't tell

2 you who these people were precisely. They may have been someone from


4 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.

5 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. Thank you

6 for this clarification.

7 Q. Mr. Becirovic, this is what my previous question was about. Oric

8 was not using your line --

9 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Because, Your Honours, I was talking

10 about Mr. Becirovic's line specifically.

11 Q. -- your line for military communication because you had pointed

12 out to him the danger being intercepted by the enemy. Am I right?

13 A. Yes.

14 Your Honours, I believed it was my duty whenever anyone came to

15 use my services and to use the radio that I should tell them that anything

16 they said could easily be overheard or intercepted. Anything -- any

17 traffic on the same frequency, including intercepted by the Serbs. I

18 wanted to get people to talk about their families because that's what they

19 were usually interested in. That's what they usually wanted, but nothing

20 else.

21 Q. Thank you, Witness. Yesterday you identified Mr. Oric holding a

22 type of radio device in his hand. You just told us that this was a

23 short-range, low-power radio device. If you know, Mr. Becirovic, can you

24 please specify the range of that device, or that type of device, if you

25 like.

Page 7694












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

13 English transcripts.













Page 7695

1 A. Those are low-power, low-range radios. If you have in mind the

2 lie of the land in Srebrenica, the range could have been 10 kilometres at

3 the most.

4 Q. Thank you. I would like now to go back to the kind of

5 communication that you were in charge of. Mr. Oric talked to Izetbegovic,

6 Halilovic, and a person known as Munja who was from the 2nd Corps. The

7 reason was that the pressure by the Serb forces during those talks had

8 mounted to such an extent that it seemed very likely that Srebrenica would

9 fall soon. Wasn't that the case?

10 A. Yes. I didn't identify Munja as someone who was necessarily in

11 the 2nd Corps at the time. I was not aware of that. It was based on the

12 gist of their conversation that I came to the conclusion that he may have

13 been a member of the regional staff or of the Territorial Defence.

14 Q. Thank you for that explanation, Witness.

15 At the time these conversations occurred, I'm talking about the

16 beginning of 1993 up to the run-up to the demilitarisation, so at this

17 time Srebrenica was faced with the threat of genocide, wasn't it?

18 A. You are entirely right.

19 Q. At the time the conversations took place, Mr. Oric was in fact

20 quite conscious of the possibility that he was being intercepted, but

21 there was no choice. He had no other way to come out and seek help for

22 the people of Srebrenica. Isn't that a fact?

23 A. Yes, definitely.

24 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour --

25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Richardson.

Page 7696

1 MS. RICHARDSON: I would object that this is all speculation at

2 this point. What -- I think the witness to testify to what his knowledge

3 was of the ability, but outside of that I think that's pure speculation.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: And it's one step short of speculation,

5 Ms. Richardson. It stands to logic what the question was -- the way the

6 question has been put is really asking the witness to confirm that it was

7 logical for Mr. Oric to suspect or feel sure that any conversation would

8 be intercepted. And the obvious answer is yes.

9 MS. RICHARDSON: Well, Your Honour, my objection is to the line

10 which went into whether or not Naser Oric had a choice, and that's where

11 my objection lies.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: I think the witness has answered that already.

13 Yes, Ms. Vidovic.

14 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

15 Q. You used to see Mr. Oric at the time because he would come to see

16 you to get in touch with his family. Isn't that a fact?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Whenever you met him throughout the war, he wore a beard, didn't

19 he?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Mr. Becirovic, you stated that Oric would come to Srebrenica every

22 now and then. Do you know that he actually spent the best part of his

23 time in Potocari. Is this something you're familiar with?

24 A. Yes, I know about that.

25 Q. Do you agree with me when I say that Potocari was a part of the

Page 7697

1 defence line that was highly sensitive because of being subjected on a

2 daily basis to attacks from the Bratunac area and the Kravica area?

3 A. You are right.

4 Q. If we leave aside what happened in Srebrenica in 1995, we would be

5 entitled to say that the most difficult period in Srebrenica was that

6 between mid-January 1993 and the 1993 demilitarisation, and you personally

7 witnessed all these events. Am I right?

8 A. I would shift this time frame slightly, and I would put the

9 beginning at late November and early December 1992 and then all the way to

10 the demilitarisation period. If ever there was hell on earth, it was

11 Srebrenica at the time under consideration. People were starving in a

12 quite literal sense.

13 Q. And this is because since November, as you suggest, or December

14 1992 the Srebrenica area was being subjected to enormous pressure by the

15 Serb forces, including those from Serbia?

16 A. Yes, you are right.

17 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Can I have the usher's assistance

18 now, please. I would like to show the witness the following document.

19 This is Defence Exhibit D184. This is a document produced by the War

20 Presidency of the Srebrenica municipality. The number is 168/93, and the

21 date is the 17th of January, 1993.

22 Q. Witness, please have a look. I will quote a portion of this

23 document. "Since the 1st of January this year" --

24 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Just for your reference, Your

25 Honours, this is the second passage of the document.

Page 7698

1 Q. And that applies to you, Witness. It says: "The artillery

2 attacks have been intensified since January 1st this year, and the former

3 Yugoslav army air forces have been carrying out bombardments of the

4 Srebrenica area every day and aircraft have been taking off from the

5 Ponikve airport near Uzice. The world knows precious little about this.

6 In night between the 15th and the 16th of January, 1993, the Uzice Corps

7 crossed the bridge in Skelani from Bajina Basta with 12 tanks, seven APCs,

8 and several trucks in order to carry out an attack against the territory

9 held by the defenders. There has been heavy fighting since that moment

10 and this fighting goes on as we speak. In the above-mentioned combat, the

11 aggressor has been using the air forces and the result is that over 100

12 civilians have been killed. The aggressor's advance has been halted, but

13 fresh forces are now being brought over from Serbia and sent into combat."

14 Mr. Becirovic, do you agree that this document by the War

15 Presidency faithfully reflects the situation throughout the Srebrenica

16 area at the time?

17 A. Yes. Maybe it was even worse than this, if anything. I see no

18 reference here to the spreading diseases.

19 Q. Thank you, Mr. Becirovic. From the period described in this

20 document to midway through 1993, there was the so-called winter offensive

21 that was launched by the Serb forces. Is this something you're familiar

22 with?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. There were attacks on Srebrenica and the surrounding villages that

25 had remained free up to that point throughout February and March 1993.

Page 7699

1 These attacks came from everywhere, didn't they?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. The pressure was enormous. One by one, the Muslim villages fell.

4 A. Yes, you are right.

5 Q. Yet again, people were killed and the Muslims were expelled from

6 the area?

7 A. You are right.

8 Q. There ensued a great amount of panic among the Muslims of

9 Srebrenica and those who were in the villages around Srebrenica that were

10 still free. Wasn't that the case?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. You will agree with me, won't you, when I say that throughout this

13 period, January, February, and March 1993, Oric hardly ever, if at all,

14 came to Srebrenica itself?

15 A. You are right.

16 Q. He was where the going was really tough at the time. That's where

17 he was. Isn't that the case?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Thank you. Now for something different. You knew Hazim Omerovic,

20 didn't you, his nickname was Mrki. Did you know this person, Hazim

21 Omerovic, also known as Mrki?

22 A. I can't remember really. There were several people who were

23 called that. If you can specify, please.

24 Q. Hazim Omerovic, Mrki. Do you remember if Hazim Omerovic, Mrki,

25 was someone who looked very much like Naser Oric? Was there another such

Page 7700

1 person in Srebrenica, I mean Hazim Omerovic from Voljevica?

2 A. Yes, there was a look-alike, and the person's name was Hazim. I'm

3 not sure about the person's last name, but it might as well have been

4 Omerovic. The nickname was Mrki.

5 Q. People who didn't know them very well would not have found it very

6 difficult to confuse them, to mix them up?

7 A. Yes. That would have been quite possible.

8 Q. You heard, didn't you, that Hazim played all sorts of practical

9 jokes about this and that he was in the habit of falsely identifying

10 himself as Naser Oric. This is something that was going on in Srebrenica

11 at the time. Did you hear anything about this?

12 A. Yes, you're quite right.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Can you give us some instances, for example,

14 Mr. Becirovic, some instances of these practical jokes played by this

15 Mrki?

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's been a long time since. I'm

17 not sure I can remember. But he would very often accost girls and

18 introduce himself as Naser Oric.


20 Ms. Madam Vidovic.

21 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. Hazim Omerovic, also known as Mrki, was close to Akif Ustic,

23 wasn't he? They were close. Do you know about that?

24 A. Yes, I do, you're right.

25 Q. They spent a lot of time together and this person spent a lot of

Page 7701

1 time in Srebrenica itself, didn't he?

2 A. Yes. He had been expelled from Voljevica. He used to spend a lot

3 of time with Akif Ustic, and he was a member of his group.

4 Q. I would like to go back to radio communication.

5 Radio communication involved a serious problem, and that was how

6 to supply electric power to operate the radio. Am I right?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Until November 1992, there had been a single generator that was

9 used for the purposes of the hospital, and this generator was used to

10 provide power to everyone else, wasn't it?

11 A. Yes, that's true.

12 Q. It was as late as November 1992 at the Krizevici River that

13 another electric engine was improvised, a makeshift one, that produced

14 about 300 kilowatts of electrical energy and it was not a stable source of

15 electricity, was it?

16 A. Yes. This is something I've already explained in my testimony.

17 Q. Until as late as the arrival of UNPROFOR and when UNPROFOR allowed

18 you to use their sources of electricity, this remained the only source.

19 Is that correct?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. You said that the package radio communication only took off in

22 early March 1993. Is that not right?

23 A. Yes, that's right.

24 Q. This package line was used by a variety of people, including the

25 War Presidency and all the other authorities, or is this perhaps something

Page 7702

1 that you don't know about because that wasn't where you worked?

2 A. I do know that it was used by the War Presidency and other

3 authorities in Srebrenica.

4 Q. Thank you.

5 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Can I have the usher's assistance

6 now, please, to show the witness the following document.

7 This is a document issued by the ministry of the secretariat for

8 national defence of the municipality of Bratunac. The date is 11 July

9 1994. It was signed by the secretary of the municipal secretariat for

10 defence, and the computer number is 01838911. It was signed by Mr. Sadik

11 Omerovic.

12 Q. Can you please take a look at this document. We are not

13 interested in the contents of the document, Mr. Becirovic. Just look at

14 the left lower corner of this document. It says here, and I

15 quote: "Agrees with the package, chairman of the War Presidency of

16 Srebrenica municipality, Fahrudin Salihovic."

17 Is it true that Mr. Fahrudin Salihovic was the president of the

18 War Presidency at the time in question?

19 A. Yes, it is true.

20 Q. Mr. Becirovic, then it would be absolutely wrong to say that

21 Mr. Oric controlled the package communication?

22 A. You're right.

23 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would like to tender

24 this document into evidence.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: This will be 268.

Page 7703

1 One question, Mr. Becirovic. Would it make you comment further if

2 I pointed out that this document refers to what seems to Bratunac

3 municipality and not to Srebrenica as such? This is -- submits such

4 report for Bratunac municipality on personnel, livestock, structure and

5 everything.

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're right there. As far as I

7 know, in 1994 after the demilitarisation or long after it, the population

8 of Bratunac who had been expelled to Srebrenica tried to establish their

9 bodies of power in the villages of Cizmici and Bljecava, which belonged to

10 the municipality of Bratunac. I believe that the reason for that -- that

11 it is for that reason that they sent this document to Tuzla.

12 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.

14 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

15 Q. However, whoever sent this document, Mr. Becirovic, had to have

16 the agreement of the president of the War Presidency of Srebrenica, and

17 this was done?

18 A. Yes, that's true.

19 Q. In your testimony, you have told us that before the war 17 local

20 communes, or some of them which did not have telephone lines, before the

21 war that is, had Iskra radio stations. Did I understand you well? You

22 were talking about the prewar period, weren't you?

23 A. Yes, you're right.

24 Q. You don't know the lot of these prewar radio stations of the Iskra

25 type, save for those you mentioned explicitly in your testimony yesterday?

Page 7704

1 A. You're right.

2 Q. The system of radio communication between the villages in

3 Srebrenica municipality in the course of 1992 and early 1993 was never set

4 up. Am I right?

5 A. You're right.

6 Q. You have testified about having made operational a ham radio

7 station. You did not make operational any military radio equipment?

8 A. Yes. That is before the second half of 1993.

9 Q. In other words, no military radio equipment or any such equipment

10 existed in Srebrenica before the second half of 1993. Is that correct?

11 A. You're right.

12 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Richardson.

14 MS. RICHARDSON: I really do hate to interrupt, but perhaps if we

15 could have clarification of what military radio equipment is being

16 referred to. There are a number of different communications systems that

17 this witness testified to.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, you are right. You're 100 per cent right.

19 Yes, Ms. Vidovic.

20 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

21 Q. Before the war you operated communication equipment, and you can

22 make a difference between the military communication equipment and

23 ordinary ham radio stations. Am I right in claiming that?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. So you will agree with me that the former JNA had special military

Page 7705

1 radio equipment and military radio stations?

2 A. You're right.

3 Q. Nothing like that existed in Srebrenica before the second half of

4 1993. Am I right?

5 A. Yes, you are.

6 Q. You have also told us in the course of your testimony that you had

7 contacts with many ham radio operators, sometimes even with those who were

8 located in Serbia?

9 A. Yes, you're right, I had such contacts.

10 Q. Within that context, are you familiar with the name Milos

11 Okanovic? Does that name ring any bells?

12 A. No, it doesn't ring any bells at all.

13 Q. Thank you. I'll go back to some other forms of communication.

14 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I would kindly ask the usher to show

15 the witness Prosecutor's document number P7.

16 This document bears the ERN number 01239517, which purposes to be

17 the document of the armed forces of Srebrenica. The number is 51/92, and

18 the date is 31 October 1992.

19 Q. Witness, please take a careful look at this document. I will read

20 the relevant part to you. "Pursuant to the legally binding decree on the

21 armed forces of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina (Official Gazette of

22 the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina 4/92) I hereby order all units of the

23 armed forces of Srebrenica are to be assigned with the following codes:

24 Armed forces staff, Suceska Brigade, Potocari Brigade, Kragljivoda

25 Independent Battalion, and Srebrenica," and so on and so forth. Next to

Page 7706

1 each of these names there is a number.

2 Let me ask you this: It is true, isn't it, that on the 31st of

3 October, or around that time, there were no brigades in the territory of

4 Sebesic. Do you agree with that?

5 A. You are absolutely right.

6 Q. There was no mortar unit. Srebrenica did not have a mortar unit

7 or platoon. Am I right?

8 A. You're right.

9 Q. There was no armoured company. Am I right?

10 A. You're right, there wasn't.

11 Q. There was not an engineering platoon either?

12 A. You're right. There wasn't anything like that.

13 Q. There was no communications platoon on the 31st of October, 1992,

14 or around that time?

15 A. No, there was none.

16 Q. Could you please take a look at the numbers next to the names in

17 this document. You never saw these codes or numbers being used in the

18 communication between any of the units. You actually never heard of units

19 bearing certain number codes before the demilitarisation?

20 A. You're right. I'm not aware of that.

21 Q. And something else with regard to this document. The heading of

22 this document of the introduction into it makes a reference to the decree

23 law on the armed forces of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and it

24 mentions the Official Gazette of the Republic of Bosnia and

25 Herzegovina 4/92.

Page 7707

1 Mr. Becirovic, before the 31st of October, 1992, you never

2 received any Official Gazette or a decree law either from Tuzla or from

3 Sarajevo by means of the communication equipment that were at the disposal

4 of your service. Is that correct?

5 A. That is correct. We haven't received any such thing.

6 Q. A courier service between Srebrenica and other Muslim villages or

7 Srebrenica and Tuzla was exceptionally dangerous. Did you hear that many

8 people were killed in the attempt to transmit a message in that way?

9 A. You are right.

10 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I would kindly ask the usher to show

11 the witness --

12 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, one moment, because correct me if I'm

13 wrong but I am under the impression that yesterday when he was being asked

14 about courier service for military communications he said that he's not

15 aware that there was any. I stand to be corrected, but that's -- that's

16 what I think he said yesterday. So if there were no couriers or courier

17 service, how can he answer your question that many people died in trying

18 to deliver messages? I don't know. It's up to you. I'm not going to ask

19 any question myself, Ms. Vidovic.

20 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the gist of my question

21 was as follows: Did many men get killed in the attempt to act as

22 couriers? That was the gist of my question. I'm not claiming that there

23 were couriers, but that many men got killed in the attempt to carry

24 messages. I don't know how this was recorded. In any case, I'm going to

25 clarify this with the witness.

Page 7708

1 Q. Witness, did you hear, and I'm not claiming that there were

2 courier services, but -- actually, I'm going to try to prove the contrary

3 with the help of some documents.

4 My question is: Did you hear that certain people did try to carry

5 messages and that they got killed in that attempt?

6 JUDGE AGIUS: He has already answered that question in the

7 affirmative.

8 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Thank you.

9 And now I would ask the usher to show the witness an excerpt from

10 P84. The page bearing the follow number: 02115085.

11 This is page 32 in the English version of this document, Your

12 Honour.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Ms. Vidovic.

14 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

15 Q. Mr. Becirovic, it is -- this is about a meeting of the armed

16 forces which was held on the 4th of December, 1992. Would you please take

17 a look at the first sentence on this page. This sentence reads: "Zulfo

18 is saying, It is our big shortcoming that we go into action without any

19 means of communication."

20 Were you able to read that?

21 A. Without your help, I wouldn't be able to read this.

22 Q. It is rather illegible, I agree. Once again, it is a big mistake

23 to launch any actions without communication means. Then Smajo, then Ahmo

24 says, and I quote: "Do you see here a paragraph where Ahmo is saying --

25 do you see the name Ahmo and I will quote. He says: "Our biggest

Page 7709

1 shortcoming is communications. However, large sets of RUPs, mobile radio

2 communications stations with batteries cannot be carried around."

3 In connection with this, Mr. Becirovic, let me ask you this: This

4 document reflects the real situation of communication between the

5 units in the course of 1992 as late as December 1992. Is that correct?

6 A. In my testimony so far I have tried to explain and I have stated

7 that to my knowledge there were no communication means used by something

8 that I didn't call the staff of the armed forces. I referred to those as

9 poorly organised groups of people in the territory of Srebrenica.

10 Q. Very well then. Let me ask you something else. This document

11 confirms, doesn't it, that these people would go into action without any

12 communication means?

13 A. You're right there.

14 Q. And let me ask you something else now about the RUP stations.

15 When it comes to RUP stations, in order for them to be operational they

16 had to have batteries?

17 A. Yes. The RUP set had to contain a battery for their power supply.

18 Q. And for that you had to have electricity to charge those

19 batteries?

20 A. Yes, you're right.

21 Q. In the Muslim villages around Srebrenica in the course of 1992 up

22 to the demilitarisation in 1993, there was no electricity at all.

23 Witness, leave aside Srebrenica. I'm asking you about the villages around

24 Srebrenica. They did not have electricity. Are you aware of that?

25 A. Yes, I am. You're right. And I would say even after the

Page 7710












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

13 English transcripts.













Page 7711

1 occupation of Srebrenica.

2 Q. It says here that you said "after the occupation of Srebrenica."

3 Are you referring to the fall of Srebrenica?

4 A. I said until after the occupation of Srebrenica, until the moment

5 people started coming back in 1997, 1998, and 1999. All of these villages

6 had been burned down, and there was no electricity in those areas.

7 Q. Very well then. You don't know whether it was possible at all for

8 the batteries to be charged, for the RUP stations to be operational if

9 there were any, or do you perhaps think that this was not at all possible?

10 A. It was not at all possible to charge those batteries if they

11 existed. I'm not aware of the existence of RUP stations.

12 Q. In your testimony you have also told us that the RUP frequency was

13 not enough to reach Suceska from Srebrenica due to the lay of the hilly

14 terrain. Is that correct?

15 A. Yes, it is.

16 Q. It is also true that the entire area of Srebrenica and the

17 surrounding villages is rather hilly?

18 A. You're right.

19 Q. The RUP communication in such areas, even if the RUP stations

20 could have been operational, would have been practically impossible. Am I

21 right?

22 A. Yes, you are, and this is for two reasons. First of all is the

23 source of energy and the second is the layout of the ground.

24 Q. You told us that the RUP station in Srebrenica was made

25 operational only after the end of 1993. Is that correct?

Page 7712

1 A. Yes, this is exactly what I said.

2 Q. The attempt for the villages to become connected started in August

3 1993, that is after the demilitarisation. Is that correct?

4 A. Yes, it is.

5 Q. The -- when we're talking about communication suing a RUP, if this

6 communication had been possible, it would have been open and exposed to

7 the interception by the enemy. Isn't that correct?

8 A. Yes, it is.

9 [Defence counsel confer]

10 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

11 Q. In your testimony yesterday, the Prosecutor asked you about the

12 Atlas radio. The question was whether it was possible to communicate

13 between Srebrenica and Cerska using this type of radio.

14 Let me put it this way: Many things are possible, Mr. Becirovic,

15 however you are not aware of the fact that somebody from Srebrenica used

16 an Atlas radio in order to communicate with Cerska and vice versa. Am I

17 right?

18 A. In my testimony I said that in December 1992 an Atlas radio

19 station 210X was mounted in Cerska. The intention was to try and send the

20 information to Tuzla and Sarajevo about the situation in that area.

21 Because of the layout of the ground, communication with Sarajevo was not

22 possible. On several occasions, I communicated with that radio station in

23 Cerska from Srebrenica. The reception was very bad, but the fact is that

24 during that brief period of time while that Atlas radio existed in Cerska

25 before Cerska fell, we could establish several contacts.

Page 7713

1 Q. Mr. Oric did not communicate with Cerska in this way?

2 A. No. Mr. Oric did not communicate with this way. I also said that

3 the information that I received from Cerska I forwarded to the general

4 public. I would summarise the information and I would join it with the

5 information that I myself collected in Srebrenica.

6 Q. Mr. Becirovic, again we are talking about your appeals and reports

7 on the very difficult situation that prevailed in Cerska that was faced

8 with a major disaster?

9 A. Yes, you're right.

10 Q. Now for something different. Mr. Becirovic, you know, don't you,

11 that in Tuzla there was a group of people from the Srebrenica area, people

12 who had left the Srebrenica area at the beginning of the war. These

13 people established a body whose name was also the Srebrenica Territorial

14 Defence Staff. Am I right?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. It's true, isn't it, that this body was in touch with the district

17 defence staff and the authorities in Tuzla. Do you have any information

18 on that?

19 A. Yes. Based on information that I obtained later, it was in the

20 second half of 1993.

21 Q. If this body in Tuzla that called itself the Srebrenica

22 Territorial Defence Staff received any documents in May, June, and July

23 1992 and later, this would not mean that these documents were really

24 received by the Territorial Defence Staff in Srebrenica, would it?

25 A. No, it wouldn't.

Page 7714

1 Q. Throughout 1992 you never received anything through this

2 Territorial Defence Staff that was based in Tuzla via communications

3 equipment, you received nothing from the district defence staff in Tuzla

4 or any other bodies based in Tuzla, did you?

5 A. Earlier I testified that communication was only one way, from

6 Srebrenica out and not back into Srebrenica. Nothing from Sarajevo or

7 Tuzla ever reached Srebrenica.

8 Q. Thank you, Witness.

9 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Can I have the usher's assistance

10 now. I would like to show the witness a document. This is an OTP

11 document. The number is P29. This is P29. It's a document by the

12 district defence staff -- Territorial Defence Staff is Tuzla. The number

13 is 01/31. The date is 28th of May, 1992. The ERN number is 01819864.

14 Q. Witness, can you please go through this document in its entirety

15 and please pay close attention. The title of this document is Acts and

16 Behaviour of the Members of the Territorial Defence Unit in relation to

17 the population during combat activities. This is an order signed by

18 commander Lieutenant Colonel Zeljko Knez. This document is an order to

19 stop the burnings, the lootings of both mobile and immobile property of

20 the population during and after combat by TO units in the areas where

21 there were combat activities.

22 Please, Witness, if you could have a look at this document. Once

23 you've looked at that, can you please look at the left corner. It says,

24 delivered to the Tuzla municipal staff, Zivinice, Lukavac, abbreviation,

25 Kalesija, Srebrenica, Gradacac, Banovici and files.

Page 7715

1 First of all, Witness, you have never seen this document before,

2 have you?

3 A. Yes, you're quite right.

4 Q. In late May 1992, the communications and information service of

5 which you were on employee had not even been set up, had it?

6 A. Yes, that's right.

7 Q. Hamed Alic set up a communications line to the outside world in

8 late June 1992, and he used a fax machine. Am I right?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Can you please look at this document closely now. This was not

11 something that was faxed to Srebrenica and received by fax in Srebrenica?

12 A. I'm not aware of any such document having been received.

13 Q. Look at the document itself. There is nothing to suggest, unlike

14 some of the previous documents, that this document was received by fax?

15 A. Yes, you're quite right.

16 Q. Therefore, the information service did not receive this document

17 in Srebrenica, not in any way in fact. Would I be right in saying that?

18 A. Yes.

19 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour --

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Richardson.

21 MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you. I'm just saying this calls for

22 speculation. We've gone through the fax machine. Now the witness is

23 being asked if this has ever been received in Srebrenica. As far as he

24 knows, through the mechanism he's aware of.


Page 7716

1 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, my colleague has just

2 drawn my attention to something. There was no way I said what the

3 transcript reflects. I asked the witness the following question: This

4 document never came to Srebrenica through the communications and

5 information service that you worked for? I was very accurate.

6 Q. Wasn't that my question, Witness? Wasn't that your understanding

7 of my question?

8 A. Yes, that was my understanding.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. That solves the problem. Let's proceed

10 to the next question, please.

11 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

12 Q. It's true, isn't it, that the end of May and the beginning of June

13 1992 was a period of heavy fighting in the area between Srebrenica and

14 Tuzla. Would I be right in saying that?

15 A. Yes.

16 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this would be a very

17 convenient time to break. I don't have many questions left, but this

18 would be a very good time. I have a bit of a sore throat.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. I think that will leave time for

20 re-examination if there is going to be one and also some time for us to

21 put some questions.

22 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, Your Honour.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Thank you.

24 How much more do you think you have?

25 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, 15 or 20 minutes tops,

Page 7717

1 I think.

2 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Richardson?

3 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I'll try to use no more than 15

4 minutes as well.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: It makes it difficult. So I'm going to impose an

6 embargo now. 15 minutes for you, Madam Vidovic; 10 minutes for you; and

7 the rest for us. Thank you. And let's have a shorter break, 20 minutes

8 instead of 25 minutes.

9 --- Recess taken at 5.39 p.m.

10 --- On resuming at 6.05 p.m.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: So let's try to finish.

12 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'll be very brief but

13 I do feel a need to say something.

14 The Defence, especially myself, are someone who really appreciates

15 the Tribunal and we're trying to do our best to help. But one thing I'm

16 very unhappy about is that the Prosecutor every time oversteps the mark

17 and the allotted time, the time allotted by the Trial Chamber, which puts

18 me in a spot, and I always have to keep my cross-examination as brief as I

19 possibly can. I understand that, and out of respect to the Trial Chamber

20 I will oblige. I understand that you need to ask certain questions, too.

21 But in relation to our future witnesses, especially these three or four,

22 we find them at least as important as the OTP.

23 So if both parties are allotted a certain time limit, I think we

24 should both do our best to comply with the time limit. We will certainly

25 try to do our best. I've never had any complaints with regard to this,

Page 7718

1 but I would just like to say that we certainly should expect the OTP to

2 stick to their allotted time, just like we do.

3 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, in actual fact, you've both exceeded the time

4 that you had indicated in the first place, and of course I can understand

5 that happening in the Defence much more than I can understand it happening

6 from the Prosecution's side. But it won't happen again; we told you this

7 very clearly yesterday. From now onwards you will each have a time limit

8 and we will not allow one single minute beyond that.

9 In the meantime, we have lost another minute. Yes, Ms. Vidovic.

10 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Can I have the usher's assistance

11 now, please. If I can please show the witness the following document

12 02622758, P143. P143.

13 Q. This is a document by the Tuzla district staff. The date is the

14 14th of October, 1992. This is an order signed by Mr. --

15 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Vidovic, go straight to the question. You don't

16 need to tell the witness what there is or us what there is on this

17 document; we can see it. Your question, go straight to the question and

18 you will finish all the questions that you have.

19 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. Please, Witness, can you look at the upper part of this document,

21 the top half. In the upper right-hand corner you can see first the

22 incoming stamp of the Kladanj 3 operations group and then the incoming

23 stamp of the Municipal Assembly of Kladanj and the Kladanj Territorial

24 Defence Staff. Is that a fair statement?

25 A. Yes.

Page 7719

1 Q. This document was received in Kladanj, which is quite a long way

2 from Srebrenica. Can you please tell us the distance between the two,

3 roughly speaking?

4 A. Over 100 kilometres.

5 Q. Thank you very much.

6 Can you please go through the entire document closely. There is

7 nothing in this document that appears to indicate that the document was

8 ever received in Srebrenica, does it?

9 A. At first sight, there is nothing to indicate that the document was

10 ever received in Srebrenica.

11 Q. There is no incoming stamp of any kind, no signature, nothing at

12 all to indicate that the document was ever received in Srebrenica?

13 A. You're entirely right.

14 Q. Thank you very much.

15 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] The document is no longer required.

16 Thank you.

17 Q. I will ask you some questions now about a different matter.

18 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please now show the witness

19 P208. This purports to be a document by the armed forces staff in

20 Srebrenica 3/93. The date is the 4th of January, 1992. I will quote the

21 document.

22 Q. Mr. Becirovic, you saw this document yesterday. I am now quoting.

23 It says: "Order on readiness. Deliver. Do nothing without an agreement

24 with Naser first. Be at the ready if Naser needs you and await further

25 orders. The radio is to be put into operation immediately and respond

Page 7720

1 regularly. This order was received by radio."

2 Mr. Becirovic, this document was purportedly written by your

3 brother. You knew your brother well, didn't you? You were familiar with

4 the way he wrote and spoke, were you not?

5 A. Yes, that's correct.

6 Q. Your brother was an educated man and he knew how to write, didn't

7 he?

8 A. Yes, that's correct.

9 Q. He was known as a pedantic person, a neat person, a well-organised

10 around Srebrenica, was he not?

11 A. Yes, you're right.

12 Q. Do you agree with me when I say that this document was written in

13 an extremely incoherent manner, and this seems to suggest an author who

14 was not well-educated and not particularly given to writing documents?

15 A. Yes, that is true.

16 Q. Your brother would never have written or signed anything like

17 this?

18 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I think this calls for speculation

19 at this point. We're talking about an order --


21 Rephrase your question, Madam Vidovic.

22 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Your brother, therefore, would never produce a document that did

24 not reflect a certain education background. Anything he produced would

25 have seemed like the product of an educated person, which might lead you

Page 7721

1 to believe that this document was not produced by your brother. Is that

2 not a fact?

3 A. You're quite right in saying that this was definitely not my

4 brother, Ramiz's, style.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Richardson.

6 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I really do hate to object. I know

7 we're short on time. But I think that with respect to what was produced

8 by this witness's brother, via what he knows about the brother, I think

9 that there should have been some foundational questions put to this

10 witness about whether he has ever seen any order written by his brother,

11 does this conform in fact to similar documents he's seen. And I think any

12 answer that he has given at this point, even though he has given one, is

13 speculation.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Next question, Madam Vidovic.

15 I'm not going to tell Madam Vidovic what questions to ask.

16 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

17 Q. Mr. Becirovic, do you have any suspicions whether your brother

18 actually produced this document?

19 A. Yes, I do have my suspicions.

20 Q. You testified that Naser had the nickname Gazda and that this

21 nickname was used in his conversation with a person known as Munja. Do

22 you agree with me when I say that the nickname Gazda is a very frequent

23 nickname where we come from? Would that not be a fair statement?

24 A. Yes, that's a fair statement.

25 Q. Many people when talking address each other using such words as

Page 7722

1 Gazda, boss, chef, also meaning boss. Would that be correct?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. It was perfectly normal for local commanders to introduce

4 themselves as Gazda or for other people to address them using this word.

5 Is this something you're aware of?

6 A. Yes, this was normal practice.

7 Q. Many people in prominent positions would be addressed as Gazda or

8 would in fact introduce themselves as Gazda, not just commanders, other

9 prominent people, too. This is something that is usual where we come

10 from?

11 A. Yes. That was the case both before the war and throughout the

12 war. This was a perfectly normal thing for people who were in any way

13 prominent, perhaps well-off or something like that.

14 Q. You couldn't really say that Naser was the only person in the area

15 who used this sobriquet name Gazda or who were referred to as Gazda, could

16 you?

17 A. Yes, you're quite right.

18 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I have no

19 further questions.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.

21 Madam Richardson.

22 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, Your Honour, thank you. I will proceed.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: And you have also time for objections, Madam

24 Vidovic.

25 Re-examined by Ms. Richardson:

Page 7723

1 Q. Mr. Becirovic, you were shown documents -- a document by the

2 Defence, and that is document 267.

3 JUDGE AGIUS: So what time did Ms. Richardson start?

4 MS. RICHARDSON: Defence Exhibit 267.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: 1817.


7 Q. And this -- without giving you the document again for you to

8 review in the interests of time, this document you testified indicated

9 that Hamed Salilovic had sent a message as -- within the position that he

10 held as the War Presidency of the subregion. I believe you agreed with

11 the Defence that this document had been sent.

12 Secondly, when you were asked how this document was sent you said

13 it was sent via ham radio. Now, on this document itself there's an

14 indication that it was received by Ilijas Omerovic and it was sent to

15 Sarajevo. Now, I will read for you the numbers for the ham radio, the

16 amateur radio station that received this document, and that is 4N4SGS.

17 Now, having heard those numbers and letters, does this reflect

18 that this document in fact went to that station, based on your knowledge

19 of the station and the numbers that were used?

20 A. Yes. In my communication with Ilijas Omerovic, I could recognise

21 his modulation.

22 Q. So indeed, if other documents which I believe the Defence

23 indicated one -- one such document where it was sent to Ilijas and only

24 4SGS was used, that would not be an indication that it was not sent to

25 him. Is that correct? Because here -- let me finish my question --

Page 7724

1 here's an indication that all of the numbers were used, and it was

2 never -- and your testimony was that it was sent to him?


4 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I believe that the

5 witness -- witness should have the document before him if asked to answer

6 these questions.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Let's not waste time on this very much because

8 in the Trial Chamber's mind it's very clear.

9 MS. RICHARDSON: I understand, Your Honour.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Basically Ms. Richardson --

11 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I'll move on.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: -- for Malta an amateur radio -- ham radio operator,

13 apart from requiring a license, will always have a 9H, and that is the

14 indicative of Malta, and then he explained what the rest is.

15 When you are communicating, they have a system of cards that they

16 keep and that the modulation that they send and receive, and you know this

17 is all oral, verbal. I mean, this is not something sent -- you're not

18 transmitting a document in the sense that a paper goes in and comes out of

19 the other end. This is all a verbal conversation, an oral conversation.

20 MS. RICHARDSON: I understand, Your Honour. I'm just seeking to

21 make sure there is no misunderstanding with respect to the consistency of

22 the receiver and the radio station, which is why I would like the witness

23 to just briefly look at the station.

24 Q. Mr. Becirovic, if you can, in the document before you, it's

25 indicated in the lower left-hand corner, it's the very last piece of

Page 7725

1 information that's indicated.

2 JUDGE AGIUS: The question basically is this, Mr. Becirovic, in

3 case it's not clear in your mind. The fact that on the document that you

4 are seeing you don't have the entire call sign, you don't have the initial

5 4N, would that put any doubt in your mind that that transmission or

6 that -- that transmission could have never taken place? Or is it a way

7 you record -- you and other colleagues of yours record things just to

8 speed up the procedure? Because anyone you are communicating with in the

9 territory of ex-Yugoslavia would always have 4N? Or in Bosnia would

10 always have 4N, so you don't need to write that. All you need to write

11 are the remaining four characters for the purposes of your record.

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In this document I have only the

13 signal of the radio club in Sarajevo, and the 4SGS received information,

14 the information that I sent. And this sign confirms that to me.

15 MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you, Your Honour.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: In other words, you don't need to have 4N to confirm

17 that that message has been sent.

18 MS. RICHARDSON: I just wanted to make sure that that was clear,

19 Your Honour. I appreciate it.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: No, no, it is clear.


22 Q. Now, Mr. Becirovic, with respect to Prosecution Exhibit 29E that

23 was shown to you, and I've just referred to the document. It was in

24 reference to a document issued by Colonel -- Lieutenant Colonel Zeljko

25 Knez. And this -- it was asked if you recall receiving this document.

Page 7726












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

13 English transcripts.













Page 7727

1 Now, my question to you is whether or not you were present on the

2 20th of May [sic] at the Territorial Defence of Srebrenica. Do you recall

3 if on that day you were present or the day after you had a meeting with

4 them or was present?

5 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour --

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was not present during this

7 particular period of time.


9 Q. And so that we're clear you --

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Now wait one moment.

11 Now, yes, Madam Vidovic.

12 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I had an objection.

13 The witness never said that he was present at the meeting of the

14 Territorial Defence Staff on the 20th. The question was: Do you remember

15 that you were present on that day? Did you have a meeting with them? The

16 witness never said anything to that effect.

17 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour --

18 JUDGE AGIUS: The question is -- my question to you is whether or

19 not you were present on the 20th of May at the Territorial Defence of

20 Srebrenica? Do you recall if on that day you were present or on the day

21 after you had a meeting with them or was present? There is no allegation

22 at any time that he was. He's being asked whether he was present or not,

23 whether he recalls any such presence. I mean, it's not being suggested to

24 him that he was.

25 Anyway, let's move, because we are running short of time.

Page 7728

1 MS. RICHARDSON: Indeed, Your Honour.

2 Q. And my question to you is: You don't know if this document had

3 been delivered by hand or courier or by any other means, do you, to the

4 Srebrenica armed forces?

5 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have to object again.

6 The document was issued on the 28th of May. The Prosecutor is now

7 confusing the witness, asking him about the 20th of May.

8 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, the 28th of May, and I'm not sure if

9 in the transcript, it says the 20th, but it is certainly the 28th --

10 JUDGE AGIUS: The transcript showed 20th, 2-0.

11 MS. RICHARDSON: I certainly need that corrected. It's the 28th.

12 Not meant at all to --

13 JUDGE AGIUS: So for the record wherever there is 20th in this

14 part of the transcript, it should be 28 and not 20th. Thank you, Madam

15 Vidovic.


17 Q. Mr. Becirovic, you were also asked to review minutes which

18 contained information about whether or not there was any communication

19 ability within the armed forces of Srebrenica. And my question to you is

20 whether or not you attended any War Presidency meetings or any meetings of

21 the Srebrenica municipal forces during 1992 and 1993, specifically October

22 of 1992?

23 A. No, Your Honour. I was never present at the sessions of the War

24 Presidency of the municipality of Srebrenica or any other organisation for

25 that matter. I've already said that I'm not aware of the fact that there

Page 7729

1 was an organised Territorial Defence Staff of the municipality of

2 Srebrenica, not before the demilitarisation.

3 Q. All right.

4 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, just with respect to my last series

5 of questions I asked about whether or not the witness was aware of whether

6 the document had been delivered by hand or courier. I don't think the

7 witness ever answered.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't think he answered as yet.

9 That particular document that you were shown last, supposedly

10 signed by Mr. Knez -- well, not signed but attributed to general or

11 Commander Knez, are you -- can you tell us whether it was to your

12 knowledge ever delivered to the -- you restricted it only to the

13 territorial staff, didn't you, Ms. Richardson?

14 MS. RICHARDSON: Yes, Your Honour, I did.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: To the territorial staff.

16 MS. RICHARDSON: By courier or hand.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: By courier or by --

18 MS. RICHARDSON: Or by any other means.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: In any manner.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I know, Your Honour, this

21 document never reached Srebrenica.


23 MS. RICHARDSON: All right, Your Honour. With respect to my next

24 question, it has to do with whether or not you attended any of the

25 territorial staff meetings and I believe, if I'm not mistaken, that you

Page 7730

1 said that you did not. And so I would like to read for you from page 5

2 of P84. If you would listen I would read it very quickly. It's dated

3 October 3rd, 1992. Present unit commanders under number 9 it says

4 communication. The --

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's put it on the -- we need to show it to him.

6 MS. RICHARDSON: ERN number to the specific page is 02115047.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: 5047.

8 MS. RICHARDSON: And it is page 5 of the English.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, you can start --

10 MS. RICHARDSON: Number 9. It states: "The military police must

11 take mobile radio transmitters and walkie-talkies. They must be

12 distributed. The command post is at the anti-aircraft machine-gun sight.

13 The pass word is Bosna Dzihad, and it lists the number of troops.

14 Q. Now, as far as you know, you were not involved in this meeting,

15 were you, where these things were discussed?

16 A. No, Your Honour. I was not involved in this meeting.

17 Q. All right. And I just have one more question with respect to the

18 same document and that is ERN number 02115087 [sic] and this was the --

19 just a follow-up question with respect to what had been asked earlier. It

20 is page, excuse me, 33 of the English version of the document. ERN number

21 02115085.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: 5085 you have to look at.

23 Yes, your question.


25 Q. My question is there's a portion after Zulfo Tusunovic it's a

Page 7731

1 comment being made by Smajo or Samo [phoen]. It states, the second

2 sentence: "The motors telephoned our attacks. A big mistake was made

3 during reconnaissance. My group was last to retreat."

4 Now -- and secondly I'll read what Ahmo said. "Our biggest

5 shortcoming is communication. We have a large sets with batteries.

6 Cannot be carried around."

7 Now, in fact there is no indication here that this communication

8 equipment was not operational at the time, is there?

9 A. Your Honour, if I may give you my view of this period, in the

10 course of my testimony I have already stated that there were no RUP

11 equipment or any other means of communication that could be used in this

12 way and that could be commented upon in this way.

13 Q. Mr. Becirovic, if you could answer my question. In fact, this

14 information here does not state that the equipment is not operational,

15 does it?

16 JUDGE AGIUS: In other words, it just says that it is not

17 practical to carry them around. It does not purport to state that they

18 are not operational if they existed.

19 Yes, Madam Vidovic.

20 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour --

21 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. If it relates to the question, let him

22 answer it first; if it relates to the transcript, then go ahead.

23 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the person says two

24 sentences and the Prosecutor just reads one. These two sentences are

25 related. The Prosecutor is confusing the witness in this way. The

Page 7732

1 speaker uttered two sentences, not just one, and this is how it should be

2 presented to the witness. In other words, it says: "Our biggest

3 shortcoming are communications," and then this is followed by the sentence

4 that the Prosecutor read out.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Madam Vidovic, this is the last time I'm saying

6 this. I gave you instructions not to proceed if the objection that you

7 had related to the answer that the question was supposed to -- that the

8 witness was supposed to give. Don't do this again because I will take

9 further steps.

10 Now, the -- Ms. Richardson had read the first part as well and her

11 question is a very simple one. Does that mean that -- does that part of

12 the statement indicate that these RUP or whatever they are called were not

13 operational or that that was just not practical to carry them around?

14 That's the question that was asked.

15 So answer it -- please answer -- give us your answer and let's

16 please move to the next question.

17 And this was my final warning. I will not tolerate interruptions

18 before the witness has given the -- his answer. I mean, I will give the

19 go ahead, and if I tell you to stop, stop. And I told you very clear, if

20 you have got comments to make on the transcript, yes, go ahead. If it's

21 relating to the question itself, stop. And if you don't, there will be --

22 there will be consequences.

23 Yes. Witness, what does that actually say? Does it say that

24 there were RUPs that were not operational, or that there were RUPs which

25 couldn't, however, be carried -- carried around, was not practical to

Page 7733

1 carry them around?

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the gist of this

3 sentence is as follows: The RUPs were not practical to be carried around.

4 But as I've already said earlier, I was not aware of the existence of the

5 RUP equipment.


7 MS. RICHARDSON: Thank you.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: That's fair enough. You can't be expected to know

9 everything.

10 Yes, Ms. Richardson.

11 MS. RICHARDSON: Your Honour, I just have one last question and

12 again it pertains to this document. If the usher could assist. It's

13 page 17, the English version, the ERN is 02115064. The previous page is

14 dated the 3rd of November, 1992, but the actual page that I'd like to make

15 reference to is 02115064. And it states: "As for the work of

16 communication and information service, in fact it consists of two

17 services, the communications service operating within the armed forces and

18 the information service, something is illegible, it is believed that a

19 special commission of the War Presidency must be formed from the

20 communication and information service for information regarding war

21 destruction and losses."

22 Now, Mr. Becirovic, you I believe already testified that you did

23 not attend meetings of the armed forces. You are not familiar with

24 this -- you weren't advised of this information, were you?

25 A. I'm not aware of the fact that there were two services for

Page 7734

1 communication and information. I can't read this text, and if I

2 understand your question well you're asking me whether there were two

3 services for communication and information. And as I've already said, I'm

4 not aware of that. I know that there was one service for communication

5 and information, and it was part of the War Presidency.

6 Q. And I guess my final question is: Since you did not attend the --

7 the meetings, you weren't advised of this particular information?

8 JUDGE AGIUS: It doesn't follow, Ms. Richardson, it doesn't follow

9 necessarily. If there was a decision that it was believed that a special

10 commission of the War Presidency must be formed from that, it would have

11 been formed and he may have come to know about it later.

12 MS. RICHARDSON: That's correct, Your Honour, and I don't have any

13 further questions.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.

15 Judge Brydensholt.

16 JUDGE BRYDENSHOLT: Well, I have now only one question.

17 Questioned by the Court:

18 JUDGE BRYDENSHOLT: Could you give us the exact date when the

19 telephone lines to Srebrenica was cut, or roughly the date?

20 A. Your Honour, I don't know the exact date. This was sometime

21 mid-July 1992 or maybe even in the first half of July.


23 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.

24 Judge Eser.

25 JUDGE ESER: I am still in need of clarification with regard to

Page 7735

1 this reporting system, how you reported and how you collected your

2 reports.

3 You told us that you gathered your information that you sent out

4 to Sarajevo and to the world by asking people who have been in the

5 hospital, wounded people. Is that correct?

6 A. Yes, it is correct.

7 JUDGE ESER: Now, would the usher please put Defence Exhibit 265

8 on the ELMO.

9 Now, in September -- in the September 1992, I think it was, if I

10 remember correctly, it was that Hamed Alic still was in Srebrenica. Is

11 that correct?

12 A. Yes, it is correct.

13 JUDGE ESER: Now, if you look to this document, it reads: "Around

14 10.00, criminals from Podravanje military attacked the villages of

15 Kutuzero, Derventa, Zutica, and Suceska," then it goes in a speedy and

16 effective action the Srebrenica armed forces moved to counter attack on

17 the line Suceska, Kutuzero, and Bucje villages. In exceptionally

18 well-prepared sabotage actions, a Chetnik Bracan stronghold was taken. A

19 T-53 tank and a PAT anti-aircraft gun were quickly seized from the

20 aggressor and two armoured personnel carriers were destroyed."

21 Now, I guess these are different villages that are mentioned here.

22 Is that correct?

23 A. Yes, that is correct.

24 JUDGE ESER: Now, if you wanted to collect information from these

25 villages, I suppose that you would have had wounded people in the hospital

Page 7736

1 from all these villages. Is that correct?

2 A. In principle, this does not have to be so, but it is correct. The

3 territory of Suceska local commune had about 25 to 30 hamlets in the area

4 covering about 10 square kilometres. So a wounded who came from one

5 village was also aware of the happenings in other villages. To be more

6 specific, in this particular attack, the Serb forces launched a fierce

7 attack from Milici and Podravanje. Those are the western and the southern

8 axes of the local commune of Suceska. All the wounded who arrived in the

9 Srebrenica hospital from any of the villages were able to know and could

10 hear what happened in the other villages, in the villages that they

11 themselves were not from.

12 JUDGE ESER: They could also hear and observe what was seized by

13 the army? Or by the fighters, let's put it this way, by the fighters.

14 A. That is correct. I believe that I've already said that the

15 credibility of this information depended on the accuracy of what people

16 told me. I never checked how many people were captured, if any. So I

17 can't say this information was received a day after the attack. And it

18 was drafted on the 25th of September, a day after the event.

19 JUDGE ESER: Now, another question. You told us about the use of

20 these communication devices in the PTT where other people, civilians, were

21 able to use it to get in touch with their families. And in your testimony

22 yesterday you told us that members of the Territorial Defence in cases

23 where they tried to stay in touch with their families using this

24 equipment, they had a chance of using the equipment under my control.

25 Now, what do you mean with "under my control"? What does it mean?

Page 7737

1 A. I've said that amongst others, members of the Territorial Defence

2 used my services, which means that I was the one who was supposed to

3 establish contact with a ham radio operator in another place. When that

4 contact was established, I handed the mike over to the person who actually

5 wanted to talk, and I was present during that conversation of course.

6 JUDGE ESER: Does that mean that you could overhear everything

7 that was spoken during this communication?

8 A. Yes.

9 JUDGE ESER: Now, you also told us that General Morillon was using

10 this communication. Should I conclude from your answers that you would

11 also overhear what General Morillon was talking with other people?

12 A. Yes, you're quite right. I was able to hear what General Morillon

13 was saying. But I do not speak French and French was the language he

14 used. So at the end of the conversation, there would be an interpreter

15 who would convey to me the gist of the conversation.

16 JUDGE ESER: Then you also testified with establishing a

17 communication with a man called Munja and that he wanted to get in touch

18 with Naser Oric. Now, how did you get in touch with Naser Oric? What was

19 the way of telling him that he is wanted by Munja to talk -- have a talk

20 with him?

21 A. Your Honour, as I've explained, people came over almost every day

22 to get in touch with their families. I can't remember any specific

23 details of notifying Naser, but the usual thing to do would be to use

24 someone from the Potocari area to get the message to Naser. The message

25 would say that there was a person called Munja who wanted to speak to

Page 7738

1 Naser.

2 JUDGE ESER: Now, coming back -- my last question to today's

3 testimony with regard to the presence of Naser Oric in the period of

4 January, February, and March 1993 in Srebrenica, and you have been asked

5 by the Defence: He was where the going was really tough at the time.

6 That's where he was. Isn't that the case? And you would answer "yes."

7 Now, what would have been these tough places that you assume that

8 he was?

9 A. The fringe areas of the Srebrenica free territory. I mean the

10 general Potocari area, the Suceska area, the Kragljivoda, and the Osata

11 [phoen] area. If we imagine a circle there, the radius would amount to

12 about 30 or 40 kilometres. It was a very small area at the time.

13 JUDGE ESER: Now, Ms. Vidovic did not mention any places. Now,

14 how can you suppose that she had the same places in mind which you

15 described now?

16 A. When she said where the situation at its worst, what I took that

17 to mean was places where there was the heaviest fighting.

18 JUDGE ESER: No further questions. Thank you.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you.

20 I don't have any questions for you, which brings us to the end of

21 your testimony, Mr. Becirovic. I thank you on behalf of the Tribunal; on

22 behalf of the Trial Chamber; on behalf of my colleague, Judge Brydensholt,

23 from the Kingdom of Denmark; and Judge Eser from Germany; and also on my

24 own behalf. I thank you for having come over to give testimony in this

25 case, for also having stayed here more than I thought you were needed to

Page 7739

1 stay, but I thank you.

2 You will now receive all the assistance that you need from the

3 staff of this Tribunal to facilitate your return back home at the earliest

4 opportunity. I can assure you that that assistance will be forthcoming

5 immediately the moment you walk out of this courtroom.

6 You will now be escorted by Madam Usher. And my last words to

7 you, also on behalf of everyone present here, is that we all wish you a

8 safe journey back home. Thank you.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

10 [The witness withdrew]

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Now, tomorrow we sit in the afternoon like today.

12 We have agreed that the new witness will testify with special protective

13 measures that we have agreed upon, thanks to the cooperation of the

14 Defence.

15 We need to decide for how long she is going to be. You said three

16 hours, you need three hours, Ms. -- I don't know who is going to be

17 responsible for that. Yes.

18 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, tomorrow that will be Mr. Gramsci

19 Di Fazio. And what we would like to do from the Prosecution's stance is

20 to -- instead of enunciating how many hours, three hours, five hours, is

21 to speak in terms of the days needed to testify. And I have been informed

22 that this witness will take no longer than tomorrow and that there's a

23 possibility that the direct examination will be shorter than one full

24 court day.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. That -- so the position is as follows --

Page 7740

1 how much time do you require, Mr. Jones?

2 MR. JONES: Yes, I'm answering because I'll be cross-examining the

3 witness. I wanted to put it really this way: That looking at the

4 potential testimony to be given by this witness, if the Prosecution adopt

5 a fairly sensible approach and limit the testimony to really what that

6 witness can testify about, which is actually in our submission fairly

7 limited, in other words, if Mr. Di Fazio adopts a sensible approach and

8 he's a pretty sensible chap, then I think I can be finished fairly

9 quickly, within an hour or an hour and a half. I think, you know -- if we

10 do adopt a sensible approach with this witness, perhaps the witness can be

11 completely finished within one day, cross-examination and re-examination.

12 So I could certainly be very brief with this witness, provided the

13 witness stays within what that witness can reasonably testify about.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. I thank you.

15 When is the next witness arriving in The Hague, number 44?

16 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, the next witness should be arriving

17 this evening.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Who is in charge of that witness?

19 MS. SELLERS: I'll be taking that witness, Your Honour.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: So start proofing him as quickly as you can.

21 MS. SELLERS: As of 9.30 tomorrow morning.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. So that if we can advance his testimony to

23 before the 2nd of May, we'll try to do that. This is going to be a

24 crucial witness, as I see it, and the sooner we start, the better.

25 MS. SELLERS: Yes, Your Honour. We anticipate starting him and we

Page 7741

1 will try and do it as soon as possible. I think the Prosecution also

2 would like to inform you that there is a possibility that if witness

3 protection is required we will file a written motion on that also as soon

4 as possible for deliberations.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, if you file that, I think it can be decided

6 tomorrow.

7 MS. SELLERS: Yes, Your Honour. We'll do our best.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. But what I mean to say is this: If

9 there is a slight possibility that we would finish with this next witness

10 tomorrow, then let's not waste the next day. So this is why I'm saying

11 try to get the proofing --

12 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour --

13 JUDGE AGIUS: -- cracking.

14 MS. SELLERS: If we did finish with this next witness tomorrow,

15 using all sense and sensibilities on behalf of both parties, I do think

16 that it would be highly impossible to start with that next witness the day

17 afterwards anyway. This witness has been allowed to have an appropriate

18 time period for proofing. We've had to, as a matter of fact, ask for

19 special measures. I believe that the Defence certainly would be sensibly

20 in agreement with us to not limit our proofing to one day on this witness.

21 And I do believe that only in proofing him could we reach absolutely the

22 core of what the Trial Chamber would want to hear without going into other

23 areas.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. -- you must have misunderstood me. I never

25 meant to say that your examination-in-chief will be limited to one day or

Page 7742

1 that the proofing will be limited to one day. I'm just saying that if you

2 can, get the proofing process cracking and make it possible to start with

3 this witness on the 28th instead the 2nd -- of the 2nd May. If that is at

4 all possible, then please do it, because it seems to me that there is a

5 great possibility of finishing with tomorrow's witness tomorrow.

6 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, then I would like to inform the Trial

7 Chamber that it will take longer than one day to proof this witness.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: To proof this witness.

9 MS. SELLERS: And we will not be able to start on the 28th.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. We'll deal with this tomorrow.

11 Good evening everybody, and we'll meet again tomorrow.

12 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.57 p.m.,

13 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 27th day of

14 April, 2005, at 2.15 p.m.